You see this style every day… in magazines, on the web, and on TV. This stuff is made by some extremely talented and gifted artists, but I think there is one thing they lack: creativity.

“But Chris,” you might say, “look at all the swirls and colors and flashes!” That’s exactly my point. They all look the same. Granted, it is some amazing work, something I could only dream of creating, but it’s becoming overdone. For example, the two images here were designed by two different artists. They’re beautiful designs, especially the way the graphic elements flow with the photographic. But there doesn’t seem to be any individual style; you’d probably think the same guy designed both of these if I didn’t tell you different.

The style makes for some amazing visuals, especially when animated. The motion graphics using this stuff is beautiful. But I think it needs to be used in moderation, like any good thing. Otherwise, we’ll stop seeing the talent behind the design.

Twenty years from now, they’ll have a name for this era in design and some art student in college will learn about it. I hope this doesn’t become the “Age of the Swirls”. I think some of these extremely talented artist should take a hint from the graphic design masters like Paul Rand: sometimes, subtlety is key.

read more | digg story

Browsing around the internet for what seems like forever (StumbleUpon and digg are virtual crack), I’ve noticed something with the “Web 2.0″ design schemes… we’re going back to the 80’s.

Take color for example: look at most “web 2.0″ websites or logos. Go ahead, take a look. What do most of the colors have in common? They’re bright, they’re bold, they’re NEON. That’s right, the internet is now clad in DayGlo.

Not that the colors are all that bad. The internet has finally become a place where good design is more important than fancy stuff, and color is included. The colors are bright and eye-catching, but they’re not overpowering. Just a few years ago, everyone had a “look what I can do” attitude on the internet, and it produced some nauseating results. I’ll be happy if I never see another <blink> tag again.

Typography has become important on the web too. Most of the logos you see are focused around text, and text is what people see the most when they visit a website. So it has to look good. I’m glad the days of Comic Sans are almost over, although I still see it used (badly) from time to time. Both the 80s and Web 2.0 used a bunch of sans-serif fonts. The biggest difference I can see is that Web 2.0 likes to use rounded edges, soft shadows, and subtle reflections, while the 80’s used alot of sharp edges and radical angles. So I guess the 80’s are returning, but in a softer, gentler kind of way.

Web 2.0 has also had a couple of serious “stick-it-to-the-man” moments, most recently the digg story of the HD-DVD Hex Code. The 80’s were also a time of angst and rebellion, especially with the rising of the punk scene. I guess this isn’t the greatest of comparisons, but it’s a comparison nonetheless.

My final bit really has nothing to do with Web 2.0 at all, but it does have something to do with a comparison between 1980’s design and today’s design: the London 2012 Olympic logo. This is probably the worst design decision to happen to the Olympics (and Atlanta had Izzy, the blue… uh… thing.), but it totally screams “1980’s!” Further proof that we’re almost done wearing the bell-bottoms of the 60’s and 70’s and have moved on to copying the next decade.

So in short, we’re copying the 80’s. I can’t wait for Knight Rider to come back.

I’ve finally taken the time to add a real weblog to my website. I hope to regularly publish updates to my portfolio, thoughts on design, and maybe even some amusing anecdotes. Check back.