Mr. Charles Hively

About Me

Current Design Director for Artisanal Media LLC publications.

Member Since May 2000
Member Type Sustaining
AIGA Chapter New York
Title Design Director
Company 3x3 Magazine
Email moc.gam3x3@ylevihc
Website www.3x3mag.com
Field Design/Graphic design
Advertising
Book design
Bio

Hively’s career began in Austin, Texas where he worked at a number of agencies as well as developing a freelance illustration practice. He went on to co-found his first advertising agency, Hively van Hulsteyn & Femat. Moving to Houston he again worked at a number of advertising agencies where he served as Vice President, Creative Director before co-founding The Hively Agency in 1985. He was responsible for the record-breaking campaign, “6 grams of fat or less” for Subway Sandwiches. Moving to New York in 1999, Hively served as Vice President, Creative Director at the former Long Haymes Carr and the B2B agency Greco Ethridge Group before joining Graphis magazine as co-publisher. In 2003, Hively designed and published the first issue of 3x3, The Magazine of Contemporary Illustration; in 2006 he purchased an existing magazine, Creative Convocation, renamed and redesigned it as Creative Quarterly. And in 2007 he launched a spin-off of 3x3, VOIR, which features artist’s studios from all over the world.

Hively was named Adweek magazine’s first All-Southwest Art Director and in 1989, Hively’s agency was marked by the magazine as one of the hot shops to watch in America. Hively has received acknowledgement for his creativity from the New York Art Director’s Club, The One Show, including a Gold Pencil, the Clios, The Advertising Club of New York, AIGA, Communication Arts magazine and The American Advertising Federation. Most recently his work has received awards from HOW Magazine’s International Design Awards 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, Applied Arts Design Annual, 2008, 2009, 2010, Society of Illustrators, PRINT Regional Design Annual and his cover design for 3x3 was a finalist in the Society of Publication Designers Annual. His work can be found in the AIGA Archive.

Hively has been invited to judge Communication Arts Photography Annua

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "What we heard: your voice on AIGA's future"

    It's a sad day when only 1% of the membership voted on something this important. What does that say?

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "Cast your vote for AIGA’s future"

    I find it interesting that there have been only 14 comments concerning such an important topic. It either means everyone has already made up their mind or they have no opinion. Or all the discussion has taken place last month. I also find it interesting that to sign on and make a comment you have to sign up through a non-AIGA site? Certainly no one would want to vote for the status quo but looking over the transformative proposal there seems to be way too little solid information i.e. balance sheets, definitive location for a new headquarters or relevant statistics. Certainly losing the Fifth Avenue location would diminish the visibility of the AIGA. I liken the AIGA to the Met or MoMA, there is a need for visibility for what I consider to be the center of design. I understand the option of one floor versus a tall building but having visited all floors in the present location I find a lot of wasted space and on the other hand I like the intimacy of the gallery space. As a long time member starting out in Houston I felt part of something even though I wasn't here to enjoy the benefits of the actual exhibits or activities. It was a big deal to say I was a member. As a New Yorker I take a great deal of pride in walking by the Fifth Avenue location, it's perfect for those of us who live here and those who visit. Moving it to a far away location would not benefit the reputation of the AIGA or their mission to involve non-designers in appreciating design, it would make it more of an exclusive club. I have to add that I have not been supportive of any of the recent changes that have been taking place at the AIGA in an effort to engage a more "youthful membership". To me great design is timeless, it knows no age, it doesn't favor any single age group and it has no boundaries. Adding more relevant contemporary exhibits makes a great deal of sense to me, staying relevant is important for designers and the organization but I don't think any of the proposed transformative steps are necessary. What I do feel is necessary is a change in leadership of the AIGA; I don't feel the direction we're headed in is a positive one for the design field or for the organization.

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "AIGA | Justified and Unjustified: AIGA competitions 2012"

    I'd be curious to know how many entries AIGA had last year in both competitions, you mention 750 designers for 365 and 350 for 50 Covers, but what were the total number of entries? And what was the number for the past ten years since you are making that a benchmark? Having run a few competitions I realize that not everyone enters and quite honestly I am very selective on what I enter when I enter as I know the judging is tough...as it should be. The number of designers entering is probably normal but it could be that there's not enough promotion about the competitions. I remember in years past that most if not all shows sent out posters which would be hung up in the studio, now all that appears is an email and like any email blast maybe too many are going directly into the Spam folder. Or perhaps there's a reluctance for young designers to enter shows in general. What they're missing is that while anyone can post a piece of design or art online, on Facebook, Tumblr...but when you look at the number of "Likes" or Comments it's in small numbers. Compare that to an annual where the press run is 5,000, 10,000 or more, the reach for a winning piece is far greater than any blog or other form of social media. Truth is we need it all in order to promote the value of design, blogs, social media and yes, shows.  > In an era when designers are seeking inspiration on websites, blogs and social media regularly, the idea of bringing a jury together annually to select the best design of the year based on submissions by a relatively small number of designers who pay to submit entries seems anachronistic, particularly when there are so many other design competitions. I think you're missing the point, you're not just any competition, you're AIGA.  I myself find it near impossible to scour the many web sites out there to discover new talent; I wade through a whole lot of crap to find someone interesting--pretty much the same experience I had as a judge when I was on a jury panel though in some sense worse as people are not that concerned about what they post. So I appreciate curated shows that select the top work being done today. Certainly a jury can only judge what's entered but I've found that the truly remarkable designers are actively participating in shows with one caveat, I find the 20-somethings more reluctant to enter. I surmise the reason is being voiced throughout the many comments I've seen in relation to Paula's two posts, but I would question how new talent is going to emerge without competitions that are curated? >...we are also experimenting with new ways to surface design inspiration—through a redesigned AIGA.org that encourages participation and portfolios posted by members and chapters, a daily curated blog called “Design Envy,”...  As a suggestion I think there needs to be more transparency when you're talking about all these improvements to the AIGA website, what are the daily hits--maybe they should be noted on the site so we can see what the traffic is really like? what were the daily hits before? Read more: “Unjustified”, Part II — Imprint-The Online Community for Graphic Designers For great design products, visit our online store: MyDesignShop.com

