Design 21: Social Design Network

You stated in your message that the logo is transcultural. What about the guillemet (« ») used in French, Italian, and a host of other European languages? They are commonly used worldwide. They are even used in China to indicate the title of a book or a document.

One could see the use of quotation marks (international or not) as skewing the content or subject matter of the film festival towards the English speaking world. Or even make the statement that the festival will only be from the English speaking perspective.

Not trying to be a sore loser. Just wondering if this had been considered. The image if the village enclosed in quotes is evocative and draws you in. But I do have to agree with another post that I do not think of film when I see quotation marks.

And finally, I thought I'd throw this out there only because I know it exists. It is another organisation (non-profit) using similar symbols: http://www.stammering.org/

Hey, very nice choice! Congratulations to the 802 design team! Simple and elegant.

Though the symbols/concept isn't new, it manages to be fresh. I love how it also means translation the oral stories to visual, as seen in the 4th slide application. Though I haven't seen all 1600+ entries, it is similar to one entry that is one of my top ten favorites (I can't find it now, would've been great to link to it ) that enabled the logo to interact with the other elements of the material, also by framing.

It's a shame the team can't be compensated; heavy media exposure maybe? It would be great if the 5,000 prize gets split between your group and a choice from the 145 finalists.

bluesea, interesting point about how it also implies skewing of intent and meaning.

Good luck with the festival.

They should answer the question:

Do you believe that "8 Millennium Goals" we show in this logo that uses two quotes?

If a logo does not identify the desired goal, (8 Millennium Goals) it does not fully meet the role entrusted to convey the message.

I agree to be abstract, but is not the kind of language that the public understands common and wild ...

To my mind, he had to win one of the logos UNDERLINES the 8 Millennium Goals, because Film Festivals exist in many parts, but 8 Millennium goals I do not think ...

See and answer, the logo "win"

This is not an exercise by vox populi. Whatever logo is chosen, the organization alone is the one committed to and be identified by it.

If they feel it represents them and their goals, that is all that matters.

"This is not an exercise by vox populi."

• 78 countrys and 1607 entries "doesnot vox populi" ??

"If they feel it represents them and their goals, that is all that matters"

• Efecctivement, "their 8 goals of millenium" !!

• Have every right to choose the logo as a private institution wishing, but not represent 78 countries participating ...

• I say always with the greatest respect that we have among us all.

Design 21 should re-evaluate the rules that are set up for competitions involving outside clients/organizations. To only relegate the client’s input to the end of the process seems, to me, to be bad design. With the ease of access to ALL the entries via the D21 internet forum, it just seems very old fashioned to limited the client’s input to only selections made by the expert judges. The client, if they so choose to, should be considered an expert judge and allowed in on the selection of the finalist (after all, the client should be somewhat of an expert on themselves). Inclusion earlier on could better avoid a scenario where the client feels like their needs are not satisfied by the selections chosen by the judges.

With this all said in hindsight, and regardless of the decisions made so far, it seems that D21 can still do what seems to be reasonable; they can award the efforts of the design team that fulfilled the requirements of the Final Jury. The selection process D21 designed is incomplete (No one is perfect! This is the first D21 competition that has an outside client; complications are expected). Let’s not penalize the winning designers because of an incomplete selection system.

The following are some additional comments regarding the competition and should probably go in another post; however, I’m here already, so here goes:

-I noticed that in the previous D21 competitions, comments from the judges regarding the finalists were posted on the website for general viewing. It would be great if this were possible for Stories from the Field also. It would be beneficial to all designers to gain the useful insight behind the selection processes.

-Is it possible to see designs of the 13 MCAI/UNDPI Finalist that were not on the D21 judge's finalist list?

-Regarding the winning entry; I too feel like the use of the quotes as a logo and frame was a strong graphical choice. However, MCAI/UNDPI should verify that this logo does not infringe on Citibank's "Thank You" rewards network logo. The logo is trademarked, I don't know whether it is the quotes or it is the quotes framing the words "Thank You".

Please do not confuse the role we, the designers, play. Not unless the 78 countries actually have direct involvement and stake in the organization, even if a logo is unanimously chosen by our peers, it doesn't and shouldn't matter to the client if they feel it is inappropriate to their cause or doesn't represent them fully.

Personally, the most I can fault MCAI (and D21) is foresight in mechanics formulation, but we learn and move on-- hopefully right after the winners (technical winner and chosen logo) are both compensated. That is the least they can do.

