In my May 2007 Desktop column:
L’Oréal, one company I have worked with for a long time, is also known for creating quality products but not always the best type. Yet, bad typography doesn’t seem to dim this French brand, even in the face of competitors who look after their type far more sensibly. In most, there is a mixture of the different types of rule-breaking: squashed type, faux small caps, and usually, inconsistent families being used between campaigns.
My original theory was that the image of Claudia Schiffer or Scarlett Johansson would sway anyone from bad type, but a recent advertisement without any model suggests L’Oréal still manages to maintain a glamorous image.
Anyone want to advance their theories? (Mine’s in Desktop.) Posted by Jack Yan, 01:13
I think the reason L'oreal can get away with bad type is because as you noted they are very much image. It is their image of a product that will help a women look beautiful and sexy that sells the product, not the wording the gives the real information about the product. With Lucire, this would be different as your product is more about content than image though image plays a part. Lucire must present an image that makes one think the magazine is up-to-date with current fashion and is an attractive magazine i.e. something someone would want to LOOK through.Post a Comment
Links to this post:
NoteEntries from 2006 to the end of 2009 were done on the Blogger service. As of January 1, 2010, this blog has shifted to a Wordpress installation, with the latest posts here.
With Blogger ceasing to support FTP publishing on May 1, I have decided to turn these older pages in to an archive, so you will no longer be able to enter comments. However, you can comment on entries posted after January 1, 2010.
Individual JY&A and Medinge Group blogs
DonateIf you wish to help with my hosting costs, please feel free to donate.
Copyright ©200210 by Jack Yan & Associates. All rights reserved. Photograph of Jack Yan by Chelfyn Baxter.