I Really dont give a fuck bout criticism... Im sure you know yerself, if someones criticising your shit, youd know if it has merit or not, cause you know what lead you that way. Its I suppose a gimmick, but well who cares... , in the words of Jimi Hendrix " Gimmicks, gimmicks, here we go again... the world is nothing but a big gimmick... wars, napalm... yes we use em."
yeah, it works great. i always forget about little deatils over time, and the way i chose these colors was by donning a pair of 3D glasses and looking at a pms book. i chose the colors that disappeared. i've done that before on stuff. i did one poster that had all of these buildings on it. i printed glow-in-the-dark inks in the windows. then i completely forgot about it. sometime later i turned out the lights in the room and the lights in the building windows lit up in the dark. it looked like a nightime cityscape. i'd even hidden a little ufo up in the sky that was not there at all in the daylite, but in the dark it pops up. the best part was that i had forgotten i did that and i got this little thrill of discovery all over agian. this stuff can be so cool.
I scored a book today on history of 3d in movies, comics and Gum cards...complete with goggles... Tried reading it with goggles and it sucked then I tried without em and the pics annoyed me, theyre all in these 2 colours... like this poster. Art does this poster work with 3D goggles? :-o
Good god amighty...nuther 5000 word circular anus exploration on a fuckin pretty simple concept.
IE: 'successfull' poster for rock show= something that vibes with the music.
IT DOES NOT GET ANY SIMPLER LADIES!
all the design and craft in the world will not make a rock poster 'work'. It might be a real nice lookin design, but the OVERALL ATTITUDE must make some sort of connection.
or a total absurdist twist on a pre-concieved notion in relation to the band that is 'off the cuff' funny or cool.
Some of you guys are
WAY over-anal-yzing this stuff.
also, i was thinking a bit more about your "style" or voice ... i was wondering how much nostalgia comes into play. like how some people only buy vinyl because the pops and cracks bring them back to their youth, or how my father will only play Martin acoustic guitars because back in his day they were the best hand made instrument around. i mean, im sure this type of design work was all around you when you were growing up, and obviously had an influence, but more than that, possibly you feel that this was just the 'right' way to design or the most effective way to design, and maybe also it connects you to your youth the same way my father's guitar does for him. am i articulating this well?
ahh right, its not that far off though (the logo i mean), but i guess a lot of that psyche kind of lettering is kinda similar.
love was a great band ... yep.
oh and you know what ... they spelled their name with two O's ...
just looking at their bio on lookout, they compare themselves to the rolling stones, and i dont remember them sounding anything like that.
well, to be honest, i went with their description. i never listened to them, i relyed on thier ideas about what they were doing - you know how THAT can go, get me?
oh. and that's not the logo for LOVE. that's lifted off an old greeting card from the sixties. so, there is no connection outside what i told you.
Ah right, a spin off band. Those ames posters i really like, they have nothing to do with pearl jam but i like 'em, the biggest shame is that they ARE for pearl jam! They could fit with just about anybody though, ambiguity isn't such a bad thing.
raoul ... i dont remember them getting psyche at all, but i think i stopped listening to them after Lookout records. I do remember them having a tune about fucking your boyfriend. i liked them.
and that is the 'logo' for the band LOVE right? did anyone catch that ... ?
bumrush was a pearl jam spin-off band. mcready was in it (i think), and maybe somebody else from that band. it also had people from other 'famous' seattle bands - sort of a 'supergroup'. i think they recorded, but i never heard them. din't much care.
in keeping with the ames/pearl jam aethetic (aka- all over the fucking place) this poster fits right in. it makes about as much sense for bumrush as their posters do for pearl jam.
Pearl jam have certainly had a fair amount of posters that aren't really pearl jam-esque but they're still great, they become so in ur minds eye so to speak; as we've been saying. those ames brothers ones. I don't like pearl jam but i like the posters, never heared of bumrush un/fortunately.
there's another element to consider here. the client was the band RAOUL, who was an all girl band who had changed personell recently. they used to be called 'danger gens' and previously 'maxxi badd'. they were definitely getting into a more psych sound and the image obviously pulled it in that direction. also, TIGER was a female led band that later changed their name to 'faster, tiger' (due to another band using their name. once i had put a russ meyer joke on one of their posters - aka 'faster, tiger' kill, kill". they changed their name to that poster, essentially). and again, their sound was a garage girl/psych sound, like raoul.
i've still never listened to bumrush, and have no idea how the image fit them or not. didn't much care, they were mostly rich anyway. this was for my friends, and i had to do it fast, and everything fell into place. somehow it all worked out.
Art, I know that you were just chain yanking, and I can appreciate it (especially when you're doing it to other people and they don't realize it) I just wanted to call you on it.
Keep on yankin' you little aesthetic football coach!
i always listen to the bands b4 making a poster myself.
i check out the mp3s and automatically jot down any words or ideas that come to mind to describe em. then i LOSELY base the poser arround that.
i don't go litteral stuff like hess, i g for a feel...
