Category Archives: Design

Sweating over a stock image? Your ideas might be in trouble…

There is something to be said for perfectionism. And sometimes the 56th round of a logo design truly does result in a better logo. But if you find yourself spending hours searching for just the right stock image for a slide or asking your designer to keep trying different shades of blue, “Because the feeling just isn’t right…,” this could be a sign that your content and message are in serious trouble.

I have no scientific data to make this case, simply years of experience working on countless presentations with every type of client. And when a story is clear and content is strong, a designer is able to do his or her best work, generally resulting in design that accurately messages the message. But when a story is muddy, a designer must do a lot of guessing. In this case, the odds of hitting a bulls-eye are slim, and the client falls into an “I don’t know what I like, but I don’t like that” posture. It is times like these that a client turns to design to solve their content problem. And here’s the unfortunate truth: 

Design will never fix a weak story.

Let me give you two hypothetical corporate stories for a sales pitch:

Example 1: Our company designs, manufactures and sells quality golf equipment that any player would be happy and satisfied to carry with them on the golf course.

Example 2: We handcraft the Prada of golf drivers for the most discriminating players.

The first story is weak, vague and far too general. Should the design be populist or elitist? Pro or amateur? Conservative or edgy? Example 1 might result in slides like these below—and lots talk like this: “It’s not quite right; we’re trying to appeal to every golfer and make them all happy!”

 

But the second story hits that bulls-eye with its messaging. “Handcraft,” “Prada” “discriminating” and the slightly suggestive “players” all indicate who this story is for and who the product should appeal to. This story might lead to slides like these…

Now, of course, client and designer can still argue endlessly over this or that detail, but there won’t be disagreement over the appeal to a very wealthy, fashion-conscious clientele. 

The Decoration Danger Zone

There’s a cousin to this perfectionist danger zone, and that’s the decoration danger zone.

If you find yourself always trying to embellish your message visually, you may not have a strong enough message to stand on its own. Remember, few people want to pay for simplicity, but it generally is the best approach.

I once directed the first production of a fun, campy musical that included, among other wacky things, a trio of singing alligators. The script was fairly solid, so we didn’t do much rewriting, but I did repeatedly attempt to cut one song that, while catchy, had absolutely no reason for being in the show. I begged the writers to take it out, but ultimately lost the fight. Since the song made no sense in the overall story of the show, my only solution was to treat the number in such a way that the audience immediately forgot it ever happened. 

I instructed my choreographer to move people around the stage as much as possible and to distract the audience with as many dance embellishments (decorations) as she could to avoid focus on the song’s lyrics and story. Manipulative? Of course. But I thought a 3-minute visual distraction would help the audience focus on the other much clearer 90 minutes. 

To be clear, there is generally a very real need for visual design of message—just be sure you’re not distracting your audience from the story itself. 

And avoid singing alligators.

FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Design, Imagery, Storytelling.

Is Clip Art Ever Okay?

To paraphrase my friend Scott Schwertly from his book How to Be a Presentation God…

If you’re comfortable walking into a
client meeting with a clip-on tie, 

then by all means go ahead and use clip art.

While the umbrella of “clip art” can include tasteful and professional images or graphics, in general it defines cheesy, stereotypical and juvenile artwork. Of course, no one wants to be perceived by an audience or client as cheesy, but with clip art there’s a greater danger lurking than simply being tagged as a goofball:

Clip art can undermine your entire credibility and legitimacy of message, because it screams: “Don’t take what I have to say seriously.”

Example? A recent (non-classified) US Army presentation entitled, “Strategic Choices — Adapt to Win.” This one deck may actually break every single rule of good presentation design (bad fonts, colors, low resolution imagery, lack of balance, death by bullet points, little white space, nonsensical charts, and the list goes on and on…) Truly, I think someone could write a PhD dissertation on ineffective communication in this document, but for me the most disturbing part of it was the very serious subject matter at the heart of this that was being treated with cutesy cartoons and tons of clip art. 

The above is far from the worst slide, but I think it’s emblematic of the whole deck, with its cartoons, lightning bolts (?) and heavily beveled arrows. Does the graphic treatment match the importance and gravity of supporting and supplying our military? I’m not saying the design should be austere or solemn—just not comical.

And speaking of comical, here are a few more slides in all their comic sans glory. Download the whole deck here.

FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Design, Imagery, Information Design, PowerPoint, Showing Data, Simplicity.

Advertising That “Breaks the Grid”

We’ve grown accustomed to advertising that is more and more intrusive (remember the Alice in Wonderland-LA Times controversy?)

But there’s just something I like about this Jet Blue ad in this week’s Time Out NY that completely breaks the page grid. Maybe it’s because both companies are “cool?”

 

FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Design, Printed Information.

InFocus “What Not to Present” Contest

InFocus, the projector people, is hosting a “What Not to Present” contest and is looking for the worst single presentation slide you’ve ever seen.

For more info and to enter via Twitter, go here. 

It didn’t take long for me to decide what my entry should be. No, it’s not the “How to Fix Afghanistan” monstrosity, or even one of Bill Gates’ old cringe-inducing slides.

For me, the worst slide is one that has led to more bad “PowerPoints” and bad presentation design than any other: Microsoft’s default template:

PowerPoint is the only software program that I know of that tells its user the type of content to insert in the default empty view. Word and Excel don’t tell you what kind of text or numbers to start with—they just give you blank pages. Photoshop doesn’t even specify the color of its blank page lest Adobe bias the user against using a hot pink background. But PowerPoint not so gently nudges you, exclaiming: Use a header and then bulleted text, dummy!

