Saturday, February 23rd, 2008

There is an interesting article over at the Helvetica website about ‘a font we can believe in’, the typeface called Gotham. I always find it so fascinating to read the history of the hows and whys behind the creation of typeface families, and when you can combine that with politics, I’m in heaven.

When you go back and take a look at where and why Gotham was commissioned in the first place, it’s interesting to note that the influences behind this typeface closely mirror the goals of the Obama campaign: idealism and social change. Additionally, the typefaces that were used as examples by GQ magazine, the company that requested this new typeface, had a very interesting summation: a ‘fresh”new’ typeface with an ‘established’ and ‘trustworthy’ look at the same time. Some of the typefaces that were referenced by the client were very trendy, very new designs (think night clubs, techno, things of that nature) that would not really mesh well with a magazine like GQ. However, they really wanted something that expressed that type of energy but still held onto the magazines classy, established feel. Sounds like a tough task. From the article:

GQ had a dual agenda of wanting something that would look very fresh, yet very established, to have a credible voice to it.

I think Hoefler & Frere-Jones knocked this one out of the park, and so did the Obama campaign by choosing Gotham as their campaign font. Don’t even get me started on the excellent choice of Perpetua as his secondary typeface which is another great choice. I know it’s corny, but I think that one’s taste in typefaces says a lot about them. The Obama campaign certainly has good taste in that regard. Does this make the guy any more or less electable? Of course not, but I’m just glad I don’t’ have to stare at McCain’s site or Hillary’s font catastrophe very often.

Welcome! If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Posted on February 23rd, 2008 | 2 Comments »

Saturday, February 23rd, 2008

Lately, I have been toying with the idea of switching email providers … again. Over the past year, I have changed my default address 3 times, and I had thought that I was ready to settle on my Gmail account. As a whole, it is an amazing service. The webmail interface is second to none, it has excellent uptime & availability, and I’m really glad that Google finally moved to IMAP, which gave users the ability to sync their mail between multiple locations in a better manner (for me, between work, iPhone and home). However, this move has actually introduced more issues than it has fixed.

Personally, I’m not a fan of the way that Gmail’s IMAP implementation uses each label as its own folder. Essentially, if I have one email — say, an email from Michelle that was sent to my daniel@danielandrews.com email address that was relating to a bill I needed to pay — the email would be downloaded by my desktop client a grand total of 5 times! Not only would it hit my inbox as any email that’s not filtered would, but it is also downloaded to the ‘All Mail‘ folder, the ‘Michelle‘ folder, the ‘danielandrews.com‘ folder, and also the ‘bills‘ folder (also, let it be known Michelle rarely emails me about bills, but it was just a hypothetical situation).

All of this would happen because of the default tags that I have set Gmail to attach to messages when they come in (michelle, danielandrews.com, bills). These tags then get translated into folders on your iPhone or desktop mail client. Not only does this make searching for emails a chore with Spotlight (as you will see double, sometimes more than double, results for most searches), but it also chokes your email client when downloading messages. If an email with an attachment is filtered into a few categories, it will be downloaded multiple times. This doesn’t just waste my time, but it wastes my bandwidth and disk space. I won’t even explore the confusing paradigm of deleting something from the inbox to actually ‘archive’ it.

Dupllicated Spotlight Search

Of course, the benefits to using a Gmail account are numerous and switching again isn’t very high on my list of things to do. The webmail interface is what I use at work and it’s really the best in the business. However, the annoyances that come along with this might be worth switching back to my danielandrews.com address & dealing with Squirrelmail’s web interface (or using Mail.app at work to access my personal mail) until things seem to be sorted out.

The sad thing is, it doesn’t have to be this way. IMAP Keywords could have been implemented instead of this half-baked solution. Google could have made the tag-folder relationship optional, thus becoming a ‘perk’ of using their online service. Instead, we were force-fed this half baked solution that clogs up my mailboxes, wastes my bandwidth, and makes Spotlight searches tedious.

Posted on February 23rd, 2008 | 2 Comments »

Monday, February 18th, 2008

I think that one of the things that I struggle with the most as a web designer is the delicate balance between realism and idealism–the idea that I should only be involved in projects that somehow better myself or my clients, especially based on their artistic merits. A sense of regret and frustration fills me when many of the projects I am involved in are finally published, and I feel that an opportunity has been lost. Either the site is hurried and thus lacks the polish that I’d like to give it, or we are not given the materials or clarity we require to do our best work. Of course, sometimes we simply drop the ball — it’d be silly to assume otherwise. However, I do feel most of the problem is bad communication, and that is an issue that you can solve. I suppose I live in a dream world where I expect every project to be portfolio-worthy.

