Tag Archives: LA Times

The Future Looks Grim

Last week we were shocked to learn that Frank Darabont left The Walking Dead after having enthusiastically promoted the show only days before at Comic-Con. Clearly, something unpleasant was afoot behind the scenes.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the problem might stem from money being poured into AMC’s flagship show Mad Men. A renegotiated contract lead to a pay hike for its creator and executive producer Matt Weiner to the tune of $10 million per season—with no budget cuts to the show.

Meanwhile, the budget for The Walking Dead has been slashed $250,000 per episode and Breaking Bad’s season five show order has been reduced to six or eight from thirteen—prompting Sony Television (the studio behind the show) to consider selling it to another network.

Interestingly enough, The Walking Dead handily surpasses both shows in terms of viewership. It averaged 6 million viewers per episode during its first season while Mad Men averaged 4.3 million last season and Breaking Bad 2.3 million this year.

AMC president Charlie Collier had this to say on The Walking Dead budget cuts:

“If you look at pilot budgets vs. pattern budgets usually the pilot budget is much higher than what ends up being the pattern budget. With The Walking Dead, instead of doing a pilot, we went straight to 6 episodes because we believed in the team and the talent in front and behind the camera. Then we came back with a 13-episode second season, and amortization over 13 episodes is very different than over 6. But we settled into one of the highest pattern budgets for a basic cable series,” said Collier.

Still, it seems counterintuitive to take anything away from a show that is clearly AMC’s biggest hit. I like Mad Men, but The Walking Dead should be their top priority—and they may have lost the show’s driving force because they don’t have their priorities in order.

(via The LA Times and TWDP)

The “WWW” to Get 2000 New Fonts

examples of the change
The Difference is Clear

A company that owns 2,00 fonts is going to make them “all” available for the web this Tuesday. This following a few other companies making their fonts available this past February. So this is going to be a huge boost to not only the Web Designers community but the web community as a whole. Just think of the amount of space that is going to be saved by not having to upload images with text in it. Which in turn will lower the load times for everyone. Also, making the text an image removes it from search engines. Now they wont have be, and searches will be more accurate. And that’s just scratching the surface of the possibilities.

But, with every great thing in design comes the bad too. Remember the early days on the web where every page was black and text was in a thousand different colors? Neon green, pink, blue, red, orange..orange for Christ’s sake?! Scrolling boxes and messages. Flashing pictures and animated ones as well. These pitfalls were everywhere and man did it make things hard to read. I just hope that this change is going to be subtle and that most people won’t even notice it even happened. Yet even still, I’m pretty stoked about this.

Go to the LA Times for the complete story.

To illustrate how Web fonts will look different than system fonts, the designers at Monotype Imaging created the following visual. The image on the left uses system fonts: Microsoft Corporation’s Verdana® (heads); Monotype’s Times New Roman® (nav, paragraph in brackets) and Monotype’s Arial® (paragraph copy, What’s Hot & Recent Posts). The image on the right uses web fonts: Linotype’s Coronet® “finally, fashion that’s frugal”; Monotype Imaging’s Parma (family) is used for the serif text, and the sans serif text is in Monotype Imaging’s Felbridge.