Wow! Tell us what you really think Nate. LOL

OK, I’ll stick my neck out and say I second your motion regarding your Number 3 pick. Dare I say ‘One Trick Pony’?

(Notice my carefully worded response so as to avoid Google bots forever documenting it for easy access.)

Great entry, (especially re: Baseman, I thought I was the only one!) but what’s wrong with Fresca? What’s wrong with good design on a bad product, for that matter? What’s wrong with good design ever? I’m probably reading too much into what may have been a lighthearted comment. But if you’re at an agency/studio and you’re tasked with designing a package for a less-than stellar product, I don’t think that’s any reason for the designer to not do his/her best. (Unless it’s like, a veal menu, pornography, cigarettes or something on a moral level) It’s simply the designer holding up their part of the deal.

As for feeling ‘conned’ after buying a well-designed product/package and getting crap, that’s a risk we knowingly take. Sort of like a sacrifice that you make when you take the plunge for a particular item based on the way it looks or feels. I was in Tower Records yesterday, which, like I think all the Tower Records in the city, has been closing for 2 months now. The store was practically picked clean and all that were left were CDs that you’ve never heard of or never wanted when they were new. But it was kinda cool, because unlike the usual record selection, which, at any given time, looks the same at every record store, I saw hundreds of album covers for the first time. All the stuff that’s usually pushed to the back of the rows was now prominently in front, on half-empty shelves. And there were a lot of covers that caught my eye. There were a handful that I wanted to buy, but didn’t, both because I am poor and becuase it’s two weeks before Christmas. But I thought about it, and was fully ready to pay for a CD with an interesting design that I completely expected would be bad. Imagine all the thousands of people that had already passed over the remaining CDs, even at a 60% price reduction. Who knows? It could also be great. But at that point I’d be content with just looking at the pretty pictures/artwork.

Because its tacky, Drew. It’s tacky. Enter it under illustration if it matters to you. Who else are we trying to impress with our names listed so many times? My mother would love something like that on her fridge, I’m sure, but not too many others. Credit where credit’s due is never a faux-pas, but save it for actual conversations, not for wall-bragging.

Nate,

I’ll disagree with you regarding the credits. I’ve listed my name several times on the same piece for various credits pertaining to a project I’ve entered. Not because I am after some ego boost, but rather because they simply asked for the information.

I think this is pretty normal for a small design firm like mine. If it’s an identity piece and they ask for ‘Designer’, ‘Illustrator’ I’ll enter my name in both. Because I did both. I am not going to pay more money to enter the same piece in a new category. Landor has the budget for that but not most independent designers.

If I am misunderstanding you post please correct me.

I gotta agree with Drew and Vonster on issue #1. I’ve always just filled out each category because I thought that’s what we were supposed to do. It was in no way for an ego boost.

Hey, I never said this would be easy, guys. But next time you fill out a form for a competition I think a few of you may give a moment’s worth of pause to consider where your ultimate responsibilty to the project lays. Also agreement isn’t mandatory. So there’s that.

I’m going to respond to item #1 because I have entered my name in multiple categories/roles and I think it is warranted. It’s not about ego, but full disclosure.

I have a partnership. Myself and my partner Adam are involved in every job that comes through this office. Sometimes it’s a 50-50 split, 70-30, 95-5. Partnerships are founded on trust and mutual respect, so Adam and I ALWAYS put both our names down as Creative Directors for every project as a way to tell ourselves and the general public that Volume is indeed a collaboration, not, say, a Pentagram where the partners all run these vertical teams. At the same time, one partner very often does end up running the lion’s share of the project and that’s where we credit one of us as a single art director and/or designer.

Second, in small offices like ours it is very often that the partner is playing both the art director and designer role. For instance, on the ReadyMade book I probably did 90% of the actual design. But for the other 10% I did art direct two other designers when the workload ballooned to more than I could handle alone. When it began to win awards I felt they needed to be acknowledged. But since I did do the lion’s share of the actual design——including concept, layout, production, edits, etc.——I felt that my name should certainly be on the design line, too. I’ve already received an email sent to one of these other designers (who was a freelancer and hasn’t worked here in 2 years) from a student asking about “how she came up with the design for the ReadyMade book.” And that was WITH my designer credit. So you can see how vague credits can lead to misunderstandings to who did what.

Which leads into my last point. When I was just starting school back in late 80s, the trend very often was to credit only the firm and the partner/principal. My feeling is that anyone who touched the project should be credited and that the winning firm should be as detailed as possible on who did what. My anecdotal inspiration is that when I was a freelancer at Elixir Design back in 1999, I worked for BARELY A DAY on a catalog design. I think I maybe created a few type treatments that might not have been ultimately used. When it was published in Graphis and CA Exhibit a year later, they credited me as a designer. It seemed a little ridiculous to me at the the time that they included my name, but I now appreciate the effort Elixir makes to honor and respect everyone who works with them, no matter how small the contribution.