Of course, this cannot always be the case. Moreover, much of the time the client leaves completely satisfied, and it is only I who am disappointed, unaware that we have actually fulfilled the main objective — to make their voice heard on the web, and get their message out to their customers. If I succeed there, then the client is happy and I should be happy. Sometimes their artistic goals are much more modest than mine are. However, lately at my job I have been dealing with an endless cycle of frustration — lacking the opportunity to speak directly with many of our clients, and thus lacking the ability to give my creative input, give direction to the client, or educate them about why we are suggesting a specific direction.

This is something I struggle with constantly, and I doubt any specific person, client, or decision can shoulder all of the blame for this feeling. It is not a desire to be perfect, it is a desire to make a positive change. I make my share of mistakes and that is okay–it’s feeling undermined by my clients or my employers that really nags me. As previously mentioned, the lack of ability to control the direction of my current place of employment is ultimately the nail in the coffin for me.

The bottom line, of course, is that I have to just get over it. I either must cede control to my superiors, or I have to take that control for myself. I’m not sure there is a middle ground when working in small business. With that said, one of the things I have been really considering lately is going into business for myself. This would allow me to do things my way — which is what I thought I was being promised some time ago at my current position.

I honestly think this is the best (and perhaps only) way that I can be happy doing design. I know people all across the design and development spectrum who I could tap to help provide crucial support along the way, and I have enough contacts that can refer business to me that I should be okay when I do make such a move full-time.

Back to square one, I suppose. Regardless, it’ll be an interesting few months as I try to work out a direction in my professional life.

Posted on February 18th, 2008 | 4 Comments »

Tuesday, February 12th, 2008

A Daily Kos reader has suggested that, in celebration of Lincoln’s birthday, we should donate $5.01 to Obama’s campaign to show that small donors are what drive his candidacy. I love the idea (much like Ron Paul supporters have shown) of getting a ton of small donors together to make a statement about their collective influence & power (not to mention personal ownership). From the article:

I propose that on February 12th (Lincoln’s Birthday) we have a money bomb extravaganza of small donations of $5.01 for Senator Obama. The reasons for this amount are easy to see:

1. Small donations are powering Obama’s campaign
2. Lincoln is on the $5 bill and the penny
3. .01 is also for us online progressives making a statement to the campaign that we are here and we’ve got money. That we aren’t the huge bundlers for campaigns. We sacrifice parts of paychecks that mean more proportionally to those of us with smaller incomes. We buy into Barack Obama because we do dream of a more hopeful future instead of cynicsm. I would much rather be called a Hopemonger than a Warmonger. So if you believe in the hope that small donors are powering the Obama campaign, please join me in showing that when Americans united with Hope can wield large influence with small donations!

I urge you all to donate $5.01 to his campaign. It’s a small, easy amount to give and will go a long way if a large number of us can pitch in.

Posted on February 12th, 2008 | 2 Comments »

Friday, February 8th, 2008

I’ve brought this up a few times lately with people. If Obama ends up losing the Democratic nomination to Senator Clinton, he will most likely bow out gracefully and at least say he’s going to campaign on the behalf of Senator Clinton. The reasons he would do this are pretty simple, really. Obama is still very young and has a long political career ahead of him, and taking a defeat like this in stride is in his best interest. Even if he has to wait 8 years to run for the presidency again, he will only be in his mid 50s, so should be primed for another run if this time doesn’t pan out. On top of that, causing drama isn’t in his ‘character’ as a change candidate whose stated goal is to bring integrity and class back to the White House. Being a sore loser would leave a sour taste in his mouth and might sabotage a future run.

Clinton, on the other hand, has shown no ability over her career to be a gracious loser, and she’s not getting any younger. If she doesn’t secure the nomination, I can see her trying everything she can to persuade Superdelegates to support her. If this, along with Bill’s influence, fails, then I can see a flame-out of epic proportions. I just don’t see it ending nicely. Maybe I’m wrong, and maybe I’m being a bit too hard on the Clintons. Or maybe not.

It looks like the Wall Street Journal agrees:

If Hillary Clinton loses, does she know how to lose? What will that be, if she loses? Will she just say, ‘I concede’ and go on vacation at a friend’s house on an island, and then go back to the Senate and wait?

This is, of course, all speculation at this point. The two campaigns are in a deadlock despite the fact that recent polling shows Obama is far more electable than Hillary, and I think a lot of insiders are starting to consider picking a candidate and running with them for the good of the party. If this drags on into the summer, things could get ugly for the Democrats.

Edit: Here’s an excellent article over at Politico about her recent string of denials over losses.

Edit 2: Further confirmation that she is prepared to ruin the party.

Posted on February 8th, 2008 | 3 Comments »