Comments on: We’re not crazy. Yay!

By: graham wood

graham wood — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:30:00 +0000

i reckon if you have a bit of a nose around you’ll find a nice inspiring tradition of places that, at least in their inception, liked to think, play and do . . .
ant farm
archigram
superstudio
fletcher/forbes/gill (thus pentagram)
the factory
fabrica
fuel (uk)
tomato
charles and ray eames
bruno munari
antirom
futuresystems
universal everything
base
graphic thought facility
rebecca and mike
m&m paris
etc etc & so on . . . i’d suggest perhaps that it’s much more of a common tradition than it might seem, and certainly not anomalous . . . in fact it’s probably the basis of practice outside of the more corporate world.
and it’s lovely. that’s actually really officially what it’s called.

By: Russell Perry

Russell Perry — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:18:22 +0000

Shops like Coudal, and even you guys here at LIC have always been inspiration for me and my teammates in Phoenix. It’s finding the time (or revenue) to pursue other projects, aside from the traditional nose-to-the-grind client work that’s been our challenge.

Maybe all we need is a cool Euro HQ…

By: Howard Mann

Howard Mann — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 17:58:51 +0000

I have wrestled with this for years and have yet to come up with that “sound bite” type of answer… But it still bugs me most days.

“Business Design” has always felt the closest explanation as it crosses so many areas depending on what is needed by each client.

Ultimately, explaining the amazing things you do for your clients (As you have done so well on your new site) tells the story better than anything else.

Let me know if you find a better answer!

By: Barry Martin

Barry Martin — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:37:45 +0000

We’ve been using “communications design” lately.
We sell Design Thinking (effectively creative problem solving). And we happen to apply it to communications.
Sure it’s a big umbrella, but that’s how high we had to go to get a clear picture of the range of things we end up outputting.
So, as long as it involves helping to define and manifest an idea, we can handle it.
I didn’t say we WOULD, just that we could.

Something else most of us have in common is a facility for understanding and solving other people’s problems (communications challenges, specifically). Hence our half-assed site (or 86%-assed)when we do swell stuff for lot’s of folks big and small all day every day.

That help?

By: ana

ana — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:17:36 +0000

adaptive path and zeus jones may also fit there. what i think that this category is – and this is also why it is hard to call it a category in the first place – that it offers their own definitions of / approaches to business. what makes them similar is the fact that they are not similar at all (unlike traditional marketing agencies, where processes and deliverables are always the same and comparable across agencies).

By: kjbro0me

kjbro0me — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:38:10 +0000

What I see as a common thread in this list is dimensionality. It is not about designing on a flat screen, or predefined business strategies, or following the branding recipe of logo/business cards/website. Interactivity is fully realized as something that must exist equally in the real world as it does onscreen.

Another common thread: happiness. I am guessing that these types of projects make both the company and their clients happy.

It is a great list. Thank you for posting it.

By: izzie

izzie — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:30:02 +0000

i really admire tiny gigantic’s courage in doing work that is different, fun, and engaging! it’s inspiring to know that a career in graphic design does not have to be limited to branding megacorporations.

By: Davin

Davin — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:41:19 +0000

My partner and I have called what we do “many media” since we started up Fluffco in ’99. It’s true, it’s hard to describe studios that have their fingers in techology, arts, client services, culture, merchandise, etc.

Etc. Companies? EtCo? Who knows…