https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PSZSRAPFzZgCcNqGyLjGfAtE7GGdAFYQ/view?usp=sharing
Category: Discussions (Page 1 of 4)
When I first started learning about the world of graphic design I remember faintly hearing about Paul Rand and not knowing much about him but as time went on and especially after reading this article and watching the videos I can see why he is so highly regarded and I honestly love his thought and design process and way of handling things. I like the way how he took the way of designing as solving a problem and by solving it in a simple way but in a way that it became timeless and basically became the image of the company and catch your attention with a certain amount of surprise, as said in the video. It still baffles me that it took ten years to perfect the IBM logo. His design process and approach is rather different from Paula Scher’s process due to the fact that Paula Scher is able to get it on the dot and capture everything within a logo in a matter of minutes. Nonetheless It is a well known fact that both of them are masters of their craft and regardless of their approach, it does take a huge amount of time and dedication and years of practice to get to that level of mastery and they have always managed to pull through and shine.
After reading and watching the Lessons from IBM and Paul Rand I concluded there is no one way to design. Rand took his profession very seriously. His designs were straight forward but there was an element of play. He went into design as solving an issue using simple forms and different weights.Â
At first it threw me off that he took 10 years to create the IBM Logo, (because it takes Scher one second and 37 years of experience) but I thought it impressive that when he presented his work it was complete in booklet form. It showed how the logo would be used and why it worked. He made sure the applications matched the aesthetic. It was mentioned in the video that if you made a mistake it was the company’s problem not Rands. If you wanted Rand to change or edit his work you had to present a rationale of why it did not work v.s. Simply saying blue isn’t the color they wanted.Â
Also I did not know that Rand designed the logos for UPS and ABC.Â
In comparison, Paula Scher does three variations and felt if she did not grasp the concept then she would say she wasn’t a good fit for the project. Scher is so established her team helps put the completed applications together and Rand does it all himself.Â
They both are similar in the way they use play. Years later, Rand remained on the IBM branding team the same way Scher did with the Highline and Public Theater. They both stand by their designs and agree that the logo should take on meaning. Without meaning the company and logo become second rate.
I am presently kinda recalling about Paul Rand since I was reading an article about him. And from what I’ve recollected, Paul Rand was a really organized and detailed designer. Cautious, but exceptionally detailed. The article talks around how the IBM symbol was made, and the diverse ways it can be utilized for. From what I’ve learned it took a whereas to create the IBM symbol but then I keep in mind how Paula Scher made the Interesting CITI logo in less than a few seconds. Both exceptionally well known and one of a kind artists. Both Paul and Paula are incredible creators but their encounters have instructed them to see at things in a different perspective point in the art eyes.
From what I’ve learned from the video, Paula Scher cherishes art and graphic design and the history behind it, together with classics, well known icons, writing, music, as well as  New York, which makes the pictures or components in her works frequently come from the social life in New York. Paula combined her craftsmanship with her graphic design angle to make a wall painting for the school. Craftsmanship has no reason whereas the graphic design does turn out to the center contrast. For Paula She made a straightforward, notorious, and effectively identifiable image for the neighborhood that inevitably got to be the symbol for the stop itself and for me so distant has still been an motivation
According to How to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Rand, Paul Rand was a very serious and talented graphic designer. This is not surprise to me, but at the same time I did not know how much time he had put into one single project which was the IBM logo. It’s amazing how he spent ten years trying to perfect it. I kind of related a bit to him when in the video, they said that he wasn’t so convinced about the letters because they were not the same width, which i have once had trouble with when i was creating a poster. Even though the IBM stripe logo is pretty iconic, the one with the bee and eye is even more eye catching in my opinion. This is because of how playful it is compared to the other one. Some will think that because it’s so obvious and simple, that it might not have taken as long as it did, but they are wrong, because designs like these often take a lot of time and thought.