So it’s not always about egos, folks.

“Well, you’ve really built yourself up into something.” —Jerry Seinfeld (to George Costanza)

I know that art is subjective, so I don’t always expect to agree with everything I read here, but this post is just condescending. I think Nate needs to take his self-righteousness down a few notches. At the risk of sounding cliche, who died and made you design God?

I won’t rebut any one point because my issue is not so much with what he said, but how he said it. Comments like “you have produced a soulless mockery” and “just so everybody who sees it knows you are the mother who did that crap” leave a taste in the reader’s mouth that rival only that left by a can of Mountain Dew. (for those besides Nate, that means bad)

Maybe this was intended to be tongue-in-cheek and I’m missing it, but I don’t care for a “let me tell you what good design is” tone. Still, I love that Nate has a soapbox on which to share his opinions and that I (and others) have the opportunity to reply. Keep up the great site, BADG!

Well thanks Mike, I was beginning to believe I was evil-incarnate, that I had inadvertently mocked the very foundations of graphic design.

Dennis, tone in online writing is a difficult thing. Nobody died and made me Design God (Paul Rand did, and he passed it to Milton. see, that was a joke!), and I’m not trying to tell the world What Design Is According To Nate. Well, scratch that, yes I am. But I’m not expecting anyone to adhere to it, or to follow it.

We lose sight quite often that the graphic design bloggitysphere is comprised of Blogs. Personal weblogs. Especially with group-writing sites like BADG, Design Observer, or Speak Up it is easy to look at these the same way we would read CA or HOW or STEP. Except that every site you visit is an OpEd site, and this article is no different. I’ve been smacked around in the past for attacking a person’s character when what I really disagree with is their argument. This article is my opinion, and I posted it because that opportunity has been afforded to me. If you disagree, we have a space for that right here. But if you just don’t like me, couldn’t you just call me names behind my back like everyone else?

Nate, your text is like the gospel of John, you are very lord-like and being that Christmas is here soon, I hope your delivery from the womb to the earth for the 2,0006th time is very smooth. I think you missed the blueberry boat on #2. Most bands, small time musicians, idiots, jerks, and for the most part anyone I deal with can’t afford to pay sht for real screenprinting. Most of the bands I work with say “make it look like screenprinting because we can’t afford the actual process.” Advertising is for jerks, design is for idiots. I can’t believe I ended up in this 3rd world job category we call design. I also think you are correct about #4 as well. Your opinions are dead-on. But again, most people don’t want to pay for originality and I’m not willing to give it away for free anymore. If you give a client 2 options 1) I’ll give you 3-6 original branding ideas for $1200, pick one, there’s your logo after revs, etc. OR 2) I’ll give you 3-6 ideas for $250, pick one, done. They’re going to pick option #2, and that means they get clip art modified and 5 hours of my time max (which usually means 8-10 hours as we designers know). No one wants to pay for originality anymore, especially in cities like Rockford, IL,. I’ve never once had a client say what’s the difference between $1200 of your time and $250. And I’m not willing to tell them because honestly, being cheap for the sake of paying bills asap is the bottom line in this garbage dump field. That goes for illustration as well. I’m talking hand-drawn, not wacom tablet sht. Once a month someone says “I hear you do portraits, illustrations, etc. what do you charge?” Once I tell them there’s 2 price packages for 2 different sizes, 10”x8” or 24”x18”, and they have to pay for the materials. they freak out. Want to know what those price packages are with materials?! $250.00 & $500.00… not one person wants to move forward after they get an estimate. Rich white people are poorer in spirit and professionalism than the homeless around here. NO ONE And thus, they get no illustrations. No originality. Free is for students, Free is for being young and making a name, not when you’ve reached the 10 year mark in this dump called design. You think a doctor does a surgery for free if it’s not his wife? Bullsh*t. Design is for idiots and I’m one of them.

As a practioner or #2 and #4 I have to take some offense. These can both be quite appropriate solutions to a given problem. BUT!! BUT, I have to admit seeing this aesthetic over and over and over again (i.e. last 3 PRDAs) I can relate to the frustration. My point is #2 and #4 can be done well, and interestingly enough by a few here and there, that it should be allowed to continue… :) And you’re way off on baseman, the guy is awesome. As far as the entries thing. whatever, it’s the right of all designers to go through that phase for a while, we usually all grow out of it.

I realize this is a design blog and all, but does anybody have a clue about spelling and grammar?

Occurances?