I submitted my designs, but I am not a finalist, is not a problem for me, but I agree entirely with those who say that all the designs participants should be submitted to a vote of the public on the Internet, and judges who would be selected from among 161 designs (10% in 1607 approximately) if the organizers are not agree with any of the 10 designs, it would give the award to the ten best, and would have every right to choose among the designs, which most interests them, it is even possible based on the designs submitted to a more tailored to what they want, THIS IS THE WAY IT IS JUSTICE, FOLLOWING UP WITH PROVIDED (the word offered and the commitment fulfilled worth more qe any institution) ... I do not want to overly pessimistic ... but even if I do not believe this is so, perhaps the next design21 is very poor professional, knowing what happened, few of the good ones, return to the competition ... We would like to strongly seek ways to be fair and reward the effort.

Take a look to this competition logo... on line since June 2007...

I would address in this post to 3 parties: The winning team 802, D21 and the jury panel. Addressing MCAI would be highly futile at this time as it seems to me they have long parted this whole competition to form another little one of their own, parasiting on D21 for organization and exposure and actually getting away with it totally gratuitously, not one cent peering out of their pockets. Cynically, the big round of applause really goes to them and a documentary film should be made about how they contrived this masquerade of a competition. It should be screened at the next Stories from the Field festival and a special prize for sabotaging achievement should be awarded to MCAI just as their representatives huddle excitedly on stage and one takes the microphone to repeat an eye watering heartrending soundbite: “But being poor doesn't stop us from wanting the best!”

Now on to the noteworthy…

I want to congratulate the winning Swedish team 802 for being picked, sadly by MCAI, but who cares. Whichever aspect of their design is criticized, I expect in the euphoria of the win, their response will be: “bite me!” Thus one can’t refrain from laying down his point of view from a constructive perspective, hoping to be taken as a mere fellow designer’s opinion, to be instantly discarded at 802’s discretion. A lot was said about the design not cleaving to the clear criteria set in the competition brief which is undoubtedly true, but let’s set that aside for we all know it is a designer’s right, if not astuteness, to bend any rule in order to offer a client a fresh new, clever and unexpected insight on representing a business. But when freshness is lacking, the quotation mark being confusingly used all over the place for so many different businesses, we are bound to look for other advantages in the design. Instant-concept-communication maybe? Take that design out on the street, even with the title “SFTF” plunked into it, and find me one person who would recognize in it hints of film, documentary, humanitarian issues…But then again, when “marketing and visual communications professionals ourselves” speak of “totally fresh” and ”instantly recognizable”, then we ought to redefine the meaning of professionalism.

All that is behind now and I hail a loud and sincere “Congratulations” to the proclaimed winners and with all modesty advise them to re-adjust their proposal to fit the concept. You got the account now, you are happy, so you might as well be ethically correct and propose more pungent versions. Based on your website, you have all the talent needed to do that. Hearty Congratulations again, even if you got insidiously lured into working for free. The “we are poor” soundbite echoes disturbingly in my head…

Wheeling to D21…

In the aftermath of this terrible mess of a competition, one thing still baffles me…It’s the dreadful silence of D21 about the posted comments of all disgruntled participants…It seems they have retracted themselves to the viewer’s chair, all warm and cozy, a flavored popcorn filled bowl in their lap, reveling at the clamorous joust between the participants and MCAI. It feels like they want us to bite at them in their place, while they take a comfortable and politically correct stand towards their irreverent clients…They deliberately leave MCAI to post an insulting “Now that things have quieted down a bit and we have had a chance to post the first-place design” without any firm reply…It’s like “Now that all the nonsense barking is behind our backs” while we, the bevy of dogs in question, are still enraged as hell…D21, you ought to have taken a dignifying stand for the participants who entrusted you with their time and creativity. The least you could do forthwith is pick a D21 winner of your own and hand him the cash…What’s more precious to you? A transient client or a block of 1600 solid members willing to champion your next competition? Your decision emphatically comes at a high price…

And finally, last but not least, our respected jury panel…

Your apathetic reticence on this blog is bare of scruple. You have been invited to judge a competition and ended up being called masters of “not a perfect science”…You got a piece of the tart in your face too, the creamy part I suppose. But we know judges, they latch onto the politically correct too, for if they trespass it they risk never being invited on high profile panels anymore and that’s exactly where they get a kick at: the glamour of being named jury member. In all earnest, the only positive action you can take to keep a straight face is using your networks to bring some media attention to this catastrophe so impertinently called by MCAI and I quote: “not a perfect contest”.

