Tangerine Tango: The Colour of 2012

Goodbye Honeysuckle, hello Tangerine Tango, or as we prefer to call it 17-1463, announced as Pantone’s colour of the year for 2012

According to Pantone, “Tangerine Tango marries the vivaciousness and adrenaline rush of red with the friendliness and warmth of yellow, to form a high-visibility, magnetic hue that emanates heat and energy” and they’ve helpfully provided us with this photo to underline their point:

It is a colour, Pantone go on to say, that is “a bit exotic, but in a very friendly, non-threatening way”.

“Sophisticated but at the same time dramatic and seductive, Tangerine Tango is an orange with a lot of depth to it,” said Leatrice Eiseman, executive director of the Pantone Colour Institute. “Reminiscent of the radiant shadings of a sunset, Tangerine Tango marries the vivaciousness and adrenaline  rush of red with the friendliness and warmth of yellow, to form a high-visibility, magnetic hue that emanates heat and energy.”

PANTONE 15-5519 Turquoise (2010)
PANTONE 14-0848 Mimosa (2009)
PANTONE 18-3943 Blue Iris (2008)
PANTONE 19-1557 Chili Pepper (2007)
PANTONE 13-1106 Sand Dollar (2006)
PANTONE 15-5217 Blue Turquoise (2005)
PANTONE 17-1456 Tigerlily (2004)
PANTONE 14-4811 Aqua Sky (2003)
PANTONE 19-1664 True Red (2002)
PANTONE 17-2031 Fuchsia Rose (2001)
PANTONE 15-4020 Cerulean (2000)

Author: Patrick Burgoyne
Source: Creative Review

(Source: agda.com.au)

Obama Poster Contest Angers Design Community

President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign recently launched a poster contest, inviting artists from across the country to submit designs in support of the president’s $447 billion jobs plan and re-election. Although three winners will be given framed copies of their artworks signed by the president, artists who apply will not be paid for their labor, and they must relinquish the rights to their own work upon submission, according to the contest website.

Many professional designers and illustrators — a group not exactly known for bashing liberals and casting Republican votes — say they find the contest detrimental to their industry. They argue that such competitions, entered by artists “on speculation” in hopes of gaining exposure, are helping to depress wages in an already tough job market, even when the artists know upfront what they’re getting into. Several told HuffPost they find it ironic that the posters are meant to convey a brighter economic future.

Syndicated cartoonist Matt Bors said the contest represents “the opposite of jobs. “Everyone’s time is wasted except for the winner, and they’re not even compensated,” said Bors, whose work has appeared in The Nation and The Village Voice, among other outlets. “It brings down rates for everybody. Just imagine this scenario with any other profession. You don’t have contests with your plumber.”

The recent proliferation of design contests and “on spec” design work has spawned a good deal of bitterness among artists who are trying to make a living. Websites such as AntiSpec.com and No-Spec.com now alert artists and the public to the issues with spec work, while the #nospec hashtag on Twitter reveals a steady stream of angry anecdotes. This week the hashtag has been overtaken with links to the Obama poster contest.

Many artists also feel that design contests, including Obama’s, can take advantage of young artists eager to make a name for themselves. And so some are asking: Is there a difference between doing spec work for a corporate entity and doing it for a politician you believe in?

Designer Jessica Hische was so concerned about the growth of spec work that she built an online flow chart to navigate the ethical complexities. Hische, who splits her time between San Francisco and Brooklyn, told HuffPost by email that the Obama poster contest is “definitely ruffling a few feathers” among professional designers. Like others, she finds it upsetting that the campaign will own the rights to the work, precluding the artist from ever selling it. She believes that the artists should share in any profits and that they should retain rights to the images while licensing use to the campaign.

"I believe their intentions were good, but I don’t support what they are doing," Hische said. "The prizes offered are a bit insulting, and I do think it’s hilarious and ironic that a contest to help raise awareness about unemployment doesn’t do its own part to help designers get compensation."

When asked about the Obama design contest, Mark Collins, the U.K.-based artist who founded AntiSpec.com, directed HuffPost to a blog post on his website, in which he panned the campaign for not hiring designers: “Obama’s use of spec work here sends a clear message to businesses everywhere that harvesting potentially 1,000s of free design hours is acceptable to promote your business/cause. It isn’t. Worse still it reinforces spec work in the minds of young designers.”

