GaryGraphicDesign: October 2011

After watching the film Helvetica, I feel that I am much more interested in type, and also inspired in design and visual communication. I really enjoyed the film and all the different views and opinions of the designers that were interviewed in the film.

I also feel that I have learned a lot from the film, not only about type and Helvetica, but also about design and visually communicating yoour design to other people. I never knew how big Helvetica really is in terms of typographic design. When it first appeared in the late 50's, everyone raved about it and everyone started to use it in their design because it was neutral but also looked good. Then, in the 70's there was a sense for the need for change and designers started to rebel against Helvetica and were more creative with typefaces in a way to communicate emotion or feeling. After this, in the 90's, designers wanted to go back to the design styles of the 60's, when Helvetica was massively popular, but add or change the typefaces in a way to create a style that suited them, or the mood of the design they were creating it for.

Some of things that surprised me about the film were some of the views and opinions about some of the designers that were being interviewed. It was clear that each of them were passionate aboute typography and design but they all saw this in different ways. One designer said that the role of the graphic designer is to "cure visual disease" which I found to be an intersesting and odd way to think of it because I never really thought of design in this way - makes it sound so serious and takes away the fun of designing I think. I also found it really surprising as to how many designers love Helvetica because I never noticed that it was so popular just because I see it used on everyday design.

The things I found most funny from the film were comments from the designers on Helvetica and also design. One designer compared Helvetica to previous typefaces as "slating crud off old things and poloshing them" and having a "mouth full of dust and then being offered a glass of fresh water". Whereas another designer simple says that it would "bore the shit out of you".

Their were a couple of new designers in the film which I hadn't heard of before which I would like to learn more about. I was intruiged by them mostly again of their strong views and opinions of design. One of these designers was Stefan Segmiester. I can remember seeing some of his work before but now I seem more interested because of how he spoke of design and his way of designing also. He is very creative and his work is quite shocking. He said that Helvetica was boring and when he sees it he hears "don't read me". Another new designer that I had discovered was Micheal Place. I really liked the look of the designs that I had saw in the film and also how he interpreted design - he says that he is not a classical typographer, he is not really intersested in the anatomy of the type but the emotional response that the design produce - which I also feel strongly about.

David Carson was one of the designers that influenced my last project who was interviewed in the film. I feel as though I learned more about his character and also his design style. He basically threw any typographic styles out of the window and never planned his work because he din't know how to - he was an amatuer who was just being creative and experimenting. Some of the things that he said that really stood out to me were "don't confuse legibillity with communication" and there is a "fine line between simple, clean, and powerful with simple, clean, and boring.

The designers in the film had many different views of the Helvetica typeface - some loved, some hated and some didn't really feel anything from it. Designers who loved the type said that it was a "real step from 19th century typeface", "timeless", it "seems like air, seems like gravity", and "invites open interpretation", a "landslide waiting to go down a slope". Designers who hated the typeface mainly said that it was boring - it would "bore the shit out of you" and it says "don't read me". Other designers said that they "accept that its just there" and that anyone could use it and it would look good but not very interesting. Their comments obviously showed their opinion but also their emotional response to the typeface.

I took a lot of confidence from the way that the designers spoke about typefaces that encourages me to also speak about my emotional responce to a typeface rather that how it has been designed and its anatomy. This means that your view can be totally different to someone elses but this is what design and visual communication is about.

This film definetly made me think more about Helvetica. I think I am going to notice more of it now which will do my head in, but in terms of design, I think I need to work more with the typeface to come to a conclusion to whether I am for or against Helvetica. I would say though that I do like the idea of taking something old and experimenting with it.

I'm not sure what my relationship with Helvetica is. I don't know whether I have grown up with it and just havn't noticed it until recently. I think that because it is used for almost every design on the street, it maybe just blended in and disappeared.

I think if I was to use Helvetica now, I would use it in something which was being designed for everyone because it is neutral and not too out there that it would divide too much opinion. However, I like the idea of designing to provoke an emotional response, which I don't really think Helvetica does, in which case I would probably avoid or experiment with Helvetica.

Font choice: The font used on a stagecoach bus ticket looks like the dottie font by Robert Schenk but instead of using dots or squares it is lines. This font was designed for showing text in electronic devices such as computers e.g the old macintosh computers. The font isn't the easiest to read but then again it is not hard to read either. The more important information on the ticket is more readable because it is larger and a thicker line weight. I think this font was chosen because it is printed out electronically and it is meant to look like a physical representation of the information on the computer or the electronic device (a reciept). It is not fun or interesting - only used to hold information that may be important. The hierarchy used is appropriate in terms of the differnce of weight and scale of the text as the more important information (date, expiry date, price, type of ticket) are all in a larger scale and are in bold. However, I think the placement could maybe be improved on as it seems quite random.

Usabillity: the people who would use this ticket would be basically everyone - People who travel to work, students, teenagers, famillies, older people. If the ticket isn't important to them anymore ie. they don't need it to get back home for example, people just throw them away. I think that older people or people with bad eye sight may struggle slightly with them because the smaller text is quite small and crammed together, it is also quite thin which means that they might not be able to pick up on the letters as clearly.