A new year brings a new start. My family and I have just finished relocating to Austin, TX. The move was purely for personal reasons related to lifestyle and closeness to family. I am, however, staying on with Adaptive Path. What does this mean? Well, in the short run, it means that I’ll be working remotely on a range of different projects. I will also be working diligently to get involved in the design and UX community in Texas. AP has a lot of connections here already — heck, the company was launched in Austin at SxSW. I am explicitly looking to meet talented folks in the area to hang out and, hopefully, build a team to start doing projects with. If you’re interested in grabbing lunch, a beer, or just having a chat, send me an email to my_last_name at adaptivepath.com.

This is going to be a bit of an adventure. Stay tuned for updates on topics including remote work, building a design team, and the UX of Tex-Mex.

Share This

Ok I'm admittedly a little late on this one...

I hope everyone had a happy, relaxing and safe holiday and a great 2007-was-ok-but-let's-really-blow-the-doors-off-their-hinges-2008 new year. It's a new year and people love to reboot around this time. Let's clean things up, wipe the slate clean and start fresh.

With luck, 2008 will hopefully bring some interesting and thought-provoking ideas from basement.org. At least that's the plan. One of the most challenging things I face with writing is to somehow continue to come up with fresh ideas that challenge old ones. I'll admit it got a little tougher in 2007.

But hey, that was 2007. It's now not 2007. It's a whole other thing! So let's see what '08 has in store. So it should be good. Hell, it has to be good.

Oh, and keep a close eye on the kids at Arc90 (between both the blog and lab). We're cooking up some nice surprises for the upcoming year.

If 2007 is any indication, all of us web people are in for another busy year. Should your plans include hiring or outsourcing, post a job listing or request for work by taking advantage of promotional pricing at Authentic Jobs: Use promotion code MOLL08 and receive 50% off the purchase price of a full-time or freelance listing. Offer expires January 15.

Of course, the money-back guarantee still applies, and others have found success, so toss in the discount and this is a great way to kick off the new year strong. And if you're on the other end seeking work in 2008, grab one of the available feeds, download the Mac OS X dashboard widget, or follow along in Twitter.

Happy new year, everyone. Here's to your continued success in 2008.

I’ve written about How Does a Designer Choose a Client earlier and in email discussions with a potential client, he asked me if there was something related to the customer’s point of view - how should a customer choose a designer - on what basis?

One simple way would be to trust your gut. If you have to choose between a handful of designers you will have varying portfolios and varying quotes - in today’s work culture you will also have varying locations.

PORTFOLIO
- How do you decide which designer’s portfolio is the best?
- What looks good to you? What looks relevant to you?
- Is it a red gradient butterfly outline above the client company name done in the Times typeface?
- Is it a logo that is relevant to the client’s requirement and business?
- Does the designer share case studies of how they went through the whole process of designing a logo?
- Does it appeal to you?
- Ask a designer for the brief they use with clients - do they even have a brief? Is it freely available - does it make sense to you?
-Does the designer inspire confidence?

There honestly is no rule and most of the common variables would be put down as :

1. Sense of balance in the graphics
2. Sense of color
3. Creativity in avoiding the obvious
4. Sense of typography, etc.

But the point is that most clients have no clue how to judge those variables - if they did, they wouldn’t be looking for a logo designer in the first place.

PRICE
Most clients, invariably, decide on the basis of price - because it is an important variable after all. As a customer, when you see a designer’s portfolio and you know their quote, you do get a sense of how it might work out with this particular designer - and you can see what you’re getting in return for what you’re paying. That rule applies universally - I have yet to come across a designer who does fantastic work and charges peanuts for it.

More than price, it is important that you look at how important your logo is for you. Why do you, as a customer or business owner, even want a logo? Most customers would usually answer that with, “Well, because it’s important that I convey a professional image to my own customers.” Some would even add, “Everyone has a logo - how can I even operate without one?”

If you want a logo to help you create an identity for your business and yourself, then you are better off going in for a designer who inspires confidence and where you have your gut telling you that you’re not compromising.

