I can't be the only one that finds the before images more attractive.
The before pictures look like a vibrant and alive city where things are happening and commerce is being done. The after pictures look dull and dead.
The before pictures look like a vibrant and alive city where things are happening and commerce is being done. The after pictures look dull and dead.
That's what you get when you have competent, professional painters, typographers, photographers and designers deliberately trying to make their work exciting and attractive.
Without the ads, all you see is drab, flatly painted buildings, which are not nearly as exciting.
The feeling of excitement and aliveness does not require advertising, however. Some towns and neighborhoods revitalized their run down buildings by hiring artists to come and paint murals (which, to my eye look far better than virtually any ad), or commissioning other artwork (such as sculptures).
But even if that's not done, I'd personally much rather see flatly-painted buildings than advertising that's trying to manipulate me.
You would feel right at home around a neighborhood of commie blocks. Those look fine too if they were painted well and had decent art on them, but that doesn't happen. Nobody wants to pay for that.
You're used to a secondary attribute, so you associate it with the actual thing. It's like growing up with muscle cars, and associating loud noise with a powerful engine. Well, we've also got electric cars. Peace and quiet doesn't mean a slow car.