Comments on: The non-design design

By: nichollecaren

nichollecaren — Sat, 09 May 2009 00:01:48 +0000

I’ll go out on a limb and say the first. Maybe it’s the OCD talking, but I like when information is set out like I’m expected to read it. I’m a get-to-the-point person, especially when it comes to spending money . . . and if it’s $6,000 . . . I hope the point would be presented — fast.

The price is at the bottom — I probably wouldn’t finish reading all that cute stuff to find out.

By: Ellen

Ellen — Wed, 06 May 2009 18:42:08 +0000

Who cares what we all think . . . what worked to sell the Jeep?

Selling a vehicle is different than building a brand. Even classified ads without pix work for selling.

Keep it simple. Text ad with photo of Jeep. Done.

By: Dezinerdad

Dezinerdad — Sun, 03 May 2009 15:01:15 +0000

Years ago I did an ad that was very similar to the “Jeep” ad. We used an old IBM Selectric typewriter and actually typed the ad out to look like a back-room invoice. Readers thought they were getting a deal (and actually they were) on used camera equipment.

As far as the two ads are concerned, the handwritten ad shows more of the benefits and looks like it’s done by the owner of the vehicle. It forces you to look at the equipment and think of them as the owner did. I like the bottom ad, although they are both well done, and agree the price seems a bit high . . . :-)

By: anita design

anita design — Sun, 03 May 2009 15:00:02 +0000

Is this a question of communications over design? The “designed” ad puts the price first — then the features (which are in teeny type). Is this how you sell a used jeep? Nope. The second ad lists all the features, and THEN you get the price . . . the order of information is correct; it tells the story in a way that helps make the sale. Plus — bonus — it tells the story with a personality that matches the target audience. That’s real communications design . . . that’s advertising.

I think that all adds up to an appropriate, appealing, and powerful design.

By: mict

mict — Sun, 03 May 2009 07:41:41 +0000

The 2nd one is too good designed — in the right surrounding enviroment it will kill all other ads (like the 1st one).

The 1st one is changeable (fits any car).

The 2nd one matches more the target group (fits drivers, owner).

By: Segun Hunye

Segun Hunye — Sat, 02 May 2009 19:34:39 +0000

Perception is relative. To me the ad #2 may not be as cool as the first, but it is very effective as the buyer is not after the design but the Jeep itself, and the ad #2 suits it perfectly.

By: MyDoxies

MyDoxies — Sat, 02 May 2009 16:03:58 +0000

Definitely the second one. It kept pulling my eye and made me laugh — this was designed by a designer — there is a style here and a lot of thought, too. It appears random, but, it’s not!

I love humour in advertising!

Advertisers — amuse me!!

By: Dreamspeaker

Dreamspeaker — Sat, 02 May 2009 12:22:12 +0000

2nd one. You’re selling a Jeep, and Jeeps are fun!

By: da5id

da5id — Fri, 01 May 2009 22:32:39 +0000

Whoa, too many comments to read.

I like the 2nd one as well.

I like how the text leads you around the vehicle pointing out the features. It’s kind of analogous to the way a car salesman would point out a car’s features in real life and the way you would give the car a once-over in person — kicking the tires and seeing what the vehicle is like.

The list in the first pic is OK, but you’re forever moving back and forward between list and picture, having to find the item the description mentions instead of having the same features pointed out to you by the text (like a salesman would do in real life).

By: BP Design Lab

BP Design Lab — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:07:47 +0000

Neither one of these ads to me is particularly well designed, although, as they are displayed, the second one is the only one that has the potential to be effective.

In the case of the “neat” one, the text is too small to read in the size that it is displayed. I think that most of us are drawn to the “grubby” one simply because it is legible. Now, like most designers, I hate it when a client tells me to “make the text bigger,” and we certainly don’t want this to look like a children’s book; however, the first ad definitely fails when it comes to legibility.

There’s a fine line between function and art and it’s called ‘design.’