Brick advertising

I'm in the middle of looking for new digs for work. I'm looking for something open, light, and historical. Unfortunately, historic buildings are in short supply; they aren't making them anymore. So, I'm driving all over. In Acworth I found a building with a restored flour advertisement; the Coca Cola ad is painted over the top and just as authentic.





In historic downtown Cartersville I found an original Coca Cola ad with a plaque stating "The first painted wall sign to advertise Coca-Cola was placed on this wall for the Coca-Cola Company in 1894. The sign was restored in 1989. Coca-Cola is a trademark of the Coca-Cola Company." It's a good thing they noted the trademark; people may think someone else owns a one-hundred-year-old ad.

Sporty C

I've never actually owned a Volvo. Okay, I've never come close, but it's not because I don't enjoy them; the Germans just happen to make cars a little more skewed to my liking. In the cycles wherein I've bought a new car, I test drive a whole slew of vehicles just to make sure I'm still on the right track. At least one Volvo has been included in each cycle. The styling has always been controversial, but I loved the V70 the first time I saw it (the boxy one, before they rounded the edges). It remains the best looking Volvo I know. And then I walked out the door of my office the other day and saw the C30.



Kyality is right, there is something appealing about it. I haven't had a chance to drive one, so I don't know how it stacks up or if it will make the wish list. But the advantage I have leaving the office so late is that no one was around and as I circled the C, I peeked in the windows and passed some judgements. It's bigger than my MINI, which is of course no real feat. But the thing about it is, it's much bigger; the wheels are more aggressive to hide the taller stance. And it looks like I could fit some actual stuff back there, not just a couple of grocery bags. It also looked good from most angles. They got the separated-twin tailpipes right. The headlights and hood shape are balanced. I typically don't like to congratulate Ford by proxy, but if nothing else good comes out of further research, the C30 is sure fun to look at.

Beneath perfect lines lie a sleeper

2. E39 5-series. From model years 1996-2003, BMW produced one of the most perfectly penned sedans in the world. I've always had a super soft-spot for this perfectly sized and balanced sleeper. Although it was possible to get with an underpowered engine, the same skin could hold a mighty 8 that would roar into play upon command. BMW knew this, too. Unlike most sedans where more money buys more luxury, the highest packages and models of the 5 series focused on sport. They were the 540 6-speed and the M5, both with sport packages and manual transmissions. I haven't driven an M5 much, but what I did I relished. It's instantly understandable and it's possible to be newly introduced yet get its real performance out. BMW nailed the target on this one.



An example of the 5 in the flesh, I parked next to this Dinan 5 at lunch today.

List of wishes

I had a conversation recently that centered around buying new cars. The others were leaning toward the optimum vehicle, and whatever that entails, while I was thinking that there really isn't a perfect vehicle for me. There are just too many great cars out there to live with just one or two over a ten-year period. Within reason, and if I had the means, I'm going to post a running list of what I'd love to lease (or buy) for 12 months.



1. Porsche Boxster S. From its inception, the Boxster has been a fantastic reincarnation of open tops from Porsche in years past. This is a beautifully balanced, amply powered, gorgeous sports car. It's not practical enough to live with it for years on end, but for a short year I would drive this like mad. National parks, parkways, and the occasional oceanside drive are entirely different experiences with the full wind blowing by. There are faster cars and there are more luxurious cars, but the Boxster is one that's unique, true to the Porsche heritage, and extremely satisfying to drive.

Embracing digital

The march toward digital is an inevitable one. I usually find myself split between the analog (physical) formats of last year and the digital ones of today. For example, this month marks the second anniversary of turning off our television reception: no over-the-air, cable, satellite, or anything else. Nothing. Instead we've bought movies, tv shows, and music from iTunes. And it has been really nice.

I'm not advocating a full switch to digital formats in an instant because, frankly, I don't see how it is financially viable. CD and DVD sales are declining while digital sales are increasing, however, the financial picture is not one that leaves the music or movie industry with as much revenue as they have now. In short, I think they're going to make less per unit in the future and they need to figure out how to make up the difference otherwise.



Which brings me to last week. I received a gift card to Blockbuster over the holidays and decided to redeem it this week buying a new Borne Ultimatum DVD, but alas, they had sold the few new copies they had. I left empty handed.

A few days later I decided I'd buy the copy of Casino Royale that I saw while browsing the new DVDs and returned to the store. Alas, they had sold the copy of that DVD as well. I left empty handed again.

This is the problem with physical copies. I wanted to spend money and was ready to buy at least one, if not both movies. But instead I have neither solely because there was not a physical copy at the same time and place as my physical money.

Digital doesn't have this problem. Sure you have to worry about unauthorized duplication, but beyond that, it has an astronomical advantage over physical distribution. Any time or place (proximate to an internet connection, of course) a customer has money, the digital copy is available. Figure this out and the movie industry will make up their shortfall.