This reminded me of Paula Scher when it comes to the outcome of their work and how effective it is. The main difference would be the amount of time spent on the projects. For example, I remember from last week’s assignment, Paula Scher spent less than a minute creating the Highline logo, but it is one of the most known logos in NYC because it’s a well known tourist spot. Both designers won’t take no for an answer. For example when they asked Paula to change the logo to look like an “F”, she was apposed to it. She did not believe it would have been this popular now a day, but she did know that the “F” was not going to work, which is why she kept insisting on the “H”. Same like Paul Rand, he did not accept a no for an answer. Once he did something, that was it, it had to be that logo because he believed in it since the beginning.
Reading the article âHow to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Randâ it was revealed to me Paul Rand was a very detail-oriented designer. Rand would spend over a decade playing with variations of the IBM logo explaining there was a problem with âthe sequence, going from narrow to wide…without any rhythmic possibility.â This struck me as a stark difference from the designer Paula Scher who would do her designs quickly. However, both have a playful and deceivingly simple design aesthetic. In my design work, I tend to have a “loose” approach. However, after reading about Paul Rand I was reminded of the importance of meticulous design and a sharp eye.
After reading and watching “How to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Rand I felt the big difference that stands out to me is the design of the IBM logo. The article talks about how the IBM logo was created, and the different ways it can be used for. ” The logo’s design did not happen overnight.” They spend much more time working on it. On the other hand, Paula Scher’s Citi bank design was just done in a second, on a piece of tissue paper. Like Paula Scher said sometimes you need to forget the brief and do what you’ve never done before.
After reading and watching âHow to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Randâ, i found out that Paul Rand was a very detail-oriented designer who loved to play around with logos using different variations until it was perfect in his eyes.For example, it took him 10 years before coming up with the strip on the IBM logo he wanted to make sure the detail and the conceptual thinking of both the client and consumers would get it and it must has did the job because the logo has remained untouched since then. Paul Rand said âA great piece of design catches your attention with a certain amount of surpriseâ and i feel he did that with the playful and witty a witty rebus poster Eye-Bee-M; it was simple symbols along with the letter M from his original logo, his quote really summed up the poster.
When Rand designed a logo for a company he only focused on creating one logo and fine tuning it instead of coming up with multiple ideas to present to a client. However, he made up for the single designed logo by also creating booklets that showed how the logo would look on different spreads,he wanted to make sure that his logo worked in every thinkable application like stationeries,ads and packaging.Paul Rand made sure his clients couldn’t say no as he said âYou hired me to do it , im telling you this is what you should useâ he didn’t want to hear if the client didn’t like it so he made sure they did; wow is all i can say his level of experience and his value for precision made him the M.V.P in the graphic design world.
I feel when it comes to Paul Rand and Paula Scher they take designing anything seriously and have pays attention to details but Paul Rand doesn’t like to create a logo in 20 seconds he wants to create it ,research it ,play with it in different variations until it fits both what he wants for the company and for the clients. Paula Scher is different when it comes to designing. She can design a logo in 20 seconds and still have the same effect as Paul Rands designs. Both Paul and Paula are great designers but their experiences have taught them to look at things a certain way.
After watching and reading âHow to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Rand An article with 2 embedded videosâ I thought he was a strict designer when it came to critiquing him, as he did not give people design options. He gave people a single presentation or a single piece of what he thought to be a good recommendation. As it was also mention in the video âhe didnât want to hear if he didnât like it he would say you hired me to do it and Iâm telling you this is what you should useâ, I really noticed that he was a genius and also detail oriented designer unlike Paula Scher she was a freestyle designer who went with the flow, he is way organized than her. As I remember she was more of a doodler and she made the Citi Bank Logo on a napkin even though Rand is the exact opposite of her he used to be more complex for example the IBM logo had more effort, study and thinking(research) done into it.