The Obama campaign wouldn’t be the first entity to feel the backlash over design contests. The Huffington Post recently carried out a contest in which readers were invited to submit designs for a new Twitter icon for the site’s politics page. The response from many artists was less than warm, with AntiSpec.com launching a campaign against the contest. In a statement, AOL Huffington Post Media Group noted that it employs a team of 30 in-house designers and that the contest was “in no way an attempt to solicit unpaid design services.”

Many editors and reporters at HuffPost were unaware of how sensitive an issue these contests were among designers. The Obama campaign may be equally unaware; it did not respond to a request for comment. According to the contest website, posters with the winning images will be sold in an online campaign store.

Of course, this president surely understands, perhaps better than most, the power of an arresting political poster. The "HOPE" design created by artist Shepard Fairey — and emblazoned on countless posters and other objects during the 2008 campaign — already ranks among the most iconic images in American political history, having played an obvious yet incalculable role in Obama winning the White House. Obama’s 2012 campaign is clearly hoping to harness a bit of that poster magic again.

In an email, Fairey told HuffPost that he’s disappointed when he considers the poster contest, although not for the same reasons as the anti-spec crowd. He believes that artists should distinguish between lending their art to political causes, as in the poster contest, and participating in commercial spec work.

Fairey said he didn’t ask to be compensated for the HOPE design because, “In my mind, Obama’s election and the progress that hypothetically would yield was the reward.” That reward, he implies, hasn’t arrived yet.

"It is great that the Obama campaign recognizes the impact and value of grassroots art activism," he went on. "The difference is that a lot of artists now feel let down by Obama. I don’t think they want money for their designs, but the concepts of their designs to be followed through by Obama and his administration."

In short, it doesn’t sound as if Fairey will be entering the Obama poster contest. “Now that we are in a terrible economy,” he added, “maybe Obama should do what FDR did with the WPA program and put artists and designers to work, rather than just asking for help with his campaign art.”

(Source: agda.com.au)

Flash and Standards: The Cold War of the Web

You’ve probably heard that Apple recently announced the iPad. The absence of Flash Player on the device seems to have awakened the HTML5 vs. Flash debate. Apparently, it’s the final nail in the coffin for Flash.  Flash and Standards: The Cold War of the Web

The arguments run wide, strong, and legitimate on both sides. Apple CEO Steve Jobs calls Flash Player buggy. John Gruber of Daring Fireballsays that Apple wants to maintain their own ecosystem—a formula Adobe’s software doesn’t easily fit into. On the other end, Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch argues that Flash is a great content delivery vehicle. Mike Chambers, Principal Product Manager for Flash platform developer relations at Adobe, expresses his concerns over closed platforms. Interactive developer Grant Skinner reflects on the advantages of Flash.

However, the issue is larger than which one is better. It’s about preference and politics. It’s an arms race. This is the Cold War of the Web.

Ceasefire

Both the standards community and the Flash community are extremely good at sharing knowledge and supporting the people within their respective groups. The relationship across communities, however, isn’t nearly as cordial. Two things are happening: either the people within each camp stay to themselves, or one ignorantly hurls insults at the other.

As new technologies emerge, their following naturally starts small. An effective rallying cry is to find—or create—a common enemy. Huge strides such as Doug Bowman’s Wired redesign, Dave Shea’s CSS Zen Garden, and Jeffrey Zeldman’s Designing With Web Standards had a significant influence, not only on the standards community, but on the entire web design industry. They positioned standards as an alternative to Flash and table-based sites, not in conflict with them. However, less enlightened followers wrongly interpreted these champions’ examples as the first assault. As Adobe Photoshop Principal Product Manager John Nack says, “people want a certain ‘killer’ narrative.”

The same thing is happening today. Those pushing the HTML5 specification forward, such as Ian HicksonJeremy Keith, and the NYCgathering of geeks, are offering it as a new alternative with some major advantages over existing technologies. Yet again, some have dubbed it the harbinger of doom for Flash.

The antagonistic nature of this debate is destroying the industry. Designers and developers waste their time playing the “one-up” game, as opposed to collaborating. Specialization has its advantages, but only as a subset of a larger whole. Jamie Kosoy, my colleague and Associate Technical Director at Big Spaceshipsays it well:

We don’t have a single “Flash developer” at Big Spaceship. In fact, we grimace at titles like that.…We happen to be good at (and love) Flash, but we also happen to be good at (and love) a couple trillion different other technologies.…We believe in strategic thinking and great design and pushing the limits. Nowhere do we say it has to be done in technology X or programming language Y in order to be a successful and engaging project, and we don’t believe the users who engage in the projects we put out there do either.

