How Much are You Worth as a Designer?

democratize:
To put an organization under the control of its members by giving them free and equal decision-making powers.

In essence, as design exists today, I believe it to represent a perfect democracy. We as designers all have free and equal decision-making power in the type of work that we create and in our level of involvement in the profession and future of design. In the good old U.S. of A., we have a particularly relentless fondness for democracy. Some would even categorize it as our modern day crusade.

There is no governing body for design, except for its practitioners. This model suits us creatively and productively. So then why the concern of “worth” in the above headline?

Well, one reason is that democracy tends to create intangibles. In this instance, by “intangibles” I mean that which is appreciated by its citizens, but difficult to explain quantifiably to others. For example: A spirit to be successful. Such a spirit or will, holds a tremendous value to its owner, yet it would be difficult to express that value in relationship to a commonplace noun. (i.e. My drive to succeed is equal to 1000 Lamborghinis, or 40,000 acres of land, or $16,000,000.) Someone may assume that they can assign values to these sorts of things but it’s rather difficult to prove.

Another reason to consider worth in a democracy is the fact that it is so openly fluid and organic. The democracy of design is particularly susceptible to great changes by its population as there are no admission requirements to join our ranks. The twenty-year veteran and the fledgling novice can practice our profession side by side with nearly the same technical (digital) abilities. For this reason, the definition of what it is we do can be clouded simply by what is being produced.

I’ve made a list of what I believe to be the most valuable of these intangibles that great designers will consistently possess. The list has nothing to do with operating Photoshop, or knowing how to properly kern and lead type. Those sorts of skills are now a given in worthwhile design work. The list does however signify the characteristics a citizen of our design democracy should attain in order to expect lifelong success as a designer. In essence, it describes their “design worth.”

• A Knowledge of History
• An Awareness of Culture
• The Ability to Think Creatively
• A Strength in Social Engagement and Interactions
• A Drive to Succeed
• The Ability to Solve Problems
• The Ability to Communicate
• A Strong Respect for Process
• Reputation, Courtesy and Dependability
• A Commitment to Stewardship of the Profession

In the way that you practice design it is important to try and express the value of these things to others—especially clients. If you hire a designer, put these kinds of attributes in your job description. If you’re a client, hold us accountable to these expectations. When promoting yourself as a designer, it’s time to start promoting your strengths in these areas. And most importantly the design work that you make should communicate these ideals clearly.

A positive, organic ebb of ambiguity in our democracy is just as easy to provoke as a negative one.

The image above belongs to Ed Fella.

Designers Unite: Logo Design Contests R.I.P. 2005!

My colleagues, I am asking all of us to come together and immediately end designer participation in logo design contests. By uniting and uniformly refusing to participate in these atrocities we can reclaim a tremendous amount of worth in our profession. What we make is valuable. Do not allow it to be cheapened by another’s greed.

Imagine this scenario: Let’s say I’ve been feeling a bit under the weather lately. I decide that I need to go visit the doctor. In addition to making an appointment with my usual family physician, I also make appointments with 15 or 20 other doctors as well. As I visit each doctor’s office, I tell them that they are all in competition with one another for treating my illness and I will only pay the physician who I believe does the best job after they have all seen me. I sample a bit of all the different medicines, perhaps I even ask my four-year-old daughter which doctor she liked best. And after everything is said and done, I pay doctor #12 my $20 co-pay and head on my way cured and happy. Is there anything wrong with this? Did the other 19 doctors not do their job? Should they not be paid for spending time with me and examining me?

This is exactly what happens in a logo design contest. Some bonehead with a couple of extra bucks or so knows the value of design. He also knows that he needs design, however, what he knows most is that he’s too freakin’ cheap to pay for design. So when it comes time to start his roofing company he gets the bright idea to hold a logo design contest with a shiny $200 first prize and like mindless zombies, we as designers oblige him. Except in our case instead of twenty people working it’s probably more like 50 or 70. And we all scramble like mad for the bonehead, each of us spending maybe 15 or 20 hours on average submitting a couple of designs. Bonehead is super happy. He might even have a hundred versions now of his new company logo to choose from and it’s only going to cost him 200 bucks. All of the contest participants wait patiently to see who wins and low and behold the winner is little Sammy Thompson, a 12 year-old from Scranton, PA. Sammy’s design won because it reminded Bonehead of a toy he once possessed as a child. Sammy’s design was completed in Microsoft Word.

Why do we devalue our process and product? This can only be detrimental to design. There probably are cases where one may be able to justify participation in a logo contest; but it should be pro-bono and for a non-profit, deserving company. It’s time to reclaim the value of our profession. Leave the logo design contests to Sammy. If you agree with me leave your name in a comment here to put your commitment in print.

