What if I told you that there was an online web banner that housed 2,800 items for purchase? You must be thinking that this web banner is enormously huge.

WRONG.

The web banner is 300 x 250 pixels. For those who don't know, this size is pretty small and translates to 10.5 cm x 8.8 cm. As you scroll over the tiny squares, the objects are magnified. The banner ad has an intro and seems to be broken into 5 categories of browsing: lights, home decor, fun knick knacks, living room furniture and bedroom furniture. If you click on an object it takes you to the site where you can purchase these items.

You may be asking, Who is the retailer of this online ad? Answer: IKEA.

Since one of IKEA's main selling points is selling furniture that helps organize and de-clutter your life and home, they've decided to take that approach to their advertising.

I myself have never been in an actual brick and mortar store. Although I've browsed online a handful of times, if I were to see this ad, I would definitely click-thru to see what it was about. I believe that this ad creates intrigue and I love that it's interactive. So many ads are boring and run of the mill. I applaud IKEA for creating something that will pique my curiosity.

Often when I talk about animation in movies or commercials and I mention mocap or traditional animation, people are generally confused as to what I am talking about. It’s understandable. Before I studied animation I had little knowledge to the differences between the two and how to recognize each. Now I pay much closer attention to animated films and video games and it is easy for me to see the Traditional Animation vs Motion Capture Animation differences between the two. Hopefully after reading this, it will make much more sense and help you take notice of the two.

Traditional or “keyed animation” refers to how the first processes for animating were executed based on the twelve principles of animation. Creating pose to pose animations for a scene and then filling the in between poses (tweening). For a traditional 2D animation, each frame would be a separate drawing. For the 3D animator, each frame would be a separate pose for the character being animated. Very tedious work.

Mocap or motion capture works differently. An actor is dressed in a skin tight suit with visual markers placed on specific parts of the body to track movement.  A special camera records and tracks the movements of the markers and then animators apply those movements to 3D models using various software. You may have seen this in the ping pong ball suits people wear in some behind the scenes footage of movies like “Lord of the Rings”. This make for a more realistic, natural and life-like movement for a character, but lacks some of the visually expressive principals of animation like squash and stretch, flowing arch movements, anticipation and exaggeration. With the advances in technology in the animation and video game industry and more realistic characters, motion capture is being used more and more. So is that a good or bad thing?

I seem to play tug of war with that question. I feel that the motion capture technology is appropriate in certain situations and applications, but also feel like it has become over used and is an easy way for calling a movie animated. Take the character Gollum from “The Lord of The Rings” trilogy. This is a perfect example of how motion capture should be used. Actor Andy Serkis performed each scene in “The Two Towers” in a motion capture suite. However, Andy’s performance was only the basis for the animation. In many cases, motion capture does not record hands and feet very well (at the time of the making of the movie) or facial movements. They then relied on a team of 18 animators to create the facial emotions and movement of the feet and hands giving an end result of a digital character that meshes well with real actors. I felt his was very successful because the intention of the film was to look lifelike and realistic and have a seamless blend of CG and live actors.

In movies such as “Polar Express” and “Beowolf”, the character seem to ride the fine line between CG characters and real life actors. This is where some animated films turn me off. The characters just seem to have a creepy look to them. They are doing the exact same thing the actors are doing and even look just like them. It makes you wonder why they make two movies during the process, one with the real actors and one with the CG characters. When I watch these, I don’t get the sense that I’m watching an animated picture, but more that I'm seeing a glorified puppet show. Then you have terrible commercials like “The General Insurance”. They are applying realistic looking movements to a very cartoonistic character and it just looks bad. Stop being lazy and ANIMATE!

I think this is why companies like Pixar and Dreamworks remain at the top of the game. They both rely strongly on the traditional principles of animation and still keep their character concepts and designs very simple and seem to retain that cartoon style. Next time you watch a movie by either company, notice the way the characters move. Notice the arching movements of the arms, or the way the character might stretch as it takes off running, or the strong pose it’s in while making a point or delivering a joke. These are all things that the animators have thought of to make the performance of the character more interesting than if they had just used the movements of an actor in a motion capture suite.

I have a much greater respect for these types of animated movies and just flat out think they are more interesting to watch. I feel like I’m watching real animation. I don’t get that with movies that are primarily motion capture. Motion capture technology is continually progressing and CG characters are to point now where they are completely realistic, and that's where it should be used.  So regardless of the industry continuing to use motion capture for the good, bad and often ugly, traditionally animated films will always rein superior in my book.

Huggies Diapers can’t seem to win.  Last year, it was the “Poop There It Is” campaign that was rated one of the top ten worst commercials of 2011. This year, they’ve managed to offend fathers everywhere with the “Have Dad Put Huggies To The Test” campaign. The commercial depicts fumbling fathers feeding, entertaining, and of course, trying to change their baby’s diaper.  Dads flocked to Facebook to complain, and subsequently the ad was yanked from the air.  In its place, a new ad was released focused less on the fathers and more on the product.  Dads are quietly cradling their napping babies and gently caressing their faces, pleased to still have dry laps as they've been "putting Huggies to the test".