After watching and reading âHow to design an enduring logo: Lessons from IBM and Paul Rand An article with 2 embedded videosâ I thought he was a strict designer when it came to critiquing him, as he did not give people design options. He gave people a single presentation or a single piece of what he thought to be a good recommendation. As it was also mention in the video âhe didnât want to hear if he didnât like it he would say you hired me to do it and Iâm telling you this is what you should useâ, I really noticed that he was a genius and also detail oriented designer unlike Paula Scher she was a freestyle designer who went with the flow, he is way organized than her. As I remember she was more of a doodler and she made the Citi Bank Logo on a napkin even though Rand is the exact opposite of her he used to be more complex for example the IBM logo had more effort, study and thinking(research) done into it.
I admire Paul’s feelings and his confidence in his work built because every decision he made creating the logo wasn’t made on a whim but by by his experience as a creator. 10 years is an insane amount of time to work on a logo that adds the explanation to his character and how he holds up his work and the company’s given history. Trying to understand the creative process isn’t something that is easily explained there logic in it but at the same time, there isn’t. One day I believe my experience will build the foundation of the creative process I will work with, but for now, it’s more like trial and error trying to understand between what’s needed and what can be more of a design.
the article on paul rand was quite interesting on the secrets behind IBMs famous logo that has helped the company be what it is today. the amount of detail and effort paul has invested into developing and rebranding the identity of IBM has had massive positive effects and the amount of work he has put in for about 10 years is immense tinkering with one logo for 10 years has definitely shown in its longevity. one of the most interesting things about paul rand to me is the fact of only coming up with one design and proving its the best solution to the client and why it would work by developing an entire book or deck to support his claims and really hit home to the client which I think is really brilliant in the design of using his status and experience to his advantage. and I someday hope I have the skill and knowledge as well as experience to do something as bold as that. another big takeaway from paul rand is his sheer playfulness when it came to designing and I totally agree design should be fun and entertaining to the extent in which some of my best work can happen when its fun and enjoyable wheres no longer work and more play. in which it is really shown in his work.
Paula Scher loves the history of art and design, classics, popular iconography, literature, music and film, as well as the city where she lives, New York, which makes the images or elements in her works often come from the cultural life in New York.
For a LOGO to become a true symbol, it takes time and the continuous presentation of various perceptions of the brand to be formed. You should not judge the pros and cons of a logo separately from the actual environment, because a logo needs a period of time in the market to establish its own image, just like a magazine needs a year or more to establish its own personality.
Paula Scher is a great designer and she uses very simple elements to achieve great results.In particular, the Citi Bank logo is very simple but amazing.She is good at drawing by hand, directly pointing out the characteristics and themes of the brand, and then drawing a good finished product.She has a classic quote: âIt took me a few seconds to draw it, but it took me 34 years to learn to draw it in a few seconds.â
In the video “Do What Youâve Never Done Beforeâ, Paula Scher teaches us through four design projects that she was commissioned to design. What She learned from each of them. The High Line, MoMa, The Northside Pittsburgh and Metropolitan High School.
âThe High lineâ She had to create a logo for them. She thought of a railroad and the letter H, which is the initial letter of the company, to help her come up with the logo. In my opinion it is a simple design but nevertheless it works very effectively on any platform. It works more like an icon that you can put anywhere such as: umbrellas, cups, signs, etc.
“MoMA” She explains that: “sometimes it’s not the design, it’s really the people.” She talks about how different departments don’t work together when working on a project. She believes that all departments should work as one, rather than each doing its own thing. She wanted all the designs to have consistency, like the same type, the same design, no matter what they might promote.Â
The Northside Pittsburgh in particular this project. She sums it up: âThe brief is wrong.” She says, sometimes you just ignore the brief and do it, especially when you don’t get paid you have nothing to lose.
Finally Metropolitan High School âIs design or Artâ The last project she talks about is her design for a high school. On this specific project she decided to combine her skills in painting and her environmental graphics.They ended up painting and placing one of their paintings, which is the map of New York with zip codes in different languages. She says: Design has a purpose, art does not. For me that is the difference between art and design. Art is free.