(My apologies to Sammy Thompson in Scranton, PA, if he really exists. Your design really was super sweet and you deserved the win.)

Lots of Stuff Happening Right Now:

I started the day by grading a couple of projects for my Intermediate Graphic Design class. Every time I think I get ahead in the grading it backs right back up. Oh well, another day, another dollar.

Yet another student of mine was up against some legal trouble today. Fortunately it’s nothing as bad as huffing this time. However, I will still not mention his name to protect his identity. It’s kind of a funny story; he used his graphic design powers for evil. In an effort to save a few bucks, he created a phony parking pass; and a couple of weeks ago walked out to his car and found a real nice parking boot on the wheel of his car. This is evidently a much more serious offense than it sounds because this student had to appear in court before a county judge and meet with the Dean of Students. Not to worry though, the penalties weren’t unreasonably stiff and as long as he keeps his nose clean, he’ll still graduate on schedule next semester.

In both of my classes today there were in-progress crits for final projects. These two classes have a deadline of December 7th for their last pieces. In the Intro to Type class they all have quite a bit of work to do. In Intermediate Graphic Design most of them have a pretty good jump on things. I look forward to those last two crits, as final projects are usually some of the students’ best work.

Since today is the 28th, that only leaves ten days until I leave for Deutschland. I am super excited! I will be bringing my Powerbook and a digital camera to make for some “awesome” on-the-road, blogging.

In switching to yet a fifth topic for this post, we were forced to add a third section of Introduction to Computer Graphics for next semester. And as of now we have no idea who will be teaching it. All of our current faculty members are to capacity in their teaching loads. This class is for freshmen who have completed the Foundation courses but have not yet taken any graphic design classes. The course curriculum simply trains students on “the new big three” (Photoshop, Illustrator & InDesign). There’s a smattering of Quark in there, but who knows for how long. The course content and syllabus are already written, we just need a truly computer savvy designer to step in there and teach the class. I’m going to start by trying to ask some local professional contacts that I have and hopefully someone will be interested. Something that’s to our advantage is that, to teach this class, it is not necessary for the instructor to hold a graduate degree. A working professional or grad student can teach it. If you are local to Cincinnati or Northern Kentucky and interested or know someone who may be interested please email me. We probably have less than a month to find someone.

Go 3-D! Everybody’s Doing It!

Since AT&T just recently merged with SBC, they of course decided it was time for a new logo. Many of us knew it was coming, but that doesn’t make it any easier of a pill to swallow. So many of Paul and Saul’s masterpieces are being replaced by the demands of tastes and trends. You can check out some of the buzz about the switch on design blogs: DesignObserver and Be A Design Group . I personally loathe this 3-D craze. Why do all “current” and “modern” logos have to be 3-D? Shouldn’t a 3-dimensional design exist for a reason, like for say an architecture firm, or maybe a box manufacturer? I haven’t made any 3-D phone calls yet AT&T, and probably by the time it’s possible to do so there will be a new trendy style of logo design you’ll use, that yet again, will not at all match the service your company offers. But all that matters is that it looks great, right?

3-D logo design symbolizes a perfect example of technology predicating ideas. Design should be exactly the other way around. Ideas first; technology second. If Adobe invents a Photoshop filter tomorrow that puts realistic fur on surfaces will we soon see some furry golden arches? Or even worse, how long before this happens…


I apologize if my posts are sparse through the rest of the week. I will be away from work and design physically as well as mentally over the holiday.

Top Ten Gen Ed Classes at NKU…

Since it is advising season, here is my latest TOP TEN suggestions in fulfilling those pesky General Education requirements for next semester.

1. SOC 380: ELITE DEVIANCE.
-This just sounds cool.

2. ATP 334: UPPER EXTREMITY EVALUATION
-Because ATP 333: Lower Extremity Evaluation just isn’t what it used to be.

3. ATS 361: FLUID POWER
-How could you go wrong with a course that has the word “POWER” in the title?

4. AVA 299: INDEPENDENT STUDY IN AVIATION
-Because I’m pretty sure you could trick somebody into letting you fly a plane.

5. BIO 129: SPRING FLORA OF KENTUCKY
-Although only one credit, you do get to look at flowers quite a bit!

6. DAN 222: JAZZ DANCE
-O.K. people: jazz hands, jazz hands, jazz hands and…freeze!

7. PHE 114: BEGINNING KARATE
-Hiiiiyyaaaaaaahhhh!

8. PHE 104: BEGINNING BADMINTON
-I really don’t think this one needs an explanation.

9. GLY 120: THIS DANGEROUS EARTH
-Volcanoes, earthquakes, and landslides! Is this a course or the latest made for t.v. movie on CBS?

