The Different Presentations Of A Pantone

One thing that always seems to crop up when we are designing a corporate signature package and a color plan for a company is the different presentation that a single Pantone color can have.



Once your logo is designed and you decide on a color plan for your identity, you need to understand that different printing processes and paper stocks will have an effect on the way the color looks. Normally you would opt for a 2 color logo and signature package if you were planning on doing a lot of letterhead, envelopes and the like. This keeps the cost of printing down. If all you needed was a logo for full color printing and/or web related marketing this isn't as critical.

To understand why the same color can look so differently (not allowing for printer error) you need to understand the different printing processes. For the purposes of this post, when I refer to printing I am referring to traditional offset "ink on paper" printing opposed to digital or toner based printing.

Spot color printing is where your selected color is either mixed by a recipe of other colors or the actual ink is purchased buy the tub. The latter normally provides for a more consistent color as hand mixing allows for more human error and color variations. If you have a 2 color piece that is getting printed, 2 printing plates are made (one for each color) and the colors are laid individually. Adjustments are make to made sure the registration or the relationship between the two colors, is where it need to be.

CMYK, or process, printing is done on much larger presses and can produce full color images on the finished product. The images are all built from 4 primary ink colors: cyan, magenta, yellow and black.


via

There are 4 plates made, one for each color. The 4 different ink colors are combined to form the full color images you see in magazines, brochures, catalogs, posters and other similar products. Some large commercial presses even have additional "heads" that will put down special coatings on top of the ink for design effects or protection.



Now, back to your colors showing up differently. For example, let's say you pick a blue color called Pantone 2747. There are 4 possible outcomes with regards to the way the color will be presented.

Spot color printing on un-coated paper
Spot color printing on coated paper
CMYK printing on un-coated paper
CMYK printing on coated paper

To add one more variable, digital printing or toner based printing, that is not Pantone calibrated, can yield yet another presentation of the same color. Even though they are the "same" color (blue 2747) they may look different. Granted, they are very similar but holding them right next to each other will reveal the difference. Printing Un-coated paper will allow the inks to soak in more giving the color a bit of a washed out look. Another thing to keep in mind, everything goes out the window if you start printing on colored papers.

If continuity and exact matches are important for you, make sure you see how your color will vary by process. Your designer should have Pantone charts that will show the difference between the different processes. Normally the goal is to find a Pantone color that will translate well between spot color and CMYK. Next time we can discuss half tones or screens, the cheat for turning 2 color printing into 3 color work and still use 2 inks.

So there you have it. The next time your green seems a little off or your red isn't quite right, think about how it was printed.

Thanks again for stopping by The Big Bald Blog.

 

The Good Web Design Enigma - Craigslist

I've done it, you have probably done it and other people do it to the tune of 24 million unique visitors per month. I am talking about visiting/using Craigslist. According to Alexa, it is one of the top 100 sites on the internet (66 as of today)

Everything that modern web design accepts as best practices can now be thrown out the window. OK, not really but you have to admit there are some talking points here.

If you have ever been to Craigslist, you know what I am referring to. Plain with simple blue text on white space. No design, no borders, no gradients, no graphics, NOTHING. It looks kind of like a word document. BUT wait a second there Captain, it works and it works good!

Why does it work? Content. Although it isn't pretty, it gets the job done, just like my rusty old lawnmower. The content is real, the site is relatively easy to use, and it gets results. What more can you ask for right? Well maybe SOME design.

I am more if a aesthetics person when it comes to web design and I think it does make a difference to the consuming public. That is why so many "consumers" love 100% Flash websites. They look great and they are fun to play around on. BUT in the end, developers know that they are not the best for SEO. Did you ever wonder why all the sites that sell flash templates, build their sites in html, asp, php or xhtml? Probably the same reason that most of the listings on a SERP for the search term "flash developers" are built in the same way.

