Its fun to play "count the fonts" on that mag cover.
Horrible.
Printable View
Its fun to play "count the fonts" on that mag cover.
Horrible.
Isn't "3 fonts, tops" the rule for graphic design?
I don't know about the "rule" but i know what looks like shit to me.
That's the rule. Nobody follows those, anymore. That's why most design looks like shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
And as someone who does some design a lot of time, if you work for someone your perfect design gets pissed on. Because the idiots who hired a designer think they can design better then the designer. I have a bunch of work now that I'd never admit to have done because I think it looks like crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaoofNee
If you look at the magazine cover it's not really using that many fonts, I think it's the color choice, and placement that make it look just bad.
But you know Bruce Wayne has a lot of money he should have hired better people to do it.
Counting italics, there's like 12 fonts. O__O
Anyway, not so sure about this movie. I still absolutely prefer '89 Batman to Begins, so take from that what you will.
I'm just curious: if the Riddler did come into play, which version would people want to see?
I'm a fan of Gorshin's performance bring the early version to life, but I think Bruce Timm's BTAS version (voiced by John Glover) would be perfect for this new series of films.
If they could get Glover to do the Timmverse version (but maybe a bit edgier) in live-action, that'd rule. The studio would probably want somebody higher-profile, though.
.
I like his look but I hate that it's just make-up.
So do I, although it's a close call. Both movies are great and have their ups and downs, but I just find Burton's film more enjoyable.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
And you won't find me saying that about many of Burton's flicks.