10. IET 300: ROBOTIC SYSTEMS
-You make a robot! They might as well be giving away free fun!

By the way, these are real classes offered at NKU.

The Concepts Concept…

So, every year one of your responsibilities as an art faculty member here at NKU is to speak to the freshman art majors in a class called “Concepts in Art.” This class gives students exposure to different majors they could lean toward in our department’s curriculum (i.e. Painting, Sculpture, Photo, Graphic Design, etc…) Usually faculty lectures are supposed to last for about an hour and fifteen minutes and traditionally faculty will show their work and discuss their current research. I have found this to be terribly boring for myself and the students—not to mention the hours of prepping for the lecture the night before. Last year, in an effort to thwart the evil that is the “Concepts lecture” we decided we would team present during that time. And it did help. But there was still the prepping and the lecture and in essence things hadn’t changed all that much.

This year I had an idea that we implemented today that made things much better. We (Julie, [my colleague] and I) turned the hour into a design competition. We split the class into two groups, (each group lead by one of us), and we gave the students a “widget” and a design briefing. In that one-hour period each team had to create a name and use for their widget as well as a working logo in Illustrator. In our design brief we stated for them a target audience with specific qualities and basically broke the design process of: briefing, brainstorming, sketching, refining, making and critique into 10 min. increments. Near the end when it came time to make the logos in Illustrator, Julie and I were at the helm of the Macintoshes vectoring away!

The overall format was a huge success. Many of the students who had never designed before were quite enthusiastic about the process and impressed by how quickly we could arrive at results. At the end we asked the regular teacher of that class to choose a winner and unfortunately, my team didn’t win (I think we were robbed!!!), but maybe next year.

This turned out to be a great exercise as well; this concept of “speed design.” I am going to try and implement this more into the curriculum of my other design classes.

Did Somebody Say Trophies???

This is the latest batch of Graphic Design Championship Trophy winners. They were voted champions by their peers at their critiques. As you can see by the photos, I am really starting to get into the big and let’s say “special” looking trophies. The recipients from top to bottom are: Kelly Conway from Introduction to Typography and Adam McIver and Samantha Reno from Advanced Typography. The reason for blurring Sam’s face in her photo is that she said she didn’t want to be on my website. And of course, I would like to respect her request. I would never put a picture of her on my site like say this site has, or maybe even like the picture of her you can find on this site from four and a half years ago. I feel it’s very important to respect someone’s wishes.

In Defense of Design Aesthetics…

(Do to all of my recent meetings and remarkably busy schedule; I had to go back in time to yesterday to make this post. Hopefully I haven’t disrupted the time continuum too greatly. Enjoy!)

I think it sends a bad message to your students to all but ignore the validity of aesthetics. Just because something functions, that does not make it good design. That makes it a functioning design. And in the world of graphic design, merely functioning means mediocre or average. Just in the same way that something would only be considered average if it looked really cool but only communicated some of the information. Why would anyone choose to be average just because it works? This is not a good way to approach life and business.

I’ve worked both in the real world and in education now, and as I look back at the stuff I did in the “real world”, I wish I had the conviction to try to find a better solution for design without as much compromise; and the courage to work more diligently in educating my clients as to what they should be getting from design. The great ones (who I’m sure many of us respect dearly) already do this.

Grading, Grading, Grading…

I spent most of the day today grading projects. To be truthful, I’ve gotten a bit behind and it was time to play catch-up. As I was looking at the work here and in the gallery, I realized just how impressive some of it is. We have some great graphic design students right now and I would be willing to pit them against any school in the country…then again I’m a bit biased. If you don’t believe me, check out some of the stuff from my Intro and Advanced Typography courses:

The students who are featured are (in order):
Jeremy Weinland, Dustin Williams, Nicole Christenson, Evangeline Bauerle, Chris Ritter, Adam McIver and Oliver Meinerding.









Bis Montag.

Not Too Much to Report Today…

This morning in my Advanced Type class we had the last section of our seminar discussions. We read an essay by Josef Müller-Brockmann on the necessity of grids in design and one by Rudy VanderLans on the American non-copyrighting laws of type design. The discussion was pretty good but I could tell many of the students were tired because half of the class was putting the finishing touches on their senior shows.

