Tag Archives: Photoshop

As a professional sign company, we see a lot of things that don’t follow general design ‘rules’. Sadly, some of those people that break the rules are from other sign shops.

 

But rules are made to be broken, right?

 

Well, no. Rules are there to keep everything on an even keel. Rules are guidelines that have been largely conceived from a lot of trial and error. Rules are, well…. rules.

 

Speed limits are a prime example. If a road has above average road accidents, the first thing authorities will do is lower the limit. The new speed limit is essentially a new rule for that piece of road. The second thing the authorities do is hide a radar trap in the area to catch those drivers that don’t think rules apply to them… but that is another subject entirely for another day.

 

Rules are in everything. Parents have rules for children (You can’t watch TV until you’ve done your homework). Employers have rules for employees (You can’t smoke in the canteen). Governments have rules for their citizens ( You can’t disobey a rule without paying a penalty).

 

But what has that got to do with design errors I hear you ask somewhat impatiently.

 

It is important to realise that good readable design also has rules. Tried and tested rules that define a good design against a poor design. If you ignore the rules, your message will probably be totally lost because people are more likely to concentrate on the confusing design more than the message.

 

Some DIY design errors are more common than others.

 

One design rule that is often ignored is the use of many fonts in each sign or poster.

http://www.creativebloq.com/industry-insight/how-not-design-biggest-mistakes-1131613

Craig Minchington, in his article for Creative Blog, points out correctly that too many fonts just clutters the page and makes it harder to read. Two fonts and several weights are the general rule in poster and sign design.

 

Another rule often broken is coloured fonts on a coloured background.

badchoice

Simone Sala points out in her blog ‘Typography cheat sheet’ that a general mistake is to use two tonalities that are too much similar to the point that distinguishing the words from the surrounding becomes very difficult. While this is irritating for most users, it’s generally a show-stopper for anyone with vision problems.

 

By far the most common mistake we see is the wrong font choice. This would be the rule that is broken on a daily basis when producing a DIY poster or certificate in-house by most DIY designers.

 

So what is the rule?

 

The rule is simply this – Never use a script style font in all capitals. With few exceptions, a script style font should only be used in an upper (Capital) and lower case format. It not only looks untidy but the spacing is nearly always wrong, especially when a flowery or feminine style is used.

 

There are some beautiful scripted fonts available, but they were never, by definition, designed to work as all capital letters in headings or definitive text.

 

Another problem with most scripted fonts is that some ethnic groups that don’t speak English as their first language, find these styles much harder to read. If you are doing a poster with an important message and the headings are all scripted capital letters, it is a fairly safe bet that the message will be lost on any reader who has poor eyesight or who has a poor grasp of the English language.

typoSo next time you are entrusted with using Word, Illustrator or Coreldraw to produce that certificate congratulating someone for a job well done, spare a thought for the readers who will have to see the thing week in and week out on the staff room wall. At least make it easy to read and not an assault on the eyes.

 

Lets all make sure that, if we are the person given the weighty responsibility to design a well deserved award certificate, we take that very seriously and we think of the reader as well as the recipient.

 

One is no less important than the other. More importantly, think of the poor sign person who has to look at the all capital script. They often lose the will to live just a little bit every time they see it. It’s not something that we’d want to be responsible for I’m sure.

 

There are many generous people in society, many just doing what they do without worrying about what financial costs or burdens, they just do what they think is right and hopefully the recipients appreciate the generosity in which it was given.

 

One such person is Carol M. Highsmith  , probably one of America’s best loved and most iconic documentary photographers. She has been documenting american lifestyle and iconic images for decades. She is at the very top of her field.

 

She is also a very generous soul, donating thousands of images to the United States Library of Congress at no charge since 1988, so the general public can have free access to her documented images. Congress calls the donation “one of the greatest acts of generosity in the history of the library”

 

Carey Dunne, in her article for the online publication Hyperallergic, tells us how it was discovered:

 

“Carol Highsmith received a letter from Getty Images accusing her of copyright infringement for featuring one of her own photographs on her own website. It demanded payment of $120. …. Highsmith came to learn that stock photo agencies Getty and Alamy had been sending similar threat letters and charging fees to users of her images, which she had donated to the Library of Congress for use by the general public at no charge. ”

 

It wasn’t just one or two photographs either. Over 18,700 of her photos have been claimed by Getty and Alamy as their own. Some included false watermarks and gave no credit to the original photographer at all.

 

The article goes on ….. “Highsmith has filed a $1 billion copyright infringement suit against both Alamy and Getty for “gross misuse” of 18,755 of her photographs. “The defendants [Getty Images] have apparently misappropriated Ms. Highsmith’s generous gift to the American people,” the complaint reads. “[They] are not only unlawfully charging licensing fees … but are falsely and fraudulently holding themselves out as the exclusive copyright owner.” According to the lawsuit, Getty and Alamy, on their websites, have been selling licenses for thousands of Highsmith’s photographs, many without her name attached to them and stamped with “false watermarks.”

 

Its not the first time Getty have been caught doing something illegal with other peoples images. They seem to feel they are beyond reproach.

 

It makes for an interesting read here .

 

The issue for those of us that use social media is, how do we know that Getty, Alamy or whoever aren’t stealing our photos and selling them as stock photo’s to unsuspecting buyers.

 

The truth is, we don’t.

 

The two instances that they have been caught fraudulently selling others images as their own is most likely the tip of the iceberg in what is out there illegally.

