Re: Step Away From The Computer

As someone who took both free-spirited art classes and strict architectural drafting courses, I now find myself with a bit of pencil anxiety. I either feel like my drawings should be messy, charcoal expressions or neat, orthogonal renderings. For graphic design, I am more likely to begin an assignment with an internet search on the subject matter. Then, scribbling notes on a pad is followed by computer design. I am more likely to create a collage or color palette on paper than draw. Maybe one day I'll pick it up again. It is good for the eyes to step away from the screen sometimes.

Re: Step Away from the computer

Stepping away from the computer…

I have to start off by saying I go completely "gaga" over any person who sketches and draws well. I love these types of people…I don't even have to know them. If you can draw/sketch, I am in love with you.

Interestingly enough being a bit out dated and from the school of pen and ink, I think sketching is very important. It's almost like crawling before walking. I think I've mentioned I had an Architecture professor while studying Landscape Architecture who was adamant about folks knowing how to sketch and draw prior to getting on the computer and designing in CAD, Illustrator, FormZ, etc. As you can imagine this professor was partial to computers - but he did learn the programs. When I think back to it, most of my best work in design school came from sketching/drawing first. I think the process freed me somehow and made me more creative not just while learning but in everyday life. 

Working at a University I get mixed emotions about design schools particularly Architecture schools that teach CAD and other drawing programs to first year students and expect that form of teaching to be the "only way". I think it's important that  these students (or any design student) know simple sketching concepts or how to draw as well or even know what a 5H, 4B, or 8B  pencil is. More so, the importance of hand lettering, measuring, etc. There have been too many times that I have see students not obtain jobs in these fields because they are unable to sketch out quick concepts. 

I can honestly say that I don't sketch much know as I should, mainly because I am always at the computer and some parts of me had been a tad bit afraid to sketch after not doing it consistently for some years. I do think since attending UB I have pulled out my pen, pencil, and AD markers more to help better process my ideas (on multiple sheets of paper and sticky notes I might add). When starting a design project I usually pull out a few of my old sketch books or fundamental design books on presentation, and/or conceptual blockbusting to get ideas flowing. I am beginning to enjoy sketching again but then too it's also making me not want to go to the computer.

Re: Step Away from the computer

I wonder if its a generational thing? I find whenever I don't start with pen and paper, storyboards, or brainstorming, the project takes longer, never looks as good, and rarely has as strong a concept as when I do it the right way. Even in motion graphics, this proves true. I have a series of motion pieces I did starting on the computer, and a recent series where I storyboarded them with the client, sketched horribly, and the final outcome was 200% better than the old ones!

My craptastic illustration skills. 

which turned into this video. 

This last video I created completely on the computer... and it shows.

 

Re: Stepping Away from the computer

I am horrible horrible horrible at drawing so my ideas don't always come out the way I would want them to on paper but I have found it helpful to sketch things out until I can make an idea work. Sometimes my ideas don't work out at all and I think its nice to only have done the sketching work then to have things on the computer. I do tend to gravitate towards the computer in most cases but lately I have been trying to sketch more. Hopefully I can make it a habit.

Re: Stepping Away From the Computer

This topic just came up with my design team. In fact, I recently bought each of them sketch pads and pencils and told them to start using them every day. I do feel you can get a lot more ideas down on paper then you can on screen. Designing on screen has technical needs, and when you take that part out you are free to explore as quickly as the ideas come to you. Ed is also a big promoter of sketching, and although I will never try to sell myself as a sketch artist, some of my best ideas have come out of sketching first.

Re: Stepping away from the computer

I usually start with the computer first but if my mind feels cluttered I will take to pen and paper for a few rounds of sketching. I've noticed myself using this method less and less and absorbing myself in the computer more and more with each project.

If you already have a clear idea in mind then pen and paper doesn't seem necessary but if you're stuck it definitely helps out.

Re: Stepping away from the computer

I'm guilty of heading to the computer first, but usually only to gather ideas first. See what other designers are doing, what my competition is, what styles might fit whatever I'm doing the best. I'll sketch something out or make a list of ideas, or create a folder of ideas-- from color palettes, to possible images, themes, screen shots of things that