The abridged discussion: grids=good, stealing fonts=bad. I’m starting to sense among the students with this discussion and other discussions, that they are embracing design with grids and growing tired of the “dirty,” modern look to design. I was discussing this style with one student in particular after class, and as we were looking at some examples of this layered, rough, texture heavy design ; I started to realize that I can’t even see this kind of work anymore. I mean, I still like it…or at least I thought I did until today. This style has been absolutely beaten to death. I have seen so much of this work that it’s now invisible to me. The next movement in design cannot get here fast enough. It’s going to be so clean and nice and full of white space. I’m already breathing better just thinking of it now.

Moving on, I am in advising hell right now. I think I currently have nearly sixty advisees. That’s right 6-0. That tends to take up a bit of time. I’m going to hold my tongue on that one.

In the afternoon I attended a Curriculum Committee Meeting where all of the courses I have been working on were approved at the college level. The university level of approval is next week.

I spent the end of my day at work hanging out in the galleries with the masses enjoying the senior exhibitions. We have some great BFA senior exhibitions this semester ranging from package and product design, a logo system (ala Ryan McGuinness) that examines a Buddhist philosophy and a collection of gig posters. If you’re local, it’s worth a visit. If you’re not nearby, here are some photos:

A Class on Self-Promotion in Graphic Design and The First Trophy Winner…

I’ve had it in my head for a few semesters now that our curriculum needs a class where students have the opportunity to prepare themselves to effectively interview for a graphic design job. Sure, there are projects within classes where students may put together a self-promotional website or portfolio, but very little of this is actually used when these students leave school and apply for work.

In the second five-week session of this summer, I will finally get to teach that type of class. I want to make students ready to successfully interview for graphic design jobs immediately upon graduation. I would also like to give those students who are not yet ready for graduation the opportunity to prepare themselves to find a worthwhile co-op position. Additionally, I hope to include in some part of the course, a focus on the business of graphic design. What follows is some of the possible course content I’ve been tossing around:

• How to Find a Graphic Design Job
• A Graphic Designer’s Résumé—content and aesthetics
• The Creation and Presentation of a Graphic Design Portfolio
• Mock Job Interviews
• Salary Negotiations
• On-Site Visits to Renown, Local Design Studios
• A Reading and Seminar Component
• Client/Designer Interactions
• Working as a Freelance Designer
• Confidence Building Exercises
• Generation of a Local, Possible Employers Lead List

The course will be offered under the heading of Special Topics in Graphic Design. I know I will need at least ten students to register for the class to be offered, but I sense the interest may be even stronger than that. I’ve been reading Shaughnessy’s: How to Be a Graphic Designer, Without Losing Your Soul, and it’s pretty good, but I still need to expand my bibliography for this course. I’ll keep you posted.

In a lighter note, today I gave away the first graphic design trophy! Woo-hoo trophy! The winner was…Julie Loboyko! She was awarded the graphic design championship trophy for her advertisement design in my Intermediate Graphic Design Class. I nominated three pieces from the crit and her work received the overwhelming majority of votes from her peers. See the photos below. Congrats Julie!





In a side note: In exactly one month from today I will be in Germany. Und ich verstehe nur ein kleines Deutsch!

More Making, Less Yacking Yet Again

Although Annoying, Democratic Design Can Be Fun Too…

dem·o·crat·ic: (adj)
Characterized by free and equal participation in the decision-making processes of an organization or group.

Many designers are worried about how too many regular folks (who know nothing about graphic design or have had no formal design training/education) are now making graphic design. If you look at this type of work carefully, it’s easy to see that we really have very little to worry about. What’s interesting though, is the audacity with which this type of work is made without the concern of embarrassing oneself with such tangible evidence of ignorance about the subject matter. Some of it I actually even like, but not in a good way; more like in an “awesomely-bad”, or “guilty pleasure” way. I like to call it “folk design.” It would be like having a velvet Elvis painting, you know it’s not good art but it’s so freaking interesting you’re tempted to hang it on your wall all the while hoping everyone who looks at it “gets” the joke.

In my Advanced Type class last week during our seminar discussion, we came up with an interesting way to combat this issue. In our university’s halls the greatest offenders are those in the music and theater departments. There are hundreds of horribly designed, music/theatre related posters that hang in our halls each year. As the graphic design students walk to their classes they are forced to look at these atrocities. There is no escape from folk design in the university environment. What we’ve decided to do, as a group is to each pick a musical instrument we have no knowledge about and walk through the halls playing it as loudly as possible. I think I’m going to pick either cymbals or the slide trombone. If they wanna make design, we’re gonna make music. How hard can it be, right? I would like to encourage everyone else out there to try this technique as well. Maybe someone in your human resources department has just crafted a wonderful flyer that’s hanging next to your desk. You should probably try to go cancel some of your company’s health care benefits or fire someone. How tough can it be? Perhaps the custodial staff has made a nice sign that directs you to do something inane. I think it’s time for you to fire up the rubbish incinerator or take the company bulldozer out for a spin. How tough can it be, right?