One of the coolest websites that I have seen is the 2AdvancedStudios website. The current version and the past 2 or 3 versions have been simply AWESOME. These guys are definitely the masters of Flash but I was unable to find their site if I was searching for flash designers or flash developers. Don't get me wrong, I am not bashing here! The people at 2Advanced do unbelievable work. They just have to market their site differently.

Here is an excerpt from a design critique written by Kate Bronstad: "When Craig Newmark, the founder of Craigslist, was asked why the site was 'visually boring', he explained that "we all consume too much media, and we just want to get to the point sometimes" (Weidaw). In addition to valuing clarity, Newmark and his colleagues probably want to impress upon their users that Craigslist isn't some untrustworthy corporation, and, in fact, Craigslist is a community. Based on the site's success, this impression might be getting across to a lot of people. If Craigslist is so popular, should it be messed with? Maybe not -but there could be a way to retain the values of the Craig and company (user loyalty, minimal design, content heavy) while making the Craigslist experience a little more pleasant for its legions of users, some of whom might not have grown to love the dizzying blue and purple bricks of text."

I think I tend to agree with this assessment. There can be a happy medium between minimalism and an over the top visual orgasm. But who am I? Since I don't have a site that's getting 24 million unique visitors per month, you really don't have to listen to me. :) However, I do have over 80,000 uniques so far this month, thanks to my stumbling friends. <--shameless self plug so you will buy an ad.>

So what's the point here? It's all about the content and functionality. You can have the best looking website in the world but if users don't find it useful or it serves no purpose, they won't be coming back. Design your site so people will want to come back. The ultimate compliment for any website is a RSS subscription or an add to the user's favorites. For this very reason I am going to take another opportunity to thank the readers of The Big Bald Blog, after all it's all about you, and without you I wouldn't be doing this. Thanks!

Let me know what you like to see in a website. Oh, and if I had a typo you would tell me wouldn't you?

 

Marketing With Ink And Paper

Since you are paying for it, when you send out a post card you want to maximize the amount of text on the piece to make it worth your while right?

WRONG!

I have seen this mistake made over and over. Inexperienced marketers commonly make the fatal mistake of cramming tons of text into a tiny post card, hoping to convey as much information as an 11 x 17 brochure. In fact, I have kept several examples of post cards as example of what NOT to do (similar to my business card collection) when you are contemplating a direct mail campaign. I am opting out of showing them because they may get recognized but trust me, they are terrible.

It's real easy - when you decide to throw your hat into the direct mail ring, just remember, less is more. If you flood the entire front and back of a postcard in the hopes of getting your complete message across, your wordy piece piece of post office love is going to find it's way into the round file. When this happens, the only one that benefited from your endeavor was the post office.

So what's a person to do when you want to get the most out of your direct mail program.

1. If you are promoting a "sale" focus on the time sensitive information and the action items associated with the event.
   
2. Focus on a "pain" and elude to a solution. This will elicit a contact.
3. Keep your message as short as possible and still be able to convey the "need-to-know" information.
   
4. Design an interesting "front" that will make people want to turn it over and find out more.
5. If you are engaging in a multi-month direct mail campaign, make sure all of your pieces have continuity with each other inside the confines of the campaign.

Before you begin, sit down and work out a plan for your campaign. Address who you want to target, what you want to target them with, how many times you want to "touch" them during the campaign and what is your follow up plan. If you know what you want before you approach your designer or ad exec, you will be much further ahead.

Some of our most successful direct mail campaigns have included nothing more than the company's website or one word on the front. However, the highest rate of return I have experienced, has been with dimensional mail. This type of mailing has a higher cost per piece and typically a lower volume but we have seen returns as high as 27%.

Bottom Line? Clean, simple text and design = better results

Have questions about marketing? Let me know what's on your mind. C'mon, talk to BigPappa!

 

I Like My Cow Well Done

Yesterday I wrote about the contest that JohnCow.com is having. Needless to say it's a nice prize package for the winner.

