NICE CANS! (aka you CAN be that specialized and make a living)

Do one thing, and do it well (or so the saying goes). Do it really, really, really well and you may just have a niche that you can eek a living out of.

There have always been illustrators, designers, and photographers that were the "go-to-guys" for a very specific requirement, but that was often balanced against a very developed career (rarely the front end) or the pragmatism of practicing a career based on breadth versus strictly speciality.

Then came the internet. The store-front equalizer that puts a small-time basement operation on par with a multinational... as long as they create a similar quality product.

Check out this business... they shoot CANS...and that's their business. They do it  very well and that's about it.


they shoot cans...

"DESIGN INFERIORITY"

I'm a fan of all things design, and I've posted here before about my love for the I.D. site CORE 77. Recently they posted an article related to a "compromise design" ...in order to sustain a project at the cost of peak efficiency.

So the question for YOU is:

Is an inferior design still inferior if more people can afford/use it? 
If cost constraints would prevent the perfect object from being commercially successful, is it better to design something with inferior performance but feasible manufacturability (or for that matter price-point or commercial viability)?

Tawlk amongst you'selves...

STARBUCK's NEW LOGO...

Let the debate begin.

Pundits are either hailing or criticizing the latest incarnation of the Starbucks Logo. Logo redesign is not unique to Starbucks, but they have the corporate audacity to elevate their mark (the correct term for what students commonly call logo) from a mixed mark (meaning type integrated) into an icon (no typography). Old timers will remember the Greg Berryman "Notes on Graphic Design..." book that elucidates these levels of marks.

The fact is laid out that Starbucks may drastically change its business model in some way, and potentially its core business and target market/s. So the time is ripe for a change in mark. But do they have the iconic status of companies like Nike, Pepsi and Apple? Do they have the brand loyalty and high equity? I'd say yes... and they are following the logical (Berryman-ian) progression of their mark as such.

Anyone with small children knows the power of the golden arches. When you drive by a McDonald's (and long before your children can read) they point gleefully at the arches and cry for McDonald's.

Starbuck's mark, as wonky as it may have been--mired in greek mythology and Seattle folklore-- is instantly recognizable. To overhaul that mark (versus tuneup) would be too many steps back in the equity it has built.

fastco article on Starbuck's mark overhaul