Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
10 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A good comprehensive study of new design, January 13, 2000
Whether you're concerned with traditional formal issues or more interested in making whacked out typographic designs, this book covers all the bases and touches upon nearly every relevant designer in the past 20 years or so. It's smartly split into three sections, the first focusing on the real movers and shakers in forward-thinking design (Rudy Vanderlans, Paula Scher, etc.), the second on those who are now enjoying success with the progress they've made (Designers Republic, Carlos Segura, etc.) and the "progeny" as they refer to them, the next wave of creative and innovative designers. Not only does the book have a healthy amount of full color illustrations to provide ample evidence of the designers' talents, but there is enough copy to be able to really consider this reading material (think of it as almost extensive captioning). It's nice to see a book that heralds both the well known names of the industry as well as up and coming talent, and that David Carson isn't necessarily the end all of high design in contemporary culture.
|
|
|
5.0 out of 5 stars
Contains Full Color Designs and Info on Cutting-Edge American Graphic Artists, March 1, 2009
Contents Include:
Foreword - Sharing the Vision - Marvin Scott Jarrett
Preface - Risky Business - Katherine McCoy
Intro - Radical Roots
SECTION 1 - MENTORS
* Pierre Bernard, Atelier de Creation Graphique
* Neville Brody, Research Studios
* Art Chantry, Art Chantry Studios
* Just Design, Spencer Drate and Jutka Salavetz
* Emigre, Zuzana Licko and Rudy VanderLans
* Ed Fella, California Institute of the Arts
* Tibor Kalman, M&Co. Labs, Inc.
* Katherine McCoy, McCoy & McCoy
* Paula Scher, Pentagram
* Rick Valicenti, Thrist
SECTION 2 - INNOVATORS
* Boelts Bros, Associates, Jackson Boelts,Eric Boelts, Kerry Stratford
* Margo Chase, Margo Chase Design
* The Designers Republic, Ian Anderson, Mike Place, Nick Bax, Matt Pyke, Dave Bailey.Liz Close, Julia Parfitt
* Jager Di Paola Kemp Design, Michael Jager, Giovanna Di Paola, David Kemp
* Max Kisman, Max Kisman Design
* Rebeca Mendez, Rebeca Mendez Communication Design
* Modern Dog Design Co, Robynne Raye and Michael Strassburger
* Reberb, Somi Kim, Lisa Nugent, Susan Parr
* Carlos Segura, Segura Inc.
* Studio MD, Glenn Mitsui, Jesse Doquilo, Randy Lim
* Paul Sych, Faith
* VSA Partners, Dana Arnett, Robert Voegle, James Koval, Curt Schreiber, Ken Schmidt
* Martin Venezky - Appetite Engineer
* Why Not Associates - David Ellis, Andrew Altmann, Patrick Morrissey
* Craig Yoe, Yoe! Studios
SECTION 3 - PROGENY
* Chris Ashworth, Substance
* Brand Design Co., Rich Roat, Andy Cruz, Allen Mercer
* Scott Clum, Rid e Design
* Jerome Curchod, Ray Gun Publishing
* Cyan, Detlef Fiedler, Daniela Haufe, Sophie Alex
* Amy Franceschini, Futurefarmers
* Fuse, Rich Godfrey
* Galie Jean-Louis, MSNBC
* Geoff Kaplan, General Working Group
* Post Tool Design, Gigi Biederman and David Karam
* Stefan Sagmeister, Sagmeister, Inc.
* Lee Schulz, California Institute of the Arts
* Smay Vision, Stan Stanski and Phil Yarnall
* Gail Swanlund, Swank Design
* Giulio Turturro, Verve Records
|
|
|
3 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Ten Years Ago this was Radical, November 30, 2000
The problem with this book is that it's a mile wide and one inch deep. Each artist only gets a page or two, and the images are small - so you only get a brief taste. After a while all of the "radical" graphics look alike - and not much floats to the surface. You won't find yourself going back to this book for ispiration after you have opened it a few times.There are some good designers represented here, but they get lost in coverage that reminds me of a bad yearbook. Most of the work looks pretty, but very little of it is realy smart. Some of the work shown was really cutting edge stuff back in 1985, but today it looks a little dated. If this book reprented itself as a study of alternative design from '85 to '95 that might be one thing - but it doesn't have enough perspective or go deep enough.
|
|
|
|