Then I really got to looking at the new site design. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a very well done blog design. From the illustrated header to the clean navigation, it has all been done extremely well. I don't know if I have seen a better blog design yet. As far as general design goes, hands down, the hottest thing on the web is 2 Advanced Studios 4th generation site. It doesn't get any better than that. Frankly I wish I could design like that, luckily I have an art department to fall back on.

At John Cow, not only are the posts witty and well written, but the subtle and sometimes blatant digs at "The Big Beef" make me chuckle. I think that, deep down, the "other John" likes what is happening here. After all, he does link to and talk about "The Cow" quite a bit.

The thing I like most are the little details. The "herd" of cow spotted sports cars (dig), the custom RSS button, the grass in the newsletter sign up box, the tag line, the search box, how the sponsor box is laid on the 2nd column, the footer and the secondary navigation.

I have been reading this blog from, just about, day one. Having only been up since July 1st of 2007 they are getting some serious traffic. That's quite an accomplishment for being online just shy of 4 months. OK fine I am jealous of that. I mean seriously, 67,000 unique visitors with over 470,000 page views. Holy Cow man!

But hey, you gotta give credit where credit is due. Kudos to the Cow and congratulation on a job well done.

 

John Stossel from 20/20 - Graphic Design

John Stossel does a riveting expose' on the global impact of graphic design.

 

Those Sneaky Graphic Designers

Going about my daily browse on Digg, I ran across a site featuring their "Phallic Logo Awards". This section of B3TA's site is dedicated to logos that have some sort of, perceived or real, phallic symbolism I can't help but think that some of these were intentional. I mean seriously, look at this example.



I think this type of thing is done by graphic designers more often than we know. Take for example the cover art from the Little Mermaid. There is well defined image of something that could be considered phallic. Even though the urban legend has been debunked, it claims a disgruntled artist intentionally put this in as a way of getting back at Disney. Whether or not anyone is willing to admit it, this has to be intentional.



Another prime example is Disney's The Rescuers. A quote from Snopes sheds some light on the issue - "January 1999, Disney announced a recall of the home video version of their 1977 animated feature The Rescuers because it contained an "objectionable background image." Approximately 38 minutes into the film, as rodent heroes Bianca and Bernard fly through the city in a sardine box strapped to the back of Orville...the photographic image of a topless woman can be seen at the window of a building in the background in two different (non-consecutive) frames...The two "topless woman" frames have reputedly been present in the film ever since its original 1977 theatrical release." I have blotted out the naughty parts but you can see the examples below.






The list goes on and on. From Who Framed Roger Rabbit to Disney's Aladdin, there are many examples of sneaky artists or animators. Take a look at this mid 80's Australian Coke ad. Snopes confirmed that, "The graphic artist who designed the picture put this in as a joke, and it went through unnoticed until someone spotted it on the back of a Coke truck. The artist lost his job and was sued..."




Of course, you have to differentiate the workings of one person trying to slide something in as a joke and well executed or planned hidden imagery. Modern advertising incorporates all kinds of covert imagery and symbolism designed to illicit a response. Then again, people can also see something where there may be noting at all. The infamous "Camel Man" on the front of a pack of Camel Cigarettes and numerous other examples in pop culture are often a stretch, but create conversation and product discussion nonetheless. So how much is intentional? We can only wonder.

 

Bad Logos And The Mistakes That Made Them

I just read a really good post on a design forum from 2004 by Craig Fraser. The author wrote about common mistakes when you are designing a logo and how you can avoid them. Granted this information is 3 years old and there are some things that I don't agree with, but I think the author does have some extremely valid points.

"The Clipart Logo - Most clipart images are widely distributed. Anyone who is familiar with the software providing the clipart will very likely recognize your ‘borrowed’ logo. This is a poor way to build credibility for your business."