It is nearly impossible to show direct positive results of a good logo on your business / revenues / profit. But I have seen how good design affects client perception. I am currently working with a couple of friends on an Adventure Sports company called Leo Adventure Sports. I haven’t designed their logo [ that got done way before I even knew them ] but I handle the design of everything else - website, photograph display, certificates, stationery, t-shirt Front and back - and as an example, I have seen how a well-designed letterhead immediately creates a positive shift in their client’s behavior. At the end of the day, it wouldn’t matter one bit if the design was great but what Leo delivered was trash - design doesn’t make or break a business - but it does help with brownie points. Imagine if you were the best Adventure Sports company in town [ which Leo is poised to become ] and your work was supported with excellent design - so now you have your innards in order and your make-up’s brilliant too.

To get that, what are you willing and able to pay?

Great! You got a logo for USD 100 - the kid who lives down your road who just got out of college was thrilled to do one for you. Now your business has a logo. You already know that you do awesome work and clients rave about you. Assuming that kid’s a born designer - you’re most probably in safe hands - but if you scrimped on money and got it done from that kid only because you could get it done for cheap - you probably don’t have a good logo. I’m not saying that’s a certainty - but I’m saying “most probably”. And if it isn’t a good logo - your clients are still going to be happy with your work but they’ll look at your logo and somewhere, subconsciously it will lodge in their brains that that isn’t good design - it probably doesn’t mean anything tangibly and I might sound like a Freud wannabe but this is my personal opinion because I’ve seen it happen.

As a customer you might be willing to pay a lot of money but your ability might be restricted. If so, then wait. Wait till your ability matches your willingness. A logo is typically for a long period of time - you might as well get it done from that designer who has a stunning portfolio than compromise with an identity that’s going to be your face for the next 20 years.

LOCATION
This is something I have to deal with so I am mentioning it.
I am located in Mumbai, India and I work with client from the US, from Europe and other countries apart from India. There have been instances where the client was not comfortable working with a designer who is remotely situated and there will be no face-to-face interaction. All clients who have worked with me, have taken a risk. They had not previously worked with a graphic designer who wasn’t in their country and they decided to take a chance - the arrangement worked out great for everyone and till date I have not had any complaints about the location affecting work.

I have refused some projects because their scope and involvement would require a preferred face-to-face interaction and it really did not make sense doing it remotely.

If your gut tells you that you will not be able to handle a remotely located graphic designer - don’t collaborate with them. Not that there’s any rocket science involved in working remotely - any face-to-face interactions are replaced with emails and sometimes phone conversations. I prefer emails because they tend to reduce ‘noise’ and small-talk clutter and everyone stays focussed. We write with more focus than talk and it helps to have everything written down when working on a project. My creative brief also needs to be typed in - no conversation - conversation has plus points when I’m looking at creating a relationship with the client - for me, it’s more important to deliver good work and get the work done - if the work is good, the relationship is automatic.

And I take a 50% advance before starting. If, as a customer, you think I’ll run away with your money - then please don’t collaborate - because even if you do, these issues will manifest themselves later on in the project.

DESIGNER PERSONALITY
In whatever interactions you have had with a designer, assess if they are treating you as just another prospective client or whether their communication is personal. If the designer isn’t personalizing even the initial communication, it can only get worse. Assess if the designer is someone you could get along with - atleast for me, because of the remote location - it is important that my client is someone I can have a conversation with without feeling like I’ve been run over by a truck. Same applies to a customer - if you’re not comfortable with the designer - whatever the reason - think twice.

Although work delivered is priority, work delivered by someone who is anti-social is no fun.

Work with a designer who inspires confidence.
If you’ve had a bad past experience with another designer from India, don’t sue me - not everyone’s the same - if you have doubts talk to my past clients - they are all listed on my portfolio and most of them are on my LinkedIn network.

And again, trust your gut.

To celebrate the flair, color and creativity of the Brazilian origins, Brahma beer is launching VISTOBRAHMA, a design competition which offers up and coming creative minds the chance to get their work seen.