A line in the sand

The problem with rallying behind a technology is that it traps us within the confines of its constraints. We easily shift “don’t know” and “not sure” into “can’t” and “won’t.” Creativity is dictated by programming languages. How sad.

Technologies aren’t inherently bad or good. They’re only appropriate or inappropriate for certain circumstances. They’re a means to an end, not solutions within themselves. Each one is powerful in its own right to accomplish a certain goal. The responsibility to use an appropriate technology lies with the one who made the choice. Unfortunately, we’ve misinterpreted irresponsible development as inadequate technology.

Case in point: Loading. Flash provides powerful methods to track the download progress of every miniscule element. And what have we chosen to do with it? We load everything up front and make the user suffer through minutes of a loading sequence, instead of loading assets progresssively as they’re requested. The Flash platform does not deserve the blame for bloated websites—the developers who made these poor decisions do.

Until we realize the foolishness of faith in technology, we’ll see the same cycle repeated.

Doomed to repeat the past

JavaScript has grown exceedingly popular of late, with much credit due to easy-to-use libraries likejQuery and the rediscovered usefulness of Ajax. More and more, sites use JavaScript to provide great functionality for the people who visit. More so, many experiments—like Scott Schiller’s site and Browser Ball—push the boundaries of what JavaScript is typically used for. The same is true for HTML5, with amazing displays such as 9Elements’ HTML5 Canvas and Audio Experiment or Jilion’s more practical SublimeVideo player.

These new executions bring interesting questions, many related to user experience. If a feature needs a lot of code or graphics to power it, do we need to give the user progress indication (read: preloader) before they can use it? Once we use HTML5 video to interact with other videos, text, and graphics, will we need blending modes in HTML6 to create more seamless online environments? Will JavaScript developers realize the value that sound brings to an online experience and have to create ways to handle audio? Will we need a visual editor so that designers who don’t code can take advantage of <canvas>? Will heavily scripted web applications become intense processor hogs?

If this sounds familiar to you, it should. These are the kinds of questions the Flash community explored throughout its early years. Regardless of your opinion about Flash, it’s difficult to deny the tremendous growth it has experienced. From a simple drawing application, to a full-fledged scripting language, to powerful streaming video capabilities, and more, the Flash platform has expanded exponentially to respond to the needs of its users—the people who use it to create and the people who use the end result. For better or worse, Flash has shaped the way people absorb online content.

We now have the advantage of learning from that journey, and we’re already reaping the benefits. For instance, any interaction model that modifies the full page refresh breaks the browser’s back button functionality. While it took eight years from Flash’s inception to birth a solution such as SWFAddress, JavaScript developers have the benefit of hindsight and were able to implement a similar solution for JavaScript-based applications much faster.

I’ll go so far as to assert that most technological advances are born from something that would be good for people using it. When we put stock in technology and try to be creative for creativity’s sake, we almost always repeat our mistakes. When we try and solve problems instead, we force ourselves to care. Innovation is a natural side effect.

Worth fighting for

But we take pride in our technologies. If I’m not striving for my guru ranking in a particular programming language or design style, then what really matters? I’ve hinted at it throughout the whole article, but let me make it painfully obvious.

People.

People matter. Not users, but people. A user is a faceless entity, robotically performing tasks that we test and optimize. A person lives, laughs, cries, loves, hates—and uses the sites and applications we make. My mom. Your five-year-old. His grandfather. Her best friend. Their science class. They don’t tell us how much they appreciate our progressive enhancement or how we use the drawing API or our impeccable use of attribute selectors. They only say that a website was confusing or hard to read or fun to play with. That’s the real motivation for excellence: bringing ease, joy, and fun to the people around us.

We should be getting to the point where people can’t tell how a site was built. I love coming across a site where how it was made is not immediately apparent to me. That’s how it should be: Create something excellent where the technology is transparent, and allow only the curious to look under the hood to actually see what’s going on. JavaScript, Flash, HTML5, tables, Shockwave, Unity—no one cares when people using it can do what they’re supposed to. When something is broken—whether it’s functionality or the user experience—that’s when you’ll hear whining about platforms. Create a great experience for people and you’ll receive due praise, regardless of the technology.

We want you

The bickering is getting old. Here’s what we can do.