After learning about the Huggies debacle, I came across two other ads that have been pulled lately.  The first was Belvedere Vodka, who had to apologize for a recent Facebook ad.  The image features a guy who appears overly-eager while reaching for a frightened looking girl.  The tagline reads “Belvedere always goes down smoothly”.  The other was a German Reebok ad directed towards men that was pulled from gyms when women complained about its message. The tagline for that one read “cheat on your girlfriend, not your workout”.

Humor is so subjective, it makes me realize how much of a gamble some companies take on their advertising ideas.  Intentionally or not these ads can push the envelope, and I wonder if the gambles pay off?

Normally, I’m not one to complain of grammatical errors. You can sometimes find me writing run-on sentences, forgetting commas and creating sentence fragments. Hey, I’m no copywriter. But as a designer, there is one grammatical error that gets me boiling: double spacing after a period.

Now, I know there are many out there that say the double space after the period is the right thing to do. Just because your middle school English teacher says it was correct, doesn’t mean it’s actually the proper way. It’s grammatically illegal, folks (and in my opinion, should be punished by full force of the grammar law).

So, if it's not correct to double-space, why did we begin to do it? In the 20th century typesetters all over the world came together and decided we should use one space after the period. This is a shared belief among all typesetters. Then, the manual typewriter was invented. Cue doomsday music. The manual typewriter used monospace typing, meaning that every character occupies an equal amount of horizontal space. Skinny characters like "i" and "t" are given the same space as fat letters like "o" and "m" creating uneven, white spaces between letters and words. The two-space rule came into play to make the text easier to read and making it more obvious the sentence had ended.

Today, almost every font on your PC or Mac has proportional typesetting - less horizontal space is given to skinny characters and more space is given to fat ones. This is why we don't need the double-space after the period. I repeat, we DON'T NEED two spaces after a period. Most of us aren't' using typewriters, however, we are still typing like we do. So, unless you are using a typewriter, please refrain from giving the designer next to you a heart attack and use ONE space.

For decades, celebrities have appeared in front of the camera for all kinds of advertisements. However, it wasn’t until recently that I noticed the same is true for celebrities appearing behind the camera, too.

When I first saw this spot during the 2012 Oscars, I thought it was cute, heartfelt, and had a strong tie to a product benefit (which is really all it takes to catch my eye these days.) But there was just something about the way the story unfolded on camera that I was enamored with.

Suddenly, I realized: this commercial had to be directed by Wes Anderson, a filmmaker known for whimsical, soft-spoken comedies like The Fantastic Mr. Fox and The Life Aquatic.

While I was right about Mr. Anderson and Hyundai, I had no idea that directors have been doing this for years. Martin Scorsese, David Lynch and Michael Bay are among those who have loaned their iconic directorial styles to brands of all kinds. I was even ashamed (though not shocked) to learn that the most famous commercial of all time, Apple’s 1984, was directed by Ridley Scott, whose sci-fi and fantasy films I have always adored.

When you’ve written a script where mood and tone play an important role in delivering your brand’s message (like in the Apple and Hyundai spots), I think hiring a director who is known for creating that mood is smart and strategic. It’s the same way for any celebrity—why pay them all that money if there isn’t a natural connection to your brand?

Here’s a recent example of what I feel may have been a movie director misstep. Darren Aronofsky of Black Swan fame just directed this commercial for Kohl’s, starring Jennifer Lopez.

Apparently, Kohl’s wanted to use the same technique Aronofsky introduced in the climactic final scene of Black Swan. You know, the one where a hallucinating Natalie Portman goes full-on psychopath across the ballet stage. In the pop-glitter-teeny-bop world of J.Lo, was this an appropriate fit? What do you think?

The opening demo video shows you exactly how to use Paper by 53. That made my first thoughts easy to get down on “paper?” It’s not really paper, but it looks like the pages of a journal. A digital journal, you could say. You can customize the covers of as many journals as you want to open with photos or sketches. My first sketch was of our cat, “Scare-D” who often sits with me in bed while I read. Since then, I’ve drawn our dog, Mona, some flowers and started a journal about my son, Ben.

One thing I really like about Paper by 53 is the availability of different tools, which is an additional charge, but worth the investment. You can sketch, shade, draw outlines, etc. and that makes the creative time more fun. I find myself relaxing at night with my iPad and just drawing or writing whatever comes to mind. I also discovered that you can buy a stylus to use instead of your fingers and well, that’s definitely my next purchase. Finger painting is fun, but it’s hard to get very detailed.

I think this app is great for graphic designers because they can sketch out a bunch of ideas for the design challenge they’re facing and then share with their internal team before actually creating the design on computer. Of course, everyone in our Creative Department would need an iPad in order to make that a reality. Could be grounds for our next technology purchase!

In the DirecTV spots, a rich, Russian man shows off his miniature giraffe.

The advertisers have even taken it as far as creating a website that has fake information about the species. The website is written in broken English – the way the actor speaks on the television commercials. It also has a few pictures and an 'about' tab, telling visitors the perks and care maintenance of having a miniature pet giraffe. You can even sign-up to be on the waiting list for one. I was number 1,296,026 on the list because the next available one born has been reserved for Prince. The most interesting part of the website is the live cam that shows one of the two miniature giraffes roaming around in a barn or outside.