Fellow duped designers, let the curtain fall on this morose theatre piece for we all have better shows to watch…as for Design21, the ball is decidedly in your court…

I would address in this post to 3 parties: The winning team 802, D21 and the jury panel. Addressing MCAI would be highly futile at this time as it seems to me they have long parted this whole competition to form another little one of their own, parasiting on D21 for organization and exposure and actually getting away with it totally gratuitously, not one cent peering out of their pockets. Cynically, the big round of applause really goes to them and a documentary film should be made about how they contrived this masquerade of a competition. It should be screened at the next Stories from the Field festival and a special prize for sabotaging achievement should be awarded to MCAI just as their representatives huddle excitedly on stage and one takes the microphone to repeat an eye watering heartrending soundbite: “But being poor doesn't stop us from wanting the best!”

Now on to the noteworthy…

I want to congratulate the winning Swedish team 802 for being picked, sadly by MCAI, but who cares. Whichever aspect of their design is criticized, I expect in the euphoria of the win, their response will be: “bite me!” Thus one can’t refrain from laying down his point of view from a constructive perspective, hoping to be taken as a mere fellow designer’s opinion, to be instantly discarded at 802’s discretion. A lot was said about the design not cleaving to the clear criteria set in the competition brief which is undoubtedly true, but let’s set that aside for we all know it is a designer’s right, if not astuteness, to bend any rule in order to offer a client a fresh new, clever and unexpected insight on representing a business. But when freshness is lacking, the quotation mark being confusingly used all over the place for so many different businesses, we are bound to look for other advantages in the design. Instant-concept-communication maybe? Take that design out on the street, even with the title “SFTF” plunked into it, and find me one person who would recognize in it hints of film, documentary, humanitarian issues…But then again, when “marketing and visual communications professionals ourselves” speak of “totally fresh” and ”instantly recognizable”, then we ought to redefine the meaning of professionalism.

All that is behind now and I hail a loud and sincere “Congratulations” to the proclaimed winners and with all modesty advise them to re-adjust their proposal to fit the concept. You got the account now, you are happy, so you might as well be ethically correct and propose more pungent versions. Based on your website, you have all the talent needed to do that. Hearty Congratulations again, even if you got insidiously lured into working for free. The “we are poor” soundbite echoes disturbingly in my head…

Wheeling to D21…

In the aftermath of this terrible mess of a competition, one thing still baffles me…It’s the dreadful silence of D21 about the posted comments of all disgruntled participants…It seems they have retracted themselves to the viewer’s chair, all warm and cozy, a flavored popcorn filled bowl in their lap, reveling at the clamorous joust between the participants and MCAI. It feels like they want us to bite at them in their place, while they take a comfortable and politically correct stand towards their irreverent clients…They deliberately leave MCAI to post an insulting “Now that things have quieted down a bit and we have had a chance to post the first-place design” without any firm reply…It’s like “Now that all the nonsense barking is behind our backs” while we, the bevy of dogs in question, are still enraged as hell…D21, you ought to have taken a dignifying stand for the participants who entrusted you with their time and creativity. The least you could do forthwith is pick a D21 winner of your own and hand him the cash…What’s more precious to you? A transient client or a block of 1600 solid members willing to champion your next competition? Your decision emphatically comes at a high price…

And finally, last but not least, our respected jury panel…

Your apathetic reticence on this blog is bare of scruple. You have been invited to judge a competition and ended up being called masters of “not a perfect science”…You got a piece of the tart in your face too, the creamy part I suppose. But we know judges, they latch onto the politically correct too, for if they trespass it they risk never being invited on high profile panels anymore and that’s exactly where they get a kick at: the glamour of being named jury member. In all earnest, the only positive action you can take to keep a straight face is using your networks to bring some media attention to this catastrophe so impertinently called by MCAI and I quote: “not a perfect contest”.

Fellow duped designers, let the curtain fall on this morose theatre piece for we all have better shows to watch…as for Design21, the ball is decidedly in your court…

Thanks for being a "spokesperson" to me and hopefully to many of us, as a user of english as a second language; I feel your critical remarks clearly represent my baffling concerns. Thanks.

After announcing the result on the Stories from the Field competition home page and then linking my Message to All Entrants to it, I emailed the message to every contestant because I wanted to be pro-active in communicating to them.

This resulted in their writing back to me directly, instead of posting blog entries. I have been responding to every issue raised by every person. I have responded to over 60 emails and have many more to go. This is not the most efficient way, I know, but I have already written an open letter on the website and I feel that the people who take the time to write to me deserve an individual response. Especially at this point I do not want anyone to feel that they are just "one of them."