Start supporting initiatives instead of bashing them. Do you think Flash sucks? Don’t write a “Dear Adobe” rant on your blog; contact the Adobe team directly and tell them what you think could be improved. Think HTML5 is a joke? Get involved with the working group to make it better. Got a problem with how a certain site is built? Approach the creators with your concerns and suggestions, privately and humbly.

Agencies: Stop writing job listings for HTML5 designers or ActionScript gurus. You’re just fanning the flames. Instead, invest in creative people who know how to execute in a number of ways, people who prioritize learning new tools to solve a problem over honing their chops. Don’t sell (or discourage) Flash or standards to your clients; instead, sell creative brand extensions, accessible content, enjoyable experiences, and simple maintainability.

Allow technologies to die on their own. Macromedia Director is no longer popular because its usefulness decreased, not because we crucified it. The old way of writing JavaScript is fizzling out on its own, because we support unobtrusive and DOM-based methods.

Teach. Approach your local college (or high school!) web design program and offer to instruct the new generation of designers and developers. Web design education is stagnant; it will take dedicated people who are willing to challenge the status quo to change that. Get involved with the wonderful work that’s being done in the area of web design education, such as the WaSP InterAct program, Opera Web Standards curriculum, or Adobe Education Technologies.

Finally, remember what really matters: People. For everyone’s sake, it’s time we all learned to get along.

Original article link: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashstandards/

(Source: transfergroup.com.au)

How clean is your online brand?

Have you ever even thought about what someone Googling you may think of you? How often do you Google yourself? What if your online name has some unpleasant personal habits and likes sharing them publicly on social networking sites such as Facebook?

It’s no secret that potential employers have been ‘back-grounding’ people online ever since Google became a verb. If this surprises you - then don’t be the slightest!

I believe that about 90 per cent of recruiters and employers Google candidates as part of the hiring process and 40 per cent ‘eliminate’ candidates based on what they find online.

As a result this means the resumes you spend hours carefully crafting forms only one piece of the puzzle when a recruiter or employer assesses you.

Here are some steps for talent wishing to manage their online brands:

  • know what is being said about you online daily
  • establish a professional presence on networking sites such as LinkedIn
  • as the online landscape changes rapidly, stay vigilant and set up a Google Alert so you’ll be notified whenever your name appears online

Think this - branding or PR agencies help entrepreneurs and stars manage their personal brands online because it helps increases their public-status and shows their continually activity. However, you may not be able to maintain control over all the information that is available online but you can proactively seed information on sites that have high traffic, so that less flattering information about you is buried further down on search results.

I  have seen many mistakes people make online in the 10 years or more I have been recruiting and hiring digital professionals. Anyone serious about managing their online profile needs to show some consistency and be savvy about their privacy settings. The party pictures you have onFacebook may be completely at odds with your pristine LinkedIn profile. You need one professional photo and a personal brand statement along with a biography available everywhere online. If talent are really serious, then they should think seriously about blogging and the comments they leave. Your online presence can tell stories about you that you’ll never even think about. Networking sites can show how well you network, while you are not  actively networking.

Be aware of how your LinkedIn profile is written as it speaks volumes about you. Employer and recruiters look beyond that, checking out the quality of ones contacts, the number and quality of recommendations they have and the groups they belong to. There are some things you just can’t fake! For example, belonging to groups like University of NSW. You can only have that tagged on your LinkedIn profile if you’ve actually studied there.

Perhaps recruiters making judgments based on their personal bias is no different from the way they may have reviewed a resume in the past. What is different, however, is how quickly they can access information about you.

And, again, it may not just be what you actually write about yourself that sends the strongest message. It can be the way you interact and engage others online.

Expect to see astute employers or recruiters make assumptions based on your personality impression found on your Facebook profile which can provide strong clues about a person’s offline personality, particularly with extroverts.

One key message for anyone using online networks is to understand the community they interact with. The popular sentiment is that Facebookis for friends, LinkedIn and Twitter is for professional networking.

Clever jobseekers, however, can use each network to take advantage of the unexpected.

Looking up and approaching an employer or recruiter on Facebook may yield a result when an email in an overcrowded Inbox may be ignored.

Some worry that the opportunities for online networking will just favour the narcissist, or the talent who will always be in demand as they have the intuitive networking skills and techno-confidence to manage their online presence. Perhaps, though, big and exciting opportunities will open up for talent who have struggled to get through gatekeeper recruiters, as many more realise they can manage their own sales pitch online.