Hands Were Lopped Off!

Last night Ann and I went to see the Cincinnati Shakespeare Festival’s interpretation of Titus Andronicus and it was super sweet! If you don’t believe me; scroll down and check the snapshot of the “Violence Guide” below. When they have to invent graphic icons for cannibalism and live burials you know it’s going to be interesting. I’ve learned from Ann that this was one of Shakespeare’s earlier and lesser known plays and during its original release it met with quite a bit of criticism. I won’t ruin the story and say what happens (as I’m guessing most haven’t read it)—just know that it’s not your typical Shakespearian play. At one point, near the end of the show, blood actually squirted from the stage all the way back into the seventh or eighth row of the audience!

The CSF performs in the Empire Theatre on Race near Garfield Street in downtown Cincinnati. Their theater space is great. With seating for probably 100 or so audience members the setting is engaging and the sound quality is excellent, you can even buy seats where you would sit up on the stage during the performance. I can’t wait to go again.

One of The Scariest Trends in Education

In ten or so minutes I’ll be going to a Curriculum Committee meeting where someone from the College of Business will be proposing a new Masters program that only requires 10 courses to be completed. That’s right a Masters of Science in Business that only takes 30 short semester hours. During this meeting I will bring up my objection for such an abbreviated course of study to be considered a “Masters” level education, and everyone will look at me with disdain. Why is this the accepted trend in Business programs? Doesn’t a Masters degree mean anything to them? I just spent some time looking around and this is actually the norm. Super accelerated weekend Masters degrees. Get ’em while they’re hot! Give a University $20K or so and 24 of your weekends and viola, you have a Masters in Business.

There is Only Conceptual Art, Conceptual Design Will Never Exist

Just because a work of conceptual art is made by a designer, that does not make it conceptual design. There is no such thing as conceptual design.

I read this article today on the AIGA Voice site about “Conceptual Design” and what follows is a portion of my rant/response:

Design does not allow for a conceptual movement. If I were to pick up a rock and call it “art”—like it or not, it then becomes art. It may not be good art, but it is art nonetheless. Design doesn’t work in this same way. I can’t simply pick up a rock and call it a design. Design is something else. It includes the communication of a specific message plus art. Conceptual design would only be half of a design.

I can see a case for design being experimental in its delivery method or media (i.e. printed on food or a message comprised of everyday objects)—but without successfully conveying a specific message I think we’re back to art. And I’m not even hung up on legibility—I’m simply referring to communication. Art implies some levels of interpretation without specific communication or message resolution being necessary; design does not. Design needs to communicate something specific to a broader audience. Design needs a resolution.

Additionally, I’m not so sure that as designers we should want to be included among the conceptual artists. There’s a certain amount of public and professional respect that comes from successfully realized calculated thought. I believe it to be a core mission of design to intellectually challenge its audience through engagement in a concept as opposed to spouting off dictums causing further disassociation from that audience. Conceptual artists don’t really care if you “get it”; as designers we should care.

“They’re Takin’ Our Jobs!!!”(screamed in a funny South Park accent)

Aside from the pot-smoking derelicts I have the fortune of calling neighbors, I can think of no other single group of people who are more paranoid about their future than graphic designers. And the truth of the matter is that it’s time to work hard and get over it.

The work that we do as graphic designers is important. Just because someone who is not a designer may have a difficult time defining graphic design—they will probably still know that they need it. They, (average consumers) may not be able to describe how we do something, but for the most part, they recognize that they couldn’t do it themselves and they recognize that they don’t want to live in a world without it. Think about that for a minute: A World With No Graphic Design. What would the grocery store look like? How would someone drive a car? The stuff that we make is not optional.

And that’s why graphic design will always be here. However where some of the disagreements and worries should really start to come into play is when one considers good vs. bad graphic design. At its core, whether you like it or not, GRAPHIC DESIGN = 50% ART + 50% MESSAGE. A strong graphic design communicates (notice I used the word “communicate” and not the word “legible”) and functions as seamlessly as it is aesthetically beautiful. The art is not more important than the message and vice versa. When designers recognize this, they then posses the opportunity to make good graphic design. Of course there’s quite a bit more than that going into good design, (education, influences, travel, experimentation, taste, literacy, intelligence, etc…) but this is the start.

If you’re going to worry about something, don’t worry about whether graphic design is going to be around forever—because it will; instead worry about whether or not you’re going to be a part of it.