The reality is that PowerPoint is simply a container and a tool for almost any type of content, laid out in just about any way you like. If you wanted to, you could actually lay out the New York Times in PowerPoint. Sure, it would be difficult, but it’s possible. (Bonus points for anyone who knew that PowerPoint actually allows for columned paragraphs…) 

But this unfortunate default view has created “PowerPointThink” and a mindset of overly wordy slides with redundant or non-essential header bars and far, far too many slide-uments and PowerPoint train wrecks. By the way, if you think a slide needs a header bar, read this.

Of course, with a simple click, you can start with a completely blank template and let the world of possibilities await you. But simple clicks are time-consuming in the grand scheme of business. And the result has been decades of Death by Powerpoint. 

I’m anxious to see to the submissions InFocus receives!

FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Design, PowerPoint, Reducing Text.

Visual Language for Designers (Review)

I read a lot of books on design and visual communication. Often, they prove either overly academic and textual without enough actual visual examples or they end up being just a yearbook of pretty designs.

Connie Malamed’s Visual Language for Designers, which I just finished, is a remarkable and well-researched book that not only lays out the principles and techniques of how designers communicate with graphics, but includes hundreds of excellent examples from a wide variety of international designers. And refreshingly, there is not a single negative example: Bucking the current trend of writers pontificating about what NOT to do (and often showing BADLY designed examples), all of the included graphics are successful examples of the specific design principles discussed.

The book functions on many levels—from beautiful coffee table book to scientific study to design textbook. As such, it should appeal to numerous audiences. The only caution I would give is to those looking for a step by step “how to be a graphic designer” reference. This isn’t it. Connie does address basic (and advanced) design principles, but does so through scientific and cognitive lenses. Therefore, when discussing “eye gaze,” she doesn’t stop at simply saying that one should generally have the eyes of a photo subject look inward on a page. She goes further, referencing “neuropsychological” and “neurophysiological” theories, and then through multiple visual examples shows how to employ this principle to very different ends. Though very accessible and readable, it is still a sophisticated book for a sophisticated audience.

Just as with any form of art, it can often be a mystery as to just why a graphic design succeeds or fails. Connie breaks down much of the mystery to show that there is actually a visual language and there are concrete techniques used by designers to communicate effectively—even though I am sure she would agree that designers are not always conscious of their use of this language. 

After an introduction of how we process visual information, Connie divides the book into 6 principles:

  • Organize for Perception
  • Direct the Eyes
  • Reduce Realism
  • Make the Abstract Concrete
  • Clarify Complexity
  • Charge it Up

Each section examines the science of the principle, then discusses how to apply it in practice through various techniques. And on every page the reader is given multiple relevant examples—each one getting its own straightforward description.

And I love the fact that while the book is based in science, the author wasn’t afraid to address the use of emotion which she discusses in “Charge it Up.”

If you’re a graphic designer or the kind of person interested in visual communications or one of those people with the suite of Edward Tufte books on their desk, you need to add Visual Language for Designers to your collection. Buy it here!

I’m now a confirmed fan of Connie’s, and hope there’s another book in the works. In the meantime, I’ll be a regular reader of her site, understandinggraphics.com.

FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Books, Design.

Visual Communication Observations from Vacation

I just returned from a week in the Florida Keys, and I couldn’t help myself from observing some visual communication wins and fails.

Britto Gallery – WIN

I loved the touch screen poster catalog from the Britto Gallery in Miami. Completely minimalist with only the necessary functionality included.

BO’s Restaurant – WIN

And what can I say about the awesome handmade sign from BO’s Restaurant in Key West? The attitude and design aesthetic completely mirror that sandwich shack’s decor and approach. The food is amazing, but like The Burger Joint at The Parker Meridien, it won’t be ranking high on Zagat’s decor list. 

Hotel Notepad – FAIL

Okay, this may be nitpicking, but there’s really no reason why 50% of this small notepad need be taken up with hotel advertising. (And the all caps does’t work.)

USA Today Pie Chart – FAIL

There’s nothing like a vacation to reacquaint yourself with USA Today. There are ongoing disagreements about whether the “USA Today style” of data graphics actually helps or hinders the reader. I understand both arguments, but I often have issues with their charts. This one, for example, doesn’t work for me on a number of levels:

  • 5 slices for a pie chart is pushing the limits. See here for why.
  • The category labels, while appropriately placed next to their slices, feel a little awkward (like “Waterways” which is outside the train, while it’s slice is inside.)
  • “Railroads” is clearly the most important slice—hence the entire train graphic—but it’s not called out in any immediately easy way for the eye.
  • The whole idea of putting the pie chart with all modes of freight within a single mode of freight is just visually odd.

Again, this style of graphics has its proponents, but after a week of looking at these, they never got any easier to read. In general, I find myself spending too many seconds looking at the whole chart before I completely understand the entire story. Graphs involving so few data points should be fairly instantaneous to understand.

Miami International Airport – FAIL

But, perhaps the biggest sinner is Miami International Airport. I don’t really understand the push to brand the airport with their FAA abbreviation—MIA. Maybe I’m just biased as one of our bags was indeed Missing In Action after last being seen in Miami. But darn it if those three letters aren’t just so cute that they need to be plastered in front of travelers at every moment. Take a look at this living pop-up ad: 
FacebooktwitterlinkedinFacebooktwitterlinkedin
Categories: Design, Printed Information, Showing Data.
visual training presentation