Aw... here we go again.

I am truly offended...

...by all that trapped white space.

Come ON people . . . first rule of stealing an idea is to make it better, not worse.

If you're going to steal someone else's idea you should make sure that the concept behind it works with your story as well. Sacramento's hed and sub hed tell me that salmon are disappearing in the area. The perforation lines and the fadeout work on a conceptual level. Pierre's hed and subhed tell me that there is a fishing tournament and that it offers a chance to study the fish. The fade and cutout line don't make sense here. This page could have been more effective if the fish were at 100% opacity, didn't have the dotted lines and broke into the text blocks of the other stories on the page. That would tell me there is a fishing tournament going on and that it will offer a chance to see the walleyes up close and personal. Additionally, it might have a bit of a trompe l'oeil effect as a fresh fish sitting on a newspaper awaiting wrapping. That could have been a nice page, instead someone takes the easy way out and rips off a concept that doesn't work.

There is more to visuals than making a page look nice, they need to have a solid concept behind them to work.

I think we're missing the bigger picture here: Why the sudden rise in fishy centerpieces?

At least it isn't a Marlboro box.

Man, I'm so tired of this...

You can't just post people's work up there accusing them of plagarism without making an effort to contact them.

You got to give people a chance to explain/defend themselves before you throw them under the bus.

If you made an effort, you've got to put that in the post.

If you haven't made an effort. You're being irresponsible with someone else's career.

The idea of a faded fish with a dull outline is so generic the designer in South Dakota seriously might not have seen the Sacramento Bee page. I know many of you are saying "unlikely," but it is possible.

Always innocent until proven guilty.

"If you haven't made an effort. You're being irresponsible with someone else's career."

The lack of effort and irresponsibility lies not with this blog. It's in South Dakota.

"The lack of effort and irresponsibility lies not with this blog. It's in South Dakota."

You're making an assumption that you don't know.

Just like I don't know that you're a plagarist. You might be.

But I am certainly not going to bandy it about the internet for conversatation's sake.

If you want to know how stupid these comments can look, just reexamine what happened with The Daily Breeze a few months ago.

A journalist who I know (who should have known better) threw out an accusation on Vizeds that the paper ripped of the AJC.
People jumped all over the paper for being plagarists.
Only later to find out that the paper was guilty of NOTHING.

Of course, all of this, after being thrown under the bus by a pack of angry designers.

All I'm saying is when you throw people's pages on the internet and start debating whether they have committed journalistic high treason. You have to be a journalist when you do it, and journalists get both sides of the story. At least, they used to.

Fair enough, although I think you're being incredibly blithe and forgiving in the face of obvious borrowing. Newsdesigner posted two pages with obvious similarities. Nothing was said beyond it being "very similar". The discussion commenced and points were made that examined design aspects and content issues among other things.

I think many are tired of the "WHAT A RIP OFF" tack but if the Pierre designer wishes to add a little insight, bring it. My guess is this one would be a little hard to explain.

The idea of "a faded fish and a cutout line is generic" is...huh?. Two almost identical presentations within a week being coincidental...come on. It was a bad decision and someone noticed. The Sacto designer might feel flattered but I would hazard a guess they're a bit perturbed.

I've beeen accused of plagiarism, by name, in E&P magazine, and I felt wronged because my side of the story was not solicited. It was a cheap shot. So I agree that both sides need to be heard if posssible. But just because the Pierre designer wasn't consulted before their page was displayed in public doesn't make this a witch hunt — it's a design blog.

"What I'm saying is, the number one thing I was taught in journalism school is that you are a journalist before you are a designer. Maybe you should do some reporting before you call people plagarists."

—Daily Breeze staffer responding at Visual Editors to a "discussion" about how they blatantly ripped off the AJC in April.

Haven't we had enough of this crap already? The Marlboro box was one thing, but this is so generic that, like an earlier blogger stated, it could have been done separately. When does this crap stop? I am not saying that plagiarism isn't a problem in our profession, but this doesn't even deserve to be posted. I could find 10 better examples. Are we going to post every single one that is questionable? Since when did we call people out in a public forum? I don't know either one of these designers, but I would bet neither one would want their pages posted for this reason...just my two cents.

i so don't care any more. have you heard? "talent borrows, genius steals." just do it™.

honestly, i'm more offended by the kerning in the sac bee hed. i can drive a truck through the space between the A and C.

Where's the journalism behind these accusations?

Oh.... the white space..... It's like ... is unfinished...

Rip off or not, it's an example of one concept executed well and one done poorly. As an earlier comment noted, the Sac Bee's design alludes to the point of the story, while the Journal's does not have much relevance. I also see that the Sac Bee's fish was rotated so that the larger top fins extend into the story, leaving the bottom, nearly flat surface to the left and minimizing the need for white space. The Journal's design leaves so much trapped white space - ouch!

They could have easily soaked up all of that left oveer white space if the fish was sticking out of a Marlboro box. Seriously... who cares. Nobody puppies were crushed in the construction of either of these pages and that I know, my taco salad tasted the same this evening.
Note to designer in question... don't use this in your clips (you've probably got better stuff)/ Just keep striving to improve and eventually this will all blow over.

wow... i was sleepy when i typed that... nobody puppies... ????

I'm largely agreeing with Martin and the 'Hawg here. Personally, I don't care if someone rips off one of my ideas (in fact -- I wish more people would; I'm starting to get a complex). That said, if someone rips off my idea and it gets more accolades, we should talk.

We can discuss execution of the ideas all day (and why one works more than the other). But if someone wants to riff off the "dotted line fish thing," I hate to see his or her career go belly up because of it.

check out today's (10.18.06) sf chronicle. =P

I believe Roger Black damaged the traditional look of the San Francisco Chronicle that I love. I don't like the new layout and I think it needs to be changed back to the way it used to be.

Jim Parkinson was commissioned by the Chronicle to design a condensed version of the Metro Black typeface, William Addison Dwiggins' design used for headlines by the Chronicle for decades, due to the reformatting of the newspaper's page size.

It was a clear and fresh transformation, and I bought copy after copy of the Chronicle because of it.

Roger Black takes a heavyweight boxer's approach to graphic design sometimes. It's a hit and miss effort. He just missed the mark while redesigning the Chronicle, in my opinion. Visual impact draws readers to publications. Too much impact may pull readers away.

I am a big lover of the traditional design in newspapers. Some great examples being the New York Times, The Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times.

I'm glad the L.A. Times went back to traditionalism, and I'm sure that the Chronicle may just fall in line sooner or later.

Thank you very much.