"The Special Effects Logo - Strip away all of the special effects to get at the heart of your design. Special filters such as glows, drop shadows, and bevels are great for creating graphics and manipulating photos, but they can be very distracting when applied to a logo. A great logo should be able to stand its ground in black and white, without any effects. You may like to consider drafting your concepts on paper first. You should think more about what is being presented before you decide how it is presented. When you are pleased with a one-colour concept then go to the computer and recreate it digitally. At this point you may or may not like to add a subtle effect to enhance your logo for web use. Eliminate any effect that does not add value to your design. "

I agree with some elements of his second point like the need to design in black and white first. But I disagree with his condemnation of treatments. This may have been the school of thought 3 years ago but today logos can incorporate "glows, drop shadows, and bevels" with little or no detriment to the design. Do you like apples?



"The Banner Logo - A logo is not a web banner advertisement. You are doing yourself more harm than good by forcing your logo into a banner shape, especially if the content is crammed to fit the entire rectangle. Our eyes are trained to avoid these shapes, not read them. "

"The Integrated Logo - Professional logo designers occasionally integrate graphic elements directly into the text to create one unified logo. This process is difficult and risky. Executed poorly, your logo can easily look ‘tacky’ and illegible. (i.e. using the letter ‘O’ in the company name to create a globe, eye, magnifying glass, etc.) If you are new to graphic design, stick to a top centered or left graphic layout. "

"The Text-Only Logo - A text-only logo severely restricts the ability to express your company’s uniqueness and memorability. Larger, more established businesses can pull off text-only logos with exorbitant marketing budgets. One test of logo's effectiveness (marketing budget's aside) is to alter the letters and see if your logo is still recognizable. If not then you need to seriously consider a visual element. If you just can’t resist a text-only logo, consider a strong, unique typeface – preferably custom made. "

I am going to have to disagree with him on this one. There are plenty of well know, extremely successful companies that have "text only" logos. Toshiba, Panasonic, The New York Times, Time Magazine, Google, Cannon, Mobil, Wells Fargo, Sony, and HBO - just to name a few.

"The Monogram - Monograms (company initials) are very difficult to use effectively. It will take a long time to build credibility with a monogram logo. Similarly, logos consisting of several overlapping letters generally do not work well. They may be fun to construct, but the end result says very little about your company and your products/services. "

"The Complex Logo - Detailed illustrations, photos, and complex layouts make poor logos. Each additional detail is an extra detail that your (potential) customer has to remember. A simple, unique logo with solid shades and minimal lines will have greater impact and memorability. "

I couldn't agree more with his last statement . Case in point:

 

That Flash is Pretty Flashy

So I get an email from a guy wanting an evaluation on his flash site before it goes live. The site is a well put together design and very visually appealing. The one problem is that there is no content, visual, HTML or otherwise. It is basically one big flash movie broken up into little flash movies accessible by the "mystery meat" navigation.

He told me that he wanted to make sure that his site was "found" on the Internet and that was the primary goal. I referenced countless articles that spoke about SEM and how flash was best used as elements within the site, including a post on Google's Webmaster Central Blog that said "Try to use Flash only where it is needed..." Linking strategies aside, I told him that "content was king" and how compelling and properly written content with appropriate key word density would yield better results than a flashy looking website.

The next day I got an email from his web designer that said I was "horribly wrong" and if "the design sucks then content will not mean anything." He went on to say that flash has been the SEO standard since October of 2004. To which I retorted, "ohh yeah, I forgot about that" and left it at that.

According Johnathan Hochman there are ways to make flash sites "spiderable" but not may designers will do it. Johnatan Hochman also concedes that, "A site built entirely with Flash suffers a great disadvantage because it lacks page structure to organize the content, internal linking, and unique page titles. One remedy is to create distinct HTML pages to represent each Flash "page,"... Most SEO expert agree that flash should be used as elements in HTML pages where spiders can glean the information and return home with real content.

Your comments are welcome!