starts as an idea. If it's a successful idea clever people made a study of it. Then students study the study. Students even get degrees in studying the study. Then they get jobs making sure everything conforms to the rules they studied. Because learning the rules removes the need to think. And the rules kill the creativity that started the idea in the first place. Luckily that's not something that could ever happen in advertising, is it? Should one learn the rules first before we attempt to bend/break them to our advantage? Shouldn't we learn to crawl before we can walk? When forced to work within a strict framework isn't the imagination taxed to the utmost and therefore most able to produce it's richest ideas? Given total freedom aren't ideas likely to sprawl or is that the best way to go and then reign in accordingly? I know Orson Wells is oft quoted as not knowing the rules of film before he made 'Citizen Kane' but maybe they broke the mold after he came out, maybe the rest of the lesser creative lights need to know what is realistically possible and what isn't before they are let loose? Dave Trott John, My dad always taught me "the spirit of the law not the letter of the law." In my experience it's usually implemented the other way round. john woods Dave, Spirit not the letter. That's a sprawl then reign then? ttp://www.liamtate.co.uk/ Liam Tate Definition of BRILLIANT Adjective 2. exceptionally clever