These two comments together I think are interesting and have a lot in common.
First, it’s the word “rebel”. Why is it that is seems there is a need to rebel against corporate to get good/interesting/s4xy design? Why can’t corporate see the vision, take more risks and produce good stuff? Sadly, much corporate design is boring, sad and uninspired, hence the need for that rebel corporate designer. I’m all for the rebel, but woudn’t we all win if the corporation itself could better position a brand to be that rebel?
Secondly, I see your point, 6ix and I am too kinda tired of seeing so many nicely rendered but never made (or made once) things. Yes, it is not really ID, per se, but closer to art. Yes, they do get a lot of traction on this blog and others. However, I don’t think that this kind of work is getting undue attention. Rather than seeing less of this, (and back to my first point), let’s see more corporate companies pushing out stuff of this level of interest. You’ve said yourself, that the corporate stuff is less flashy. I’d say less interesting.
The problem is not that corporate is not getting enough attention and the one-offs are, it’s that corporate stuff can be boring, and people want exciting. If the mentality at corporate changed, both these problems would be solved - no need for the rebel, and the corporation itself could become the “rock star” to capture people’s attention.
Of course I’m generalizing “corporate” and not all companies are the same. But still the premise holds.
R