Advertisement:

read more

A few posts back I featured Jonathan's copy of the Crouwel designed de grote bosatlas and referenced his Flickred copy of The Practical Idealists, which I subsequently bought via AbeBooks.

I'm indebted to Jonathan for bringing it to my attention; until it arrived I really had no idea quite how significant this book is. Designed by Herbert Spencer and Hansje Oorthuys, and published in 1969, it first sets out to describe the circumstances in which the early design consultancies were established, specifically focusing on the work of the first of these consultancies; the perfectly named Design Research Unit.

With skills crossing pretty much the full gamut of design: the obvious graphic type, product, interior, townscape and architectural; DRU set the standard high for all the others to follow.

Amongst their many high profile activities were significant contributions to the Festival of Britain (1951), interior design work for BP's headquarters in London and what was, in its time (1956-66), Britain's largest design programme for British Rail that included locomotive design, signage and livery, staff uniforms and a comprehensive corporate ID manual, collaborating with Kinneir Calvert and Associates who designed the corporate typeface: Rail Alphabet.

A strong point for DRU's reason-for-being was to "design for industry" coming from Britain's post-war need to get back its feet, and emphasises the vital role that design played.

It's fascinating stuff. DRU did some fantastic work; like this beautiful symbol for the Royal Garden Hotel (1965); and pioneered corporate identity sytems, inline with the growing complexity of national industries. The photography is incredibly evocative of a ground-breaking era of optimistic modernism and the principles that DRU introduced resonate with so many things we take for granted today.

In 2007, Adaptive Path conducted a significant amount of research and design work in the mobile space. Typically, we can’t talk about much of it, though the paper Rachel co-authored with folks at Nokia addresses some of it.

In discussions on designing for mobile, form factor often dominates. The devices have to fit in your pocket. They have smaller screens. They have (or don’t, in the case of iPhone) some set of buttons.

Another common theme is “they’re not small PCs.” Initial attempts at mobile design tried to squeeze the PC (particularly the PC Web experience) into the phone, which simply frustrated users.

What I’ve seen in our work is that form factor, though important, is not crucial. In fact, it might be a misleading concern. The thing that’s interesting about designing for mobile isn’t the form of the device. It’s that the device comes with you.

What we’re realizing is that the key item of concern when designing for mobile is the context in which the device is used. What this means is that discussions of “PC” versus “mobile” are misguided, because we shouldn’t be focusing on the device. We are not designing for mobile — we’re designing for mobility.

It’s helpful to contrast designing for mobility with designing for sedentariness. What we hadn’t realized until we were designing explicitly for mobility is that, in the past, we had been designing not just for the “PC,” but for a sedentary experience. We shared unstated assumptions that people would remain in one place for long periods of time, with little change in their environment. We could take advantage of this with software experiences that rewarded deeper engagement, encouraged exploration and play, allowed for more complicated interactions to achieve a goal.

A key characteristic of mobility is that the environment around the user is dynamic — they’re walking, driving, on transit, in restaurants, theaters, offices, moving from place to place, context to context. Things around them are constantly changing.

And what we as users want in that kind of dynamic environment is a highly predictable, straightforward, get-in-and-get-out software experience. We don’t want to explore cyberspace when we’re out-and-about. We want to quickly get a key piece of information, or make a key connection. We want key functionality at our fingertips.

Whereas in a static environment, we’re much more willing to explore, assess, and analyze. We’re willing to take the time, to try new things, to invite surprise, because our environment is stable and supportive. So there’s an inverse relationship between the dynamism of your environment, and the complexity of use you’re willing to put up with.

Now, the thing is, it doesn’t matter what device you use in these contexts. If I’m out-and-about, and I pull out my laptop to find an address, I want to get in and get out. And if I’m at home or at the office, and have time to relax and engage, I’m perfectly willing to get exploratory with my mobile phone.

I believe we’re missing big opportunities when we design for the device, and not for the context in which the device is being used.

Share This

Ben nails why Facebook doesn't make sense. It gets *less* useful the more people are in the system, not more like you'd think (also why I logged into Myspace once and haven't revisited in over two years)