So it's not as though we are just sitting in a warm viewer's chair. We are listening and talking to many people and working very hard to come up with some sort of a solution. We just posted another announcement to that effect here: http://www.design21sdn.com/design21/news/1239

Thank you, Daniel, for all your valuable opinions and observations. I very much respected your comments (even about flavored popcorn!) and promise that we will "take a dignifying stand for the participants who entrusted us with their time and creativity."

Dear Mr.Smith,

I have to admit I did not expect any replies to my post from Design21, especially not from you personally. I even feared my post would be removed instantly. I am humbled by your honesty and courage to take in the criticism. I hope I was not too scathing in my comments, at least not towards Design21 for I believe all participants have a genuine respect to the core mission of the organization.

I am convinced that the D21 team will sort out this problem, before it takes any further unnecessary amplitude, rendering everyone satisfied and excited for the next D21 competition.

Again I need to stress on congratulating 802 for being MCAI’s pick and hope they will develop a great identity vital for a powerful media impact. The festival itself has a highly esteemed purpose and I imagine all of us want it to be success no matter who claims its fatherhood.

I sincerely thank you for your reply and all the effort put to reach a righteous resolution.

Best Regards,

Daniel Georges

Many designers who worked hard on this project may feel that the competition requirements requested a particular framework for the formulation for the logo. There seemed to be limits set: the brief implies a request for unique design used for a specific film festival. The brief went so far as to say:

'For a film to be considered for inclusion in the festival, it must reflect one or more of the eight UN Millennium Development Goals. Entrants to the logo competition should familiarize him/herself with the MDGs whose target date is 2015.'

It was assumed that the MDGs and the festival are intimately linked. The logo chosen does not seem to address this link.

For example, I just ran across this image, just moments ago, doing some shopping. Never would have thought twice about it before. Such an icon has its place. The image is generic and lacks specificity, but it is a quickly recognizable icon, like the play button on a DVD player.

Some frustration lies in the fact that the chosen design could be applied to nearly any film festival...or nearly any place where there is a call for discussion. As a logo and icon, the quotes without the image of an African village, or a hungry child, or a twilight-wrapped savanna is voiceless.

In a media campaign, I can see and appreciate the potential of the logo framing images. But this was not a competition about a media campaign.

Choosing a logo for the festival from the pool entries coupled with using the quotes for a publicity campaign might be a good compromise here.

Hey everyone,

Please find in the link below an update letter from Mr.Haruko Smith Director of Design21 about the Stories from the Field contest disentanglement... http://www.design21sdn.com/share/1240

Hey everyone,

Please find in the link below an update letter from Mr.Haruko Smith Director of Design21 about the Stories from the Field contest disentanglement... http://www.design21sdn.com/share/1240

When I read the post published telling that the winner was not a finalist, I thought 'Well, be prepared for a very bad logo to be the winner'.

Now, I have to say I agree with MCAI NY: It's a great logo. And what is more important to me, is a great logo in a way it will be great through time. Because there are a lot of submissions closer to be an illustration than to be a logo. And I know that, with some great illustrations, with a lot of work on them, it's difficult to take an eye on a black and white typographic logo submission, but to work with photo and documentary stills, it's the best option (in my opninion).

Now I'm curious about the other 12 finalists that MCAI NY had choose because, to be honest, I think would be more interesting than the D21 145 finalists selection.

I also want to congratulate the winners.

My suggestion is that the DESIGN 21's international panel of judges chooses their favorite logo out of the finalists and that the $5000 prize is equally split between the 'judges favorite' and the chosen by MCA-I NY.

If this isn't an option I think the $5000 prize shouldn't be added to another competition but that it should go to a charitable organization, although ideally someone should win so that the entire competition process doesn't loose credibily.

Any other suggestions?

I too was disapointed by the fact that there's no winner to the SFTF competition.

When you present all the work there has been created (in this case by showing it in public for voting) to a client, there's always the risk that they choose a design that the creative director (the jury) doesn't like.

The client always has an opinion about what's best for his brand. This often doesn't match with the designers point of view. He also looks for aesthetics wich are secondary for the client.

In order to avoid this checkmate situation in the future, the judging system should be other way around. First the jury picks the best designs and then those 'winners' wil be judged by the public. In that case the client is not tempted, because he simply doesn't know.

Judging design will alway be something subjective. Objectivity doesn't exist in our field of work. And that's a good thing!

Probably the client like my design most. ;-)