Comments on: I Am Not A Graphic Designer

By: Marc-Oliver

Marc-Oliver — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:18:06 +0000

Interesting article. I really enjoyed it and have to add some thoughts. Let me put it this way; Graphic Designers just made things look pretty and information easy to consume. Back in the days they were at the end of a long developing process, were business and marketing guys were sitting on the same table to discuss the next steps and tell other people excactly what to do – including graphic designers.

Nowadays designers sit on this table. In some cases, they are the leaders – the visionary people. Think of the iMac designer or the designer of the social media campaign for Obama. You just can’t call them “graphic designers” anymore. And the work they do, is often not graphic design at all.

Regards,
Marc-Oliver

By: Nandini Ramakuru

Nandini Ramakuru — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:22:15 +0000

Mark,

I really liked the method you used to get people’s attention. Totally got my attention. And definitely provoked me to think immediately.

But I’m writing to thank you for explaining the exact meaning of “graphic design” and how it has now evolved into “visual communication”. Reading it has made the whole thing crystal clear now. And now finally I can wrap my head round it.

I’m a student of architecture and wanted to pursue a purer form of design in the future. So I have been looking up all my options. But somehow I was always stumped when I looked for “graphic design” or “visual communication”, and yes I definitely wikied it, which got me even more confused by the end. But your explanation was so precise and to the point. It’s almost black and white now.

I write this mainly out of appreciation and gratitude for now I have a clearer idea in my head as to what I want to do.

Thank you.

By: jonas

jonas — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 02:47:18 +0000

Visual design

Visual Design is the design working in any media or support of visual communication[1][2][3]. This is a correct terminology to cover all types of design applied in communication that uses visual channel for transmission of messages[4][5][6], precisely because this term relate to the concept of visual language of some media and not limited to support a particular form of production, as do the terms graphic design (graphic)[7] or Interface design (electronic media).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_design

By: Moey’s Not a Graphic Designer, He’s A Plagiarist | Industrial Brand

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:15:52 +0000

[...] I could list line-by-line a comparison between my original words written in early 2007 and his article more than a year later, but I won’t bother. I’m not even going to link to Moey’s website as I don’t want to contribute to his search engine page rankings, but you can find him easily enough on Google. Or take a look at this screen capture of his article and compare it to my original post “I Am Not a Graphic Designer”. [...]

By: Mark Busse

Mark Busse — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:48:52 +0000

Here’s an interesting take on this issue of what to call ourselves on Icograda’s blog.

I agree with Roy Clucas that it’s time for a change, though I’m not sure I like the sound of “Informatic Visiography” as an alternative to “Communication Design”.

Ahh, the debate goes on.

By: Anas Shanti | Brandevise

Anas Shanti | Brandevise — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 22:12:20 +0000

Bottom-line! although the term “Graphic Designer” best describe a designer involved in the the graphical part of design, but if you ask what is graphic design, i personally don’t have an answer, all i know that a graphic designer creates graphical elements, that goes on print or web or any other media, you can of course argue forever about this, for example, a logo is a graphical element, therefore the designer who designed that logo is a graphic designer right!

Nowadays, designers are looking for an alternative title to describe what they do and honestly they do allot and they need to feel appreciated, designers are regularly exposed to a ridiculous amount of information that they have to deal with.

Now! A “Communication Designer” literary means “us who are able to design communication”; do we really?! we actually don’t design communication, communication comes to us designed already. our job it to covey this information to the public. isn’t it true that some great designers cannot clearly communicate themselves!

communications require -as far as i know- two factors; sending & receiving information, in this case we need results.

that’s why we are not in the business of communication, yes we contribute and improve ways of communication, but communication itself is an Art by it self. so let us stop giving our selves names that we shouldn’t.

our involvement in the communication part is in our ability to understand and comprehend information briefed to us by the client so that we could visually render it for the targeted audience.

So what are we designers for then? hmmm.

I believe a “Brand Designer” is more descriptive, businesses commonly use the word “Brand/s” so let’s not worry them not understanding what we do if we say we are “Brand Designers” they will get it. designers actual role is to deliver a message that drive sales, that’s our job. if you are still in it for the money!! :)

By: I Am Not A Graphic Designer at Industrial Brand | Graphic design blog articles

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:52:28 +0000

[...] View original here: I Am Not A Graphic Designer at Industrial Brand [...]