 

Can we do anything about it? We certainly need to be vigilant and be alert, but unless we are a high end photographer who would watermark their photo’s anyway, there is probably little we need to worry about.

 

The real issue is if we buy a Getty image and find out later they didn’t have the royalty free rights to the photo. We may find ourselves involved in an expensive and time consuming legal battle we are ill prepared for or can not afford.

 

When Getty Images bought Istockphoto, they paid $50m and that included all photos on their database. The assumption was that Getty own the contributors photos and that is what they’d like to imply, but the truth is, they don’t own contributors photo’s at all, they just own the rights to sell them for a commission.

 

Without doubt Getty are very aggressive in the photo markets they dominate. They have 200 million images available, are forming partnerships with many companies that own smaller competitors, opening their markets up to Asian centers that are basically untapped to this american giant.

 

With nearly 2000 employees around the world, clearly their thirst for dominance has landed them is some serious hot water. The case of Mrs Highsmith is a perfect example of that. Will they get away with this for less than a billion dollars? Time will tell.

 

Interesting times.

 

The Psychology of Colour

Colour choice is an important step in designing everything from signage to point of sale advertising.

It has been the subject of many blogs and industry articles over many years, yet DIY designers often make fundamental errors in the getting their marketing message across to the buying public successfully.

In this day and age where everyone has a PC and a design program, some simply ignore the basics in colour compatibility. It’s a science that many don’t take the time to study.

A good resource worth reading is “The Psychology of Colours, a guide for beginners.”

Grab a cup of coffee, settle into a comfy chair, then have a read.

Recently I was met by a traditional sign writer that found it very hard to hide his contempt for me, and those like me, that practice the ‘digital new age’ concept of his traditional trade.

I hasten to add that no one is more in awe of our traditional sign guys and girls, whether it be in the brush, airbrushed or pastel applications, than me.

But I was more than a little amused when he labelled ‘my type’ as wannabe’s and impostors.

Strong words that I found rather confronting.

I’m the first to admit that there are plenty of my Digital colleagues out there way better than me. Just as there are plenty of Traditional sign people who are better than our digital colleagues as well.

Clearly, some traditional signies have embraced the digital age and use both forms to ply their trade. Some, though, have not.

As a wholesale print supplier, most of my own regular clients are traditional screen printers or old school sign painters that either have no intention of going digital, or don’t understand the software to make the machine sing. Some of my clients willingly admit that they are technologically challenged, some just have no interest in the art form that is the digital realm.

Whilst most have vinyl cutters, the growth of the digital print industry has clearly overrun them and some are not happy.

Then you get the shops that buy a machine because they can afford it, but find after a few months it is just too hard or the industry was more competitive than they had first anticipated.

I was talking to several reps recently and they all told me the same thing – a fair percentage of units purchased will be back on the market within 12 to 18 months.

As an example; several years ago I was doing small print jobs for a computer cut sign company out west. It was nothing stunning in terms of turnover, but my client developed a niche business in the farming industry and used me to produce the prints quickly, and his clients were none-the-wiser.

All went well until he rang me one day, thanking me for my support, telling me he was going to buy his own machine.

I was a bit concerned as, unless he wasn’t telling me something, the business I did for him was not going to be enough to support a machine on its own.

He dismissed my concerns and asked who I’d suggest he approach to buy a printer. He wanted the same setup as me, so everything would be the same. I suggested the company I purchased from.

I heard back later that he rang that company, and his order was for ‘everything that Shane had’. To his credit, the sales rep looked at his business, his turnover and his position, and advised him that he wouldn’t have enough business to warrant buying a machine. The sales rep actually declined to sell him one.

The sign guy, not to be deterred, went to an opposition supplier and purchased one from them. Interestingly, that supplier has since gone bankrupt.

To make matters worse, the sales person stitched him up good and proper by supplying all his ancillary materials on the same 5 year lease as his machine. This effectively increased his monthly lease payments by a significant amount.

Eight months later, I get a call asking if I would takeover the lease of the printer he’d purchased. As I had two already I declined. He then admitted he was about to go bankrupt. He realised having his own printer was a bigger burden on his cash flow, than if he just purchased what he needed when he needed it, and made a mark-up on each sale. It was an expensive lesson to learn. He was very upset that I didn’t try and talk him out of the idea originally. I reminded him of our conversation, and suggested I was not his keeper. He couldn’t, and shouldn’t, blame me.

But I digress.

After my rather confronting conversation with my new traditional sign painter friend, I did actually have a reality check some weeks later. I understood the lesson the traditional sign writer was trying to teach me.

You see, I am a mad keen photographer. Not weddings or anything like that, but landscape and animal photography mainly.

Having had my own dark room years ago, I’m more a traditional photographer. I like to think my best shots are through the lens without software manipulation.

It totally frustrates me to see photos that are heavily photo shopped for instance, winning awards for photographic excellence. It drives me to distraction. It is clearly not a photographic talent, but a Photoshop talent. There is a difference.

In my humble opinion, a good ‘traditional’ through-the-lens photo is infinitely better than an ‘average’ photo that has been enhanced electronically.

But like my new friend, the traditional sign writer said, these digital new age people are impostors. In this instance they are photographers that rely of software enhancement when it comes to ‘real’ photography.

It was only after this, my own experience, did I truly understand my ‘traditional’ colleagues pain.

Lesson learned.