Uncommon Knowledge: 004

This is a small one but I was reminded of it today when a friend asked me to cast my eyes over some ad layouts he was working on.

Unless you're doing it for a specific effect or are referencing an historic style like these:

it has a tendency to look just plain boring. These, of course, look stunning.

Comments

[Kevin]

Great tip, and fantastic examples! I love this series.

[David Airey :: Creative Design ::]

The centre and right examples are very clean, but I'm not liking the left one too much.

What is it that appeals to your design taste?

[Ben]

Yes.

[Richard]

Funnily enough David it's the one on the left that I like most, then I'm a sucker for a bit of dirty old wood type. The other two are beautiful/elegant. The Swift one is so evocative of posters of his time and every time I look at it I get a stirring in my loins (but you don't want to hear about that); wood type is so physical. In our Mac-polished world the inherent flaws of wood type are the equivalent of ripping each other's cloths off in frenzied abandonment.

You know, I suspect that doesn't come across well in a comment but I'm fired up right now thinking about wood type.

The Hazlitt design (to calm me down) is straight out of the Bodoni Type Specimen book (brilliant!).

[David E.]

Centering can be the visual manifestation of indecision. I have three other rules that keep me from putting indecision into a design. If I catch myself using any of these, it's a sign that there is probably a better way.

1. Gradients
2. Graying out an image to put type over it
3. Repetition of an element

[Charles Edward Frith]

Stuff like this just makes me hungry for more tips.