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 01:53:56 +0000

“As I imagine the next ten years and a continuing trend of ‘design democratization’ where anyone with Adobe Creative Suite, camera, printer and Internet access can potentially teach themselves the basics and begin selling their services as a ‘graphic designer’….”

I am reminded of a line from On Writing, by Stephen King, “A good writer can become better, but a bad writer can never become good.”

Only the intervention of talent can render the truly gifted from the truly bad.

By: Sharisa Petrowsky

Sharisa Petrowsky — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:14:02 +0000

Nearing graduation this spring, I fully appreciate this argument as I too have recently been struggling with the idea of becoming a “graphic designer.” Don’t get me wrong, I have a passion and eagerness for design and find the opportunities the profession has to offer to be more exciting and diverse with each encounter in this flux market. Yet, recent experiences have come to make me question the appropriateness of “graphic” in the title “graphic designer.” At my recent place of employment I have found my co-workers interchangeably use the terms: graphic designer, graphics designer, graphic artist, etc. Which invariably seem to assimilate my profession primarily with pictures and images, a mere layout artist. It’s frustrating to me that clients I have, even the clients I don’t have, just the whole annoying failure of the world at large (even my closest friends and family) to recognize and understand what it is I do. “Graphic designer” inherently connotates that I make graphic images: pictures, illustrations, layouts, charts, diagrams, graphs. Yet, I do not think this could be more off base from what we actually do as designers. I agree that much of what we do as professionals is based on style and aesthetics. Our designs must be attractive and well thought in order to get individuals attention in the fast-paced environment we exist, but this is in addition to the more important artistic translation of concepts, strategies, sound, animation, interactive, web, environmental, message making solutions that efficiently satisfy our clients’ design problems. Overall I think the attitude toward design itself is beginning to change. Maybe this is partially due to the wide expanses in computer revolution and multimedia phenomena but the role of so called “graphic designers” has come to extend far beyond the historical associations with typography, layout, and design that resulted in visual identity for print. When I introduce myself as a graphic designer I feel like there are a small circle of similar responses: “So what is it exactly you do?” “You make logos and ‘stuff.’ That’s cool.” “Interesting.” And then there’s the always all too common, “Ohhhhh, so you’re an art major.” I think it’s time to take back (if we ever had any) the respect and admirability that our creative and conceptual skills deserve. It’s frustrating to me how much of our professional careers are misinterpreted by society. In general terms and maybe this is a biased opinion because I am a designer myself, but I feel that designers are intelligent, curious, well informed people with exceptional critical thinking skills that that ultimately assist in making the world function as a smooth and well oiled machine. My view is that the adjective “graphic” is somewhat limiting and doesn’t say enough about what we do as designers. Despite common misconceptions there is a large large difference between producing graphically appealing “pretty” and “professional” designs vs. “embracing the reality of design as a process, as a means of creating communication solutions” as Mark Busse so elegantly put it himself. Lately it has been very aggravating working with clients who tell me “make this look professional” or “clean it up” without being given any information relative to my audience, context, how it will be used, or what the heck it’s even for without having to ask myself. Without that knowledge it seems like designing something successful is just a flat out shot in the dark. And if that means this is what being a graphic designer is about, then I am not. I don’t know if changing our professional title is the complete solution, but I think it might help clean up some of the misconceptions people have about what we actually do in our professional careers. More and more I feel as if I am hearing the terms “communication design” and “information design” being thrown around and maybe that is a good sign that “graphic design” is on its way out. In addition, some individuals feel (designers included) that changing our name will damage the reputation we have earned as capital G “Graphic Designers” throughout history. Yet in my personal reality and experiences we don’t even have a reputation. At large I am surrounded by people who think I “just” make logos. So what is in a name? For me personally, considering this is what I want to spend the rest of my life pursuing, I think there’s A LOT to be said about a name. A name is extremely impressionable upon outsiders unfamiliar with the field and important when promoting our values, beliefs, ultimately what we stand for to the business world. It’s a legitimate debate and something of definite relevance we all need to begin considering as designers, but whether we keep this old terminology or revamp our own identity with a new professional title there is a higher call and responsibility for us to begin working together educating and facilitating a global interest and understanding in the value and relevance of designers.

By: SMR

SMR — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 06:07:29 +0000

As a student I hope that you will all be encouraged to hear that universities are beginning to teach “Graphic Design” as more than simply the construction of a pretty picture. Through my years in school I have learned that design requires more than an aesthetically pleasing image; it requires a specific message. If the image fails to communicate it does not matter how great the image looks; it still fails to fulfill its purpose.