Harry. Agreed. I think what I'm talking about is when everything on the poster seems to go against what a band is all about - making it seem that the designer had no idea who or what he/she was designing for.
Yea i hear what ur saying mike, but how would you define empty eye candy? this ones a picture of a girl and its still suitable to the band, lots of things would be suitable to the band, there isn't necessarily a diamond encrusted pillow containing the keys to the exact image that should be used for any particular band, its how you interpret things and how they meld into association with the band in question, often it doesn't work but thats when a WRONG image is used, and yep we know when an image is wrong, right? There's concept art and there's eye candy if we wanna simplify things, both work for me- good eye candy is better than bad concept art.
i can easily argue both sides of this point. it's sorta like the 'art vs not art' thing. it can go on and on and on and i can easily jump sides and argue them effectively. ultimately we have to come down on one side or the other INSIDE OURSELVES when we actually do any work, because otherwise we'll be lost as to direction. there are no atheists in a foxhole, ya know?
so, over time i've definitely come to believe that rock posters are elaborate bullshit. every time i tackle one, i try to rise above the meaningless qualities of them over and over. the funny part is that the ones i blow out and treat as a meaningless ditty end up being the best ones. maybe our subconcious is working better than our concious mind? i dunno. it's just interesting how much freedom there is in a rock poster. you really can do damn near anything you want, and it usually works ok. sometimes the less meaning, the better.
as for the volante poster, i was yanking yer chain. you guys were coasting too hard on your successes and i figgered, what the fuck. if i don't yank you, nobody will, so i pulled hard. if you get too staisfied with your own work, you get lazy and smug and it goes stale fast. i thought that by yanking you, it would make you better.
ok, so it's stupid, but it forced you to double think your intentions...
For me, however, a poster that works both aesthetically and conceptually is much more impressive. Not saying it is more or less effective...just more impressive. Does that makes sense?
I mean, it's great this poster works so well. But, I'd certainly be more taken with it if there was some thinking behind it.
And I am in no way stating that I haven't done eye candy posters before myself. And I wouldn't consider this poster empty eye candy either, simply because it makes sense for the band, and Art recognized that.
There's a difference.
What i mean is that i was one of very few people who argued that the idea of a concept in a poster doesn't necessarily make it a better poster. that meaningless imagery can still be relevant to the band, the imagery could be completely random and could still fit, like art says, you put your own meaning to it wether theres an intentional concept or not. i also argued with art that cool looking posters or decoration if you like isn't a pointless or meaningless task, what it means is that the poster actually looks good! Now art is saying how some of the best posters were meaningless and he's right, one of your posters he slagged off for being pointless and you defended it, naturally. its funny how after all this time spent on gig posters, the contradictions are starting to come out of us, which is cool, it just means we're still thinking. :-)
Now, hold on Art.
You gave our Volante poster shit because you felt it was "pointless" which by my definitions is pretty much the same thing as meaningless. I quote:
"the idea is obtuse, the execution is pure decoration. it's pretty for pretty sake. this is the kind of work that sends me up a wall. … this one sux. and it sux because it's pointless."
yeah, i really believe that. if were an advertising poster or a theater poster or an election poster, they have to be extremely literal and have exact meaning in what they say. they have to have editorial integrity. rock posters can mean damn near anything or nothing if they so choose. the great famous psych posters and even kozik's work has almost no editorial integrity, they just have a whole lot of style (oh, oh) and ATTITUDE that reflects the music it advertises. it's a not a LITERAL interperetation. hess's work is TOO literal in it's adherence to the bands' names (to the point of stupidity).
all the great posters in the rock world have almost nothing to do with the bands they advertise, therefore they have no DIRECT meaning. they are in essesnce meaningless. this poster was originally designed to be a cover for the 'zine BAD TRIP. i missed the deadline, so it was sitting a drawer. i needed a poster design fast, so i changed tht type to the concert info, and voila! a cool rock poster. actually it was a cover story about the band LOVE. see how stupid this stuff gets?
yet, the attitude of the poster perfectly fit the bands' personalities, and it was very successful and popular. it had the right ATTITUDE.
fr'instance, just what does a skull holding roses or little travelodge bears have to do with the grateful dead as an editorial and literal idea, anyway? but it sure worked. people WANT to read meaning into this stuff. they will find it no matter what you put in there. if you're real good you can manipulate what they read into it. that's our power. to fuck with their minds.
it's an old sureallist trick.
actually most of my posters have been two colors. sometimes three. rarely more. my clients have to pay for printing, so it has to be lower budgets and therefore less color. thank GOD ALMIGHTY for BLT!!!
by the way, i was being funny about the brilliance of this poster. it was originally a 'zine cover that got rejected. it sat around for a few months and then i turned it into a poster.