I can only predict a very limited life span for the long dominating job boards unless they’re ‘free’ and allow employers to post positions that are broadcast across strong wide social networks. The number of professional style blogs out there now days all over the world supports this wouldn’t you think. We at Transfer are investing allot of money in refining digital Transfer’s talent profiling system, where we allow talent to register for a profile based on their ideas and personalities, not their experience. Before a profile is launched into the public domain a professional recruiter meets, screens and thoroughly references each applications. Unlike many job boards out there offering a resume pool service for employers to pay a fee to access uploaded resumes.  

The days of of traditional ways of recruiting are gone. I think many of the traditional job boards … will continue to change their business models based on the rise in social media recruiting.

My prediction is that generalist job boards will soon be able to provide options for employers to offer one-click listings on FacebookLinkedInand Twitter.

On the other hand I don’t believe that ‘executive headhunting’ agencies will ever go away, however, where they’ll be used to source and evaluate talent as “information curators” by way of tracking professionals and their careers.

Where does this all leave us? The fascinating thing about online networking is that the online community dictates the direction; and that direction can take unexpected turns. So the only reliable answer may just be: who knows?

This Wheelchair For Dogs Is Too Adorable For Words

Get ready to bawl your eyes out.

This Wheelchair For Dogs Is Too Adorable For Words

Get ready to bawl your eyes out.

liquidnight:

René Maltête 
From Au petit bonheur la France: Photographies et Textes de René Maltête, 1965

liquidnight:

René Maltête 

From Au petit bonheur la France: Photographies et Textes de René Maltête, 1965

An Electric Bike That Hauls Cargo, And Doesn&#8217;t Look Like A Dork Mobile

An Electric Bike That Hauls Cargo, And Doesn’t Look Like A Dork Mobile

A History of Business Cards

history of business cards

The business card is often something placed at the back end of your wallet or in your pocket. Deemed as a small inconsequential piece of paper that is part of day to day meetings with people, the card is seldom considered more than its face value. However, these cards have a long history and an evolution many of us don’t appreciate.

17th Century Europe

Business cards began in the 17th century in Europe, where they were used to announce the impending arrival of prosperous or aristocratic people to their local town or even their home. They were shaped and sized in a similar way to a playing card and became a staple of the elite by the middle of the century. In time the cards became engrave with gold and exciting typefaces and by the 19th century the cards were a must have by anyone, who was anyone in the middle class circles of the day. Houses even had card trays, ornate in construction, made so those visiting your house could leave their card in.

history of business cards

Goldsmith and engraver trade card

history of business cards

Florist trading card

history of business cards

Playing Card Manufacturer trade card

history of business cards

Dentist Trade card

19th Century

By the 18th and the 19th centuries these ‘social cards’ were taken from each lady upon her first visit to a house. People were offered the card tray upon the opening of the door to the door and had to place their card in it as a matter of etiquette. This card was then delivered to the lady of the household, who would examine it – in many ways it created the first impression of the person.

history of business cards

Grieg, Edvard (1843-1907) Norwegian composer

history of business cards

Gorki, Maxim (1868-1936) Russian Novelist and Short Story writer

history of business cards

Freud Visiting Card (1856-1939) Austrian Neurologist

When the other person waited for those they came to see in the hall, it would have been unheard of for them to look at the other cards. Cards with folded corners had been presented in person, cards folded in the middle indicated the call was meant for all family members. There was also often lettering on the card P/F for a congratulatory visit, P/C for a condolence call.

Unlike in polite society – these cards were also used in the UK for trade purposes. These cards were handed out before or after work was done and included maps to get in contact with the person. Originally produced with wood presses, they would have been created with lithography after its creation in 1830.

Formality

The effects of the industrial revolution created a lessening of formality in the world. Exchanging of contact information became essential and the visiting card and trade card were merged and handed out on less formal occasions. The upper class still suffered an aversion towards their use on informal occasions, however they became widespread in the USA. There widespread use often created up turned noses when a US business man presented one at a upper class home in the UK.

Modern Day

Time has eroded much of the etiquette regarding business cards, however rules do persist. Cards should not be handed out by the left hand, should never be written on and should always be translated to the language of the specific country they are being handed out in on the rear of the card. They should never be carried loose and presented in the best condition.

These days cards should have the name of the card holder, their title, the company, their location, and relevant contact information such as address, email, telephone and anything else you feel the need to add. Cards are usually printed in black ink on white paper, though this varies by country.

Following this logical etiquette means you and your cards won’t have any issues and just think how much more hassle you’d have had handing them out 300 years ago.

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards

history of business cards