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "What we heard: your voice on AIGA's future"

    It's a sad day when only 1% of the membership voted on something this important. What does that say?

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "Cast your vote for AIGA’s future"

    I find it interesting that there have been only 14 comments concerning such an important topic. It either means everyone has already made up their mind or they have no opinion. Or all the discussion has taken place last month. I also find it interesting that to sign on and make a comment you have to sign up through a non-AIGA site? Certainly no one would want to vote for the status quo but looking over the transformative proposal there seems to be way too little solid information i.e. balance sheets, definitive location for a new headquarters or relevant statistics. Certainly losing the Fifth Avenue location would diminish the visibility of the AIGA. I liken the AIGA to the Met or MoMA, there is a need for visibility for what I consider to be the center of design. I understand the option of one floor versus a tall building but having visited all floors in the present location I find a lot of wasted space and on the other hand I like the intimacy of the gallery space. As a long time member starting out in Houston I felt part of something even though I wasn't here to enjoy the benefits of the actual exhibits or activities. It was a big deal to say I was a member. As a New Yorker I take a great deal of pride in walking by the Fifth Avenue location, it's perfect for those of us who live here and those who visit. Moving it to a far away location would not benefit the reputation of the AIGA or their mission to involve non-designers in appreciating design, it would make it more of an exclusive club. I have to add that I have not been supportive of any of the recent changes that have been taking place at the AIGA in an effort to engage a more "youthful membership". To me great design is timeless, it knows no age, it doesn't favor any single age group and it has no boundaries. Adding more relevant contemporary exhibits makes a great deal of sense to me, staying relevant is important for designers and the organization but I don't think any of the proposed transformative steps are necessary. What I do feel is necessary is a change in leadership of the AIGA; I don't feel the direction we're headed in is a positive one for the design field or for the organization.

  • Charles Hively commented on the article "AIGA | Justified and Unjustified: AIGA competitions 2012"

    I'd be curious to know how many entries AIGA had last year in both competitions, you mention 750 designers for 365 and 350 for 50 Covers, but what were the total number of entries? And what was the number for the past ten years since you are making that a benchmark? Having run a few competitions I realize that not everyone enters and quite honestly I am very selective on what I enter when I enter as I know the judging is tough...as it should be. The number of designers entering is probably normal but it could be that there's not enough promotion about the competitions. I remember in years past that most if not all shows sent out posters which would be hung up in the studio, now all that appears is an email and like any email blast maybe too many are going directly into the Spam folder. Or perhaps there's a reluctance for young designers to enter shows in general. What they're missing is that while anyone can post a piece of design or art online, on Facebook, Tumblr...but when you look at the number of "Likes" or Comments it's in small numbers. Compare that to an annual where the press run is 5,000, 10,000 or more, the reach for a winning piece is far greater than any blog or other form of social media. Truth is we need it all in order to promote the value of design, blogs, social media and yes, shows.  > In an era when designers are seeking inspiration on websites, blogs and social media regularly, the idea of bringing a jury together annually to select the best design of the year based on submissions by a relatively small number of designers who pay to submit entries seems anachronistic, particularly when there are so many other design competitions. I think you're missing the point, you're not just any competition, you're AIGA.  I myself find it near impossible to scour the many web sites out there to discover new talent; I wade through a whole lot of crap to find someone interesting--pretty much the same experience I had as a judge when I was on a jury panel though in some sense worse as people are not that concerned about what they post. So I appreciate curated shows that select the top work being done today. Certainly a jury can only judge what's entered but I've found that the truly remarkable designers are actively participating in shows with one caveat, I find the 20-somethings more reluctant to enter. I surmise the reason is being voiced throughout the many comments I've seen in relation to Paula's two posts, but I would question how new talent is going to emerge without competitions that are curated? >...we are also experimenting with new ways to surface design inspiration—through a redesigned AIGA.org that encourages participation and portfolios posted by members and chapters, a daily curated blog called “Design Envy,”...  As a suggestion I think there needs to be more transparency when you're talking about all these improvements to the AIGA website, what are the daily hits--maybe they should be noted on the site so we can see what the traffic is really like? what were the daily hits before? Read more: “Unjustified”, Part II — Imprint-The Online Community for Graphic Designers For great design products, visit our online store: MyDesignShop.com

No articles were found.