Best of '07

I typically don't create lists of my favorite things because I tend to be so biased about certain products that's a rather short, predictable one. However, I now have a blog that, like the dog, doesn't feed itself.

Best car of '07: No surprise, it's still the '06 Cooper S.
Specifically, it's Kyality's Cooper S which made the list by being purchased in '07.

Runner up: The '07 Cooper S.
If there's a car that would make me consider giving up my '06 S, it's this one. The jury is still out on the turbo lag, fake intake duct, larger speedo, and toggle switches on the roof, but that's not a long list compared to all the things done right. Like Kyality, the shape has grown on me and I prefer the redesigned tail. Pilfered from miniusa.com: the '07 in its natural habitat.



Best book of '07. Creature by Andrew Zukerman and designed by David Meredith.
I saw the design in March and placed an order months in advance. My copy finally arrived in November and it is fantastic. Whereas most books published this year tried to intimidate me into voting for certain politicians or consume less air, Creature lets me just sit, relax, and lose myself in deep, detailed pictures of animals with perspective that I've not had before.

Best holiday/new year design of '07. That'd be the one over at Canister.

Happy New Year.

There is no Marble

There has been a recent debate swirling among web designers regarding the lack or even need of a canon of design. The nuances and conversation aren't particularly interesting so I won't cover them again. However, they could be found here (ALA), here (Subtraction), and the one that started it here (Speak Up). The basic premise is this: a print designer questions why there are not many great web sites held up as phenomenal design as there are in print, i.e. why has the genius of print not carried itself over to the web? Khoi Vinh said it, web design is boring.

In return, the web designers create a well-articulated, thoughtful response explaining that the creation is the design. In essence, the engineering and the interface combine to create an organic design that is genius in its own right. Web designers argue that holding the web to the standards of print is futile; the two don't compare and should not be. Great web design is great when compared with poor web design.

I beg to differ.

Truly great design always results from the combination of two things: creativity and skill. The skill is the key, as there are more people with creativity than skill. Skill refers to the specific tool at hand and the designer's ability to master it. The harder the skill to master, the fewer who do, and inevitably fewer phenomenal pieces are created. But, those phenomenal pieces are great. For example, Michelangelo sculpted David from marble, which is an incredibly difficult material to work from. In order to accomplish this, he would have mastered creating sculptures in materials such as wax, clay, wood, and so forth that are cheaper, more pliable, and have an equivalent of the modern "undo" button. The point is, regardless of how creative they are, no hack can create a worthwhile sculpture from marble. In fact, many creative artisans are unqualified; it requires the truly skilled.

The playing field has leveled some in the current age of design, but not entirely. As is pertains to print and web design, there are some parallels to sculpture. Speaking strictly about visual design, changing something as trivial as a color on a finished-and-launched web site, even universally, can be done in seconds with minimal cost and impact on the surrounding elements. To do the same in print is often as expensive as creating the first print(s) and requires disposal of that prior run. The economic cost discourages those who don't have the technical skills to create great press-produced designs. Or at least it makes them practice first.

This isn't to say that all web designers are untrained sloths, only that some are. The rest are frustrated with the tools at hand. So, for the purpose of oversimplification, the two categories of web designers are 1) unskilled hacks and 2) those frustrated by the tools. The first group uses all the tools that Adobe has made available to Windows' users. In many cases they use templates, rules, and all sorts of tricks that make them feel better about creating something 'pretty.' The second group is frustrated that they can't make type run vertically, on an angle, or follow a curve. In fact, they're irritated that they can't even dictate a specific typeface without making it a graphic. For them, the web is still in its infancy; it's boxy, developing, shows potential, but although they can envision design, they can't actually create it.

For the purpose of diplomacy, I should subdivide the second group into further categories. Group 1a are malcontented print designers displeased with the state of the web and either don't venture in or stay on the fringes creating print-like designs while breaking web standards. Group 2b contains Flash designers who combine motion, print design, and control into an embedded object. It's not html, but it is viewable in a browser. It's a good in-between step for these designers, but they sometimes wish they didn't have to live entirely in this world. (Not that that world pays badly, mind you.) Group 2c are css-compliant designers who are skilled with the craft of browser-compliancy, css validation, and standards-based design. In short, they lower the bar enough that great design can be achieved via a checklist. They are good designers, to be sure, and some great, but only when they use graphics or workarounds that aren't truly html (i.e. the good stuff is embedded).

Ultimately, I'm not crying foul on web designer's talent. I do think that there are many, many very talented web designers. (Indeed, many are better print designers than I am.) I am actually protesting the fact that we can't really do on the web what we want. The solution, however, is not to redefine the measure of success to a state of engineering, but to continue to figure out (and force engineers to create) a platform worthy of our skills.

We want our marble.