I personally don't think the DirecTV commercials are that great. You can check them out here on YouTube. It's even crazier that they pumped more money into creating the website and carried the miniature giraffe theme to an extreme. This marketing ploy, while cute, is not very effective in my opinion. I'm not even sure if this gimmick would stick in my mind long enough for me to consider switching cable providers.

Geico on the other hand has rolled out several commercials with the tagline, "Easier way to save." A couple of the commercials feature various animals in the spots performing a duty to help their owner save money. The most popular one is the guinea pig commercial. This commercial has gotten a lot of recognition but I'm still unsure of how effective it is.

Even though I'm still new to the business, I often stop and ask myself, "Does this commercial or advertisement make me want to go purchase the product/service that was just offered?" Since I'm not really in the market for new insurance or a cable provider, perhaps this is why they don't strike a cord with me. Or maybe these ads really are a dud. Watch the videos and decide for yourself.

Manliness is back in business.  It took a sabbatical in the early-mid 2000’s during the rise of the “metrosexual” but now its all about pure, unadulterated, pre-war manliness.  Grow a beard, wear flannel, chop your own wood, be self-reliant.  This is being reflected in man-centric blogs like Artofmanliness.com, gentlemint.com, manofthehouse.com etc.

Advertising has noticed this trend and has started tailoring their message to the new national identity.  There is a right way and a wrong way to do this.

The right way: Dodge.  Dodge’s new line of commercials is voiced by the ever-stoic Michael C. Hall and you can almost feel the testosterone.  Take a look at this commercial, featuring George Washington riding a new Dodge Charger into battle. Not only does this play into man’s obsession with war and love of history it tops it off with clever humor.

The wrong way: Dr. Pepper 10.  Not only is the spot for Doctor Pepper 10 not funny, its misogynistic.  Part of being a “manly man” in the 21st century is recognizing women as equals, not painting a tired caricature of an overly emotional or humorless cat-lady.  The spot is offensive because it is lazy.  Also, is there anything inherently unmanly about diet drinks?

The rise in male-centric advertising shows no sign of slowing down, advertisers and their clients would do well to think more like Dodge and less like Dr. Pepper.

What do you think?

This year though, it may be fun! Or at least that is what Jackson Hewitt wants you to think with their ad campaign this tax season. Customers and staff all dance along to the timeless party anthem “This is How We Do It” by Montell Jordan, celebrating all the money they get back by using Jackson Hewitt. Yes these commercials are a little exaggerated as we all know taxes aren’t fun, but does it get customers in the door? I guess we will see.

Take a look and a laugh and enjoy. Maybe YOU will go to Jackson Hewitt this year!

We designers often complain that everybody who owns a computer thinks they can do what we do for a living. The truth is they can, but they don't.

Here's what I mean: the Apple revolution of 28 years ago (wow) made publishing accessible to the masses. Before the introduction of the Mac, what we did took days, not minutes and it required a level of craftsmanship that today is built into the hardware and software. We ply our trade on machines that are readily available in any mall with an Apple Store and we use software that you can download to your computer with a few clicks on your keyboard and a credit card number.

So you have all your gear... now why doesn't your flyer/brochure/business card look right? Try a few of these tips and see if your project doesn't improve a little.

1) Don't use all the fonts
Your fancy computer came with a boat-load of fonts. You don't have to use them all at once. Your project starts to look like a ransom note when you do. Pick, at most, two fonts: a good display font for headlines and a serif font for body copy. And remember, script fonts are really hard to read. Use them sparingly. Short headlines only.

2) Not all clip art is created equal
90% of the clip art available online and 100% of what came with your PC is garbage. This is where taste comes into play. Try to think "simple & stylish" and use art that is all in the same style (and preferably from the same illustrator.) Using one cartoon and one silhouette and one brush stroke drawing will just make your piece look like it was designed by three different people in three different rooms.

3) Use the right program for the job.
Don't design a logo in Photoshop. You won't be able to scale it or simplify it later. Use Illustrator. Don't lay out a brochure in Illustrator. You won't have the control you can get with InDesign. Don't use Word to design anything. I don't care what Microsoft says... Word is good for typing copy and that's it.

4) Google images is not a source for photography
You don't own those photos. Plus, there is a very good chance that the awesome cat photo you found online will be WAY to small to use in a print job. The web is designed in 72 dots per inch, or dpi. Print work is best done at 300 dpi. So when you use that 72dpi image in your print job, those dots increase more than 3-fold when you print. That's why your finished job looks "all pixely." There are plenty of REALLY cheap stock photo sources online where you can get a professionally shot image for less than $20. Use them. And if you insist on stealing photos from Google images, set your search filter to only show large format images.

5) Periods don't require a double space. Ever.
I know what my typing teacher said, but she is long-retired at this point. Double spaces were necessary for typewriters, but modern word processors have space built into most fonts that allow for a little breathing room after a period. One space is plenty.