Remember when art and design was commonplace? (Before&Af

[flukec]

digitaldreammachine said:

There's a somewhat okay commercial for the card game Uno up here in Canada that has some cartoon characters - boy and a girl - that look somewhat 50's - 60's style. One of the better ones I've seen.

Yeah, that's the one by Kirsten Ulve. It's great! I think you can download it off her site: www.kirstenulve.com

-Luke

[MikeFeeney]

Here is the front and back of my wife's old summer camp postcard.

[SpaceBoySlim]

digitaldreammachine said:

There's a somewhat okay commercial for the card game Uno up here in Canada that has some cartoon characters - boy and a girl - that look somewhat 50's - 60's style. One of the better ones I've seen.

Yeah, that's the one by Kirsten Ulve. It's great! I think you can download it off her site: www.kirstenulve.com

-Luke

Yeah Kristen Ulve designed the characters, and storyboarded it. I directed the animation... glad to know its "somewhat okay" Is it still playing up north? It was great to work with characters that were so well designed!

This is a great thread. I have a ton of "Before" pics, but I have to track down some more current pics for comparrison...

--E

[digitaldreammachine]

I meant 'somewhat okay' in the fact that the one I saw had 'real people in it, instead of just all the great animated stuff it does have. I'll revise my statement to reflect better on the great job you guys did!

[sukeband]

I think a part of the problem, is all of these so called "art" schools. The artists community is now quite crowded with these deluded people that think that they have the talent it takes to become a good artist and a lot of so called "schools" and "teachers" telling them how great they are.

Could it be that it's made a generation of people in the industry whose eyes are completely indifferent to good art and design truly is?

Good art and design takes a CONSIDERABLE amount of talent. I think that untalented people are he majority in this field and the talented ones don't know how far they need to push themselves.

Art should never be put in the same realm as, air conditioning repair, bookeeping, dental assistant or computer repair. These art schools are the blind (with greed) leading the blind.

[Sirspamdalot]

I think it comes down to society's emphases on either universals or particulars.

People in the '50s had a stronger sense of overall context. For better or worse, they trusted the government, their traditions, conventional family structures, big businesses, etc. These things gave them a broad mental construct in which to group the details of their lives -- almost akin to the pantheism of Eastern cultures, but with an American flavor. The result was an overall orderliness in their habits, drawings, buildings, fashions, etc. Similar aesthetic results can still be seen in Japan, where overarching social constructs still carry much weight.

After the '60s, Americans became disillusioned with authority structures of all kinds, and resorted to a fierce individualism that eschewed larger contexts and emphasized particularity and surface detail. Traditions, family, business loyalties, even patriotism became self-defined and separated from any overarching structure. A negative result of this has been a diminished sense of how details should relate to each other in an overall context, such as in a pictorial composition, or in a story plot. Another minus is the importance now placed on superficial realism: lacking a sense of broader context, people attempt to inject realism into the details, such as by texturing and shading every square inch of a drawing.

On the positive side, this move away from universals has resulted in a greater emphasis on the personal. Notice the emphasis on Aurora and her Prince in the new Sleeping Beauty poster, as opposed to the primacy of the overall setting in the previous version. Notice how much more personal and human the new Tony the Tiger looks, while the old one looks like some sort of balloon or doll.

I think the ideal goal would be to marry both mindsets, resulting in designs that suggest personal intimacy while submitting to the overarching standards of sound composition. Drew Struzan's work seems to accomplish this; his work is warmer than Leyendecker's, for example, yet still well-composed. The new Disney Golden Books also appear to achieve this balance. Compare Nemo's lively gaze with the eyes of the bunnies in Sukeband's post on page 2. The old bunny's eyes are beady, opaque, inhuman. The new bunny's eyes have more friendly vitality, in spite of occupying an atrocious overall design. The Nemo Golden Book coverpic features the best of both pieces: sound composition, and personal warmth.

[cedricstudio]

Sirspamdalot--Hmmm, interesting. That actually makes sense.

Also, I have to agree with sukeband about the art school problem. I read somewhere thar art schools are cranking out more students than ever before, overglutting the market. Emphasis seems to be on quantity of students over quality.

Also, I think we live in such an "instant" society that speed and deadlines take priority over hard work. "User-friendly" graphics software makes some people feel like they are doing better work than they really are. Advertising deadlines are always "I need it yesterday". And then there's the general dumbing-down of American culture, in pretty much all aspects.

Having said that, I have to point a finger at myself. As a busy illustrator I've been guilty of getting lazy with my design skills. This thread has challenged me to work harder at that aspect of my work.

PS--I like the cutesy airbrushed look. Really. Yes its overdone, but as long as the image is composed well, it doesn't bug me.

[Dewey Logan]

While the commercial art from the 40's- 50's is technically beautifully done it does tend to have a "safe", almost dull quality. As artists we admire the skill with which it was done, but to most it will look dated.
It's sort of like when Elvis came along- he wasn't nearly as polished as someone like Sinatra, but he brought an energy and spontaniety and sense of danger that thrilled people- especially the young.
You show these 50's cereal box designs to teens, and they are probably going to think it looks old, dull, boring. But combine that technical craftsmanship with a sensibility that appeals to people TODAY - you give it an edge- and you have something great. This is the type of thing that people like John K. and David Lynch do so well. "Old school" craftsmanship- beautiful drawing, painting, but that actually has something to say to the current generation.

[MartinRedmond]

I think a part of the problem, is all of these so called "art" schools. The artists community is now quite crowded with these deluded people that think that they have the talent it takes to become a good artist and a lot of so called "schools" and "teachers" telling them how great they are.

Could it be that it's made a generation of people in the industry whose eyes are completely indifferent to good art and design truly is?

Good art and design takes a CONSIDERABLE amount of talent. I think that untalented people are he majority in this field and the talented ones don't know how far they need to push themselves.

Art should never be put in the same realm as, air conditioning repair, bookeeping, dental assistant or computer repair. These art schools are the blind (with greed) leading the blind.

It's no secret, I've been told plenty of times that it's better for a company to hire people with the right attitude than people that they find have talent or education. Which still makes no sense to me as a decision from a business that wants to make money with a product. I buy entertainment out of attraction and interest, certainly not out of nescessity... A product doesn't "have" to be out on the shelves. It has to be desirable.

However, I think that crap is a timeless phenomenon, and there was plenty of bad stuff that cared little about solid foundations way back then too. It's romantising the past a bit to say that everything was a perfect 10 back then.

[sukeband]

Almost 0 of my dollars go toward entertainment anymore.

[ihorace]

As some would say it's quantity - not the quality.

[Mike Mitchell]

if you like old ads theres a series of really thick books, of the 30s 40s 50s and 60s

i was looking through this at boarders, had to have just about every major advertisment of the 40s

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846

[Mal Faccia]

It's exiciting to see this type of dialog, makes me feel like i'm not crazy! I agree with alot of what has been said, but Sirspamdalot nailed it most on the head for me. I have worked for 10 years as a "Graphic Artist" but constantly get ignored, and usually slapped down, when I try to infuse even the slitest bit of good design into the work. I've seen them actually act suspicious of somthing "artsy" I'm just a glorifyed button pusher now... not anykind of designer. People don't trust professinals to design there pice if there nephue can do just as good on his desk top p.o.c. "after all he has corel draw!"
Mabe someday soon we'll see a renaissance, I think forums such as this can help!!

[MartinRedmond]

I like the illustrations for the Lavalife or lavalite something dating service. And those books ads from the 40s blablabla don't even feature the best, there's more boring garbage in those than cool pics. I think it depends more on how much style whoever's in charge of getting the ad agencies for a company has. I know graphic design for comic companies has gotten way cooler for some, and it's gotten way tackier for some other companies.

[el Dopa]

Marrtin's observations and the 2nd half of Spamdalot's are close to the mark to me. The 'befores' that are being posted are for the most part the product of one or two people's creativity: the "afters" are the product of accountants, marketers, execs and focus groups. After all, these companies just want to sell as many boxes of frosted flakes as possible. Naturally they're going to test package designs and choose the one that offends or jars the fewest people. The result is not 'bad' design-- it's 'blah' design. The focus shifts away from what people find attractive-- since people's likes are as pointed and individual as people-- instead to what's least objectionable. Kinda like padded cells. Unfortunately, it's simple mass-market economics. Which is why I like niche markets better.

Take for example Spamdalot's observation of the bunny's "beady eyes". This he cites as "inhuman". what I think he means is simply that he doesn't like them so much. I like them, myself. Think of Watterson's Calvin. Spamdalot writes favorably of Struzan. I can't stand Struzan's work, personally. (I'm not saying Spamdalot's wrong, I'm simply pointing out differences in our opinions.)

So how the hell are you going to sell a box of cornflakes to both me and spamdalot? Well, if you put Struzan's art on the cover, you might hook Spamdalot. But you've just ensured that I will never buy your cornflakes, nor will I purchase any other of your products, ever ever again. (yeah, I dislike his work that much. ) I might even go out of my way to see that others boycott your product as well. But odds are if you put something on the box I'm wild and crazy for, Spamdalot or someone else might not like it.

So what do you do? You find the image that the most people can tolerate. They probably won't love it but at least very few people will hate it.

(my thanks to Spamdalot for letting me pick on him as an example. No offense intended.)