Unpopular opinions
-
@UnTucked at a cafe this morning they were playing the two artists back to back a few times and while I do love Adeles music. Amy Winehouse is superior.
-
It was a bakery. You love bakeries! Who doesn’t love fresh baked goods on a Sunday?!
-
depends what kind of baked goods you're talking about..
-
I really wish Good Art didn’t put their name on everything.
???
-
"Branders!"
(Channeling the Reefer Madness "Reefers!") -
@Streetwise:
I really wish Good Art didn’t put their name on everything.
???
It’s definitely a big part of their design aesthetic/image. There’s text everywhere. I can see why those who dislike overt branding get put off.
EDIT: Been thinking about this today. It's a valid opinion, as it is a matter of taste. There's a lot of GAH stuff without obvious text branding though (excluding the rosette motif). Of the eight seperate pieces I wear daily (two rings, three pendants, a BLB, and two chains), only the pendants and the BLB have text branding visible on them.
Personally I'm a sucker certain types of branding, especially when it is well integrated into the item in question. I love the chains with text branding on every damn link for example.
Your unpop op has me visualising hard what GAH would be like if they dropped it entirely. My conclusion is less interesting (to me at least). Good post.
-
I'm not a jewelery guy but I tend to look at the GAH stuff this way: if they didn't have a certain level of branding i'm sure the counterfeit market would have a hay day stealing their stuff and passing it off as their own. I think someone on this forum mentioned that there are already counterfeiters out there trying to copy/sell GAH stuff. Even though i'm not a big fan of unnecessary branding it makes sense for GAH to brand their jewelery in a way that deters theft.
-
Yeah, it’s all personal preference so there’s no correct view… other than mine.
Thanks @neph93I know nothing, but I’m not sold on the counterfeiting argument.
-
@Streetwise:
I know nothing, but I’m not sold on the counterfeiting argument.
Don't take my word for it
From the GAH website:
Thank you for your love and support. It is with regret we tell you that counterfeit GOOD ART HLYWD products are rampant. Numerous items bearing the GOOD ART name, logos and insignia are flooding the marketplace (some are actually radioactive). It has come to our attention that some of you have been deceived and inadvertently purchased counterfeit pieces, typically from auction sites or cheap online retailers.
To avoid purchasing counterfeit GOOD ART HLYWD products we urge you to buy only from our authorized Stockists or from our Official Online Shop.Even with their branding people are still counterfeiting GAH product. That probably makes my comment pointless
-
I actually think if the GAH stuff had fewer logos/emblems it would be counterfeited less. Thinking about the items that seem most commonly counterfeited it is stuff like the gaudy Louis Vuitton purses peppered with LV logos.
I happen to like the volume of branding/emblems on GAH so I would never want them to decrease it just to potentially decrease counterfeits, but I think they may see less if they had less branding….. They may also see a decline in sales though.
-
The market has shown this to be a supremely unpopular opinion, but I wish everything had less branding. I understand the value that it produces for the manufacturer, and for some consumers who are conscious of such things or who dig the aesthetic of a logo. I also understand that a lack of branding can look proletarian and unappealing to many. And aesthetically I can appreciate good logo design.
I especially hate branding that gets incorporated into patterns. I can handle a Burberry tartan, but the Louis Vuitton pattern with overt branding incorporated into it just screams desperation to me.
It would be remarkable if a brand could let their aesthetics alone represent their brand, but that is admittedly extremely difficult, and could become limiting and cliche.
-
interesting.
counterfeit goods will always be rampant. it doesn't matter if the original item is worth $10 or $100. you'll find counterfeit items for all industries and goods..
LV's monogram has been in their history books for more than 100 years. back then, they weren't the hyped up company that they are today. bought and carried by many who think they are an instantly recognisable design. if someone looked at a vintage LV trunk, would you think any different of a item produced today bearing the same monogram? would it still shout desperation?
-
Well next time you're in London @mclaincausey make sure you stop by the Fendi Cafe in Harrods for your branding fix!
Edit: on closer look, seems it closes Friday
-
Subtle…
I'm not sure the history matters, @louisbosco Perceptions change over time. I don't see an LV bag and think someone is paying tribute to an historic brand, I think they're saying "look at my Vuitton." But that's just me.
What was cool about LV back in those days was innovation–water resistant, stackable trunks, for example. But I suppose integrating overt branding into something that's supposed to be kind of a background (a pattern) is a form of innovation too.
-
It would be remarkable if a brand could let their aesthetics alone represent their brand, but that is admittedly extremely difficult, and could become limiting and cliche.
It would be remarkable, and increasingly impossible in the market, as you suggest.
Back to the case in point, the technical quality of the design and execution of GAH’s products is fantastic, it is wedded to wild, original creativity, an irreverent sense of humour and a frankly bizarre combination of refined luxury and aggressive, loud branding. It is very much a part of their identity. That’s going to put some people off, understandably. But I’d suggest GAH wouldn’t be GAH without it.
-
IMO part of GAH's cache is making things that are borderline ridiculous (not intended as an insult). Pendants, bracelets, and rings are things to be expected from a jeweler. But then they differentiate those with design and novel spring loaded latches and other tweaks (including overt branding by name or more subtle by rosette). The Belt Buddy is and has become recognized as a classic of design simplicity and effectiveness–I could see it in MoMA.
Then they go nuts with things like buttons, shoelace holders, and the like. I guess it can be viewed as "look at how rich I am, even throwaway items like my shirt buttons are Sterling" but somehow the frivolity and excessive opulence kind of works. More power to em and to y'all who own their products.
-
Subtle…
I'm not sure the history matters, @louisbosco Perceptions change over time. I don't see an LV bag and think someone is paying tribute to an historic brand, I think they're saying "look at my Vuitton." But that's just me.
What was cool about LV back in those days was innovation–water resistant, stackable trunks, for example. But I suppose integrating overt branding into something that's supposed to be kind of a background (a pattern) is a form of innovation too.
no. of course not. i wouldn't think someone would carry an LV bag for that. i feel that the brand has been let down recently due to the amount of negativity caused by the hype surrounding. it's almost seems like maybe certain groups of people carrying it has destroyed what others may view (or used to view) as iconic..
Monogram patterns were started with a few french trunk makers back in the day. LV being one of them along with Goyard and Moynat.
