Lets Get Dirty
Hi all! I decided for this post i'd get grunge text out of the way. I think all of us have noticed the growing insurgence of "distressed" design over the past 5-6 years, which has evolved into more of the hand drawn text and graphics that are so prevalent as of late. One of the things that first attracted me to graphic design was the opportunity to synthesize so many other mediums into a piece with technology. I could paint, draw, sculpt, collage, shred, scan, and photograph, and pull it all together into something aesthetically beautiful. I've also noticed that the style has been closely related to the emergence of the hardcore/metal genres in music, which is where I first noticed distressed looking type being used. Later I started to get interested in designers such as David Carson. I'm sure we're all familiar with the work from Eduardo Recife available on his site misprinted type, even if we're not aware of it. And since most of the fonts are available for free, well it only makes sense that it would show up all over the place. Most free font sites also offer copious amounts of grungy text, most of them poorly crafted and relatively useless. I've also noticed this style gaining popularity on the web as well. A somewhat lengthy article on low-fi grunge text on the web can be found here. And here is an article/tutorial that was rather in depth.
So what am I getting at with all this? Since these fonts and brushes are easily available, and easy to create, and considering the over saturation as of late, does this de-value grunge as a design style? Does it detract from our craft as graphic artists, or is there still a valid artistic expression (commercially viable or not), and a degree of technical proficiency required, or has it made it possible for anyone to instantly create something dirty looking?
Another question that came to mind is: What does this sort of design, typography say to the viewer? What kind of appeal does t really have, if any? It is definitely reactionary, but has it become so watered down that it has lost its rebellious edge?
I'm curious to learn what everyone thinks about his, or if anyone has any other info about it.
(Jason, I can feel your clean geometric blood boil from here)
posted by Rex @ 1:00 PM
10 Comments:
Thanks for bringing this up, i personally hate "distressed type." I hate it when people use it in ad's especially. I want to be able to read the ad. Right now that is the trend, but trends come and go. I compare Grunge type to people ordering lemon or lime in their water at restaurants it came all of a sudden out of nowhere and now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. Some people actually like it in their water others do it because it's cool. I prefer to be a trend setter not a follower, try something new or at least something that's readable.
I’m on the fence about this topic. I think that distressed type certainly has its applications and certain treatments seem to work better then others. There a lot of misuse of the type and I think a lot of people just throw it onto the page and call it good. I haven’t used any fonts like that since type 1, and personally I don’t think they should let you use those fonts in type 1. If I were to use it, it would be strictly as a graphic and not be intended for reading. I like to use it as an abstracted form and if it has a good tie-in to the concept. I’m not going be all type snooty and refuse to even consider it. However, I’ll say it again I would not use it as something to be read. In very, very rare occasions I might use it as a headline, but I would hand set every letter, and it would have to fit seamlessly. That really is the biggest issue is the distressed type fitting seamlessly. If you can do that more power to ya, but it’s not often that someone does, and even less often that I see it add to the design mostly it just distracts from it. When it does work I think it looks awesome, so I don’t want to instantly dismiss it. So give the grunge designers a chance, but don’t let them get away with bad type. Anyway that’s just me.
Rex thank you for this wonderful little piece. I pesonally get angry every time I see most of these distressed typefaces. They show poor type design. They seem to have been created just to give us something else to look at instead of trying to actually taking time do develop something we can use. They fonts, just for fonts sake.
I don't think there's anything wrong with distressed fonts in general, I'm sure there's a time and a place, but I think too many people use them as an easy way out. On a lot of media such as posters, t-shirts, album covers, etcetera, people just pick out a grungy font and think they have finished designing, and I'm not okay with that
I certainly think of them as fonts that scream attitude and grab your attention. Grunge fonts are given the appearance of punk and graffiti look. The grunge look shouldn't be used for extensive amounts of text. In my opinion they only work if your trying to convey a certain look that is loud.
I'm glad to see the majority of you -- so far -- on the "right" side of this particular fence! Partially kidding, of course.
I believe that so-called grunge type is reactionary. Similar to its counterpart in music, it is in direct opposition to the clean design of our most recent neo-moderinst movement. "To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction," as the rule goes.
When David Carson did it, it was the apex of post-modernist expression in the early to mid 1990s. The rise of technology in the form of a Macintosh resulted in clean and hard edges to almost everything. Carson, a formally untrained graphic designer, felt that modern typography (and design in general) lacked expression and emotion. So he, and a large group of followers, reacted accordingly.
The recent resurgence of grunge type has a lot to do with the omni-presence of skate- and snowboarding. Similar to the surfers, like Carson, that crave adventure in all things, clean, modernist type cannot sustain them.
Of course, there are conceptual and cultural reasonings for using grunge type, but I would agree with Nick that most of it is just a way to get us to look at something.
Have no fear, eventually it, too, shall pass...
as most of you have stated already, it is all part of the pendulum shift. the "distressed" phenomena, although has lasted a little longer than some of us would like, does have its time and place.
as previously mentioned, i believe in the musical roots to this particular fad. Jason had mentioned carson's "untrained eye" and so forth. it seems to me that most "untrained eyes" in bands probably used economical means to produce posters/flyers as efficiently as possible causing most of the typography to look like "shit/cool." perhaps? now it has become a staple for a rebellious/punk/scary/skater/hip image. the one that frustrates me the most is base 2. i bet its even on diapers now. it might look trendy, but that baby is just expressing that it doesn't give a shit. well, unless its in huggies.
I think that grunge type works well in the right context. It works well on publications dealing w/ grunge or rock music, or anything else having to deal w/ the punk life stlye. I am personally ot a fan but I may have used it once or twice.
distressed type has definitely
(wether negatively or positively
is the question) changed the way
people react towards ads that use it.
as has been said already for many designers,
grungetype is an easy way out. instantly it takes
on that lame excuse for a badass rip-em-up feel
its different and interesting when someone
distresses a typeface independently
instead of using a pre-distressed
typeface. that also is determined
by what lengths they went thru
to get to the finished product.
most of the time you can tell
just how long they spent on
making the finished product.
i dont understand how a designer
can use a distressed typeface and type
the same character more than once in one
piece. when you see the same gritty slash and
other "random" scratches thru the A over
and over again, its an eyesore.
if the designer of BASE 02
got a penny every time his shitty font
was xeroxed onto a shitty punk band poster
he would be diving into gold like uncle scgrooge:
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y42/kcnifhsoj/DOLLERZfull.gif
(blogger doesnt accept
my HTML, boohoo)
There are a lot of styles out there and they are each waiting to catch their wave and ride their popularity until they make the whole population queasy. For every style their are those who do it well and a lot that do it oh so crapily. Whatever style catches on, there is going to be an abundance of clowns out their putting their generic designs on display for everyone to see, messing it up for the true tank dogs (good designers). Just look at K-Fed, he loves to rap but he's sure as hell not going to win a grammy, and I'm sure his typography wouldn't hold up either. I think distressed type can be affective, it just depends on the designer and the effort put in. Like Josh said, you can usually tell how much time was invested. If you like the eroded/scuffed/rusty/paint chipping off/dirt/gravel/burnt/hacked up/broken windows/crying babies style, just give your best effort and do it well.
Sorry about the K-Fed reference
Post a Comment
<< Home