After watching this video, there is a lot of great and useful information to use and absorb in regards to being a graphic designer. You definitely have to branch out , because thatâs one of the ways youâll grow as a designer, and when youâre developing or redesigning an identity for something or someone, everything needs to be cohesive and go with each other. Paula Scher shows how this is done when she talks about her working at the MoMA and how they were not functioning as one brand and with the introduction of one template, everything looked cohesive regardless of the design that was presented, and that sometimes people fail at communicating things. Also, I learned that when youâre designing something , you never know if itâs going to become iconic. Take the example when sheâs talking about the highline, when she was iffy about taking the job because at the time it was just an abandoned railroad. It only took an hour of studio time to come up with everything and now itâs iconic and pretty much a landmark. Â Itâs insane and pretty cool and inspirational at the same time.
Paula Scher said âThe way stuff gets made is accidental and circumstantial, that things have a life of their ownâ. At first I thought, accidental? I did not understand what she meant, but through watching the Do What Youâve Never Done Before video I believe she meant that you often start with an idea that may not go anywhere but it doesnât hurt to just do.Â
Scher took on the Highline job because she wanted Watch World. I found it interesting how she was never fully confident the job she did would become a real thing. I guess I thought the smaller things to get the attention of the audience like her city wide campaigns and her post card and stationary making would be like mini accomplishments regardless of it becoming a real thing. But overall she did the project not knowing it would be so successful. Just like how the I heart NY logo was originally intended for the state, but the logo became specific to the city.Â
I find myself overthinking more times than I can count. Wanting to be sure that I understand the brief and that I am not missing information. Scherâs example about the Moma made me realize it isn’t always the designers fault. She says âSometimes it’s not the design, it’s the peopleâ. Regardless she went into the project and had to restructure all the department’s communication as well as redesign each department to look cohesive.Â
What really stood out to me was how humble Scher seems. She was honest with not wanting to recreate the H in Highline to an F, and how she was not interested in the Pittsburgh bridge redesigning because she didn’t want to work for free, âSometimes just ignore the brief and go and do itâŚ.You have nothing to loseâ.
After watching âPaula Scher: Do What Youâve Never Done Beforeâ,she explains that when it comes to design sometimes things get made accidental.Paula didn’t want to take the high line project because she thought it would be a waste of time and money but she wanted the watch world job so she figured if she did a high line she would get it so that was her motivation.The Highline logo was so simple using the letter H and adding an extra horizontal line to make it look like a railroad line, the logo definitely got straight to the point about who and what the company is about.It’s crazy how Paula Scher didn’t feel the Highline project would be successful but it ended up becoming an iconic tourist attraction.
When it came to the MOMA museum she mentioned that they didn’t have a brand guideline to follow so designs were all over the place because the MoMa design team was separated by departments that don’t communicate with each other. Paula came up with a way to break down the departments and who was in control of what design and who had the final say so.A company needs to have a good base structure like a team that understands each other in order for a company to be successful.
As Paula said “Sometimes ignore the brief and just go do it when you’re not getting paid”.she did that whem it came time design for north side.Her design concept for the northside in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania was to take the bridge and turn it into an art piece that can house art shows. Her idea was brilliant because not only did it turn a dule area into an interesting place it also brought the towns together.
The Metropolitan High School building was wrapped in typography based on her map paintings, it was very colorful.It was funny when it came time for MoMa to proofread the foriegn languages because all of a sudden turned into art work and didn’t need to be proofread they knew it was gonna be a lot of work; I wonder why the first couldn’t be considered art too. Can a piece done in a country’s spoken language can be considered art if they don’t proofread it first?.âDesign has a purpose and art has no purpose” in her definition; with this quote would the answer to the question be yes?.
When it comes to designing one’s inner voice will try to stop the process but one should always push through because design may not be successful in the beginning but later may end up turning into something wonderful.William F. O’Brien said “Better To Try And Fail Than Never To Try At All”, People rarely get second chances in life so grab every opportunity because every experience is growth.
Recent Comments