Danny Yount: Semi-Permanent Portland 2013 Titles Lilian Darmono April 5, 2013 New piece from one of my favourite motion designers of all time, Danny Yount. SEMI-PERMANENT 2013 TITLES from Danny Yount on Vimeo. Thanks for the tip, Filipe. Share 8 Comments Matthew April 5th, 2013 WOW! Such a beautiful and streamlined experience. Scott April 5th, 2013 Love the type! boyan April 8th, 2013 man. this is absolutely beautiful. perfect symbiosis of font, live-action and wicked sound design. Paul Rand April 9th, 2013 3 years ago… – https://vimeo.com/9403179 Dani Wolf April 9th, 2013 Paul, what exactly are you trying to show by sharing this link? Paul Rand April 9th, 2013 That answer is really up to you. Objectively speaking, they both use a mirror technique for the entire sequence. The value in those similarities can be determined by your own subjective opinion. To some a futile argument about originality might immediately come to mind. For others there may be even more provocative questions like these: When does a design technique become a gimmick used merely for style, decoration, and visual effect and when does a design technique become an essential tool of language for expressing critical thought about a subject? And in the case of these videos, which one expresses critical thought about a subject and which one is a stylistic gimmick? What are those critical thoughts anyway? Are there any? Do motion designers care about these kinds of standard questions that print designers deal with all of the time? Or are the audiences of these videos just concerned with having leisurely visual fun like looking through a kaleidoscope toy expecting very little deliberate communication contributed by the designer? Is posing such questions too much too worry about and a buzz kill? If it is then how serious is the craft of motion design supposed to be taken? Dani Wolf April 11th, 2013 Some very serious questions here. so what do you think? Has Danny put some thought into this title sequence or was he “…just concerned with having leisurely visual fun like looking through a kaleidoscope toy expecting very little deliberate communication contributed by the designer…” ? Paul Rand April 11th, 2013 hmmm, it seems you are taking my comment out of context and using it to ask a question I never even asked. I wrote “are audiences” AUDIENCES – the people that watch these videos, like on Motionographer… But to go along and answer your question, I can’t tell you if he thought about it, I am not a mind reader. I can only respond and make observations based on what I experience. Just like discovering the other video that uses an identical technique for the entire video it seemed worth mentioning since they are very similar. I sense that you are trying to trap me into making insults and be disrespectful to others work simply because I am asking some provocative questions. If you notice I didn’t make any declarations about the “quality” of the work. One reason is because it doesn’t really matter if I “like” it or not. I am more interested in the conversation that surrounds these works. I wish more people were interested in discussions in an objective less politically motivated way. I have read plenty of comments where people seem to enjoy destroying others work based on cheap insults and conversely, I have seen heaps of praise thrown at work that is just congratulatory ego stroking with very little analysis backing up their opinion – you know comments like : “great type”, ” THIS SUCKS”, “Blew me away”, “Wow” or “Hipster, bullshit” Who gets anything from these comments but starry-eyed gleeful validation or contempt from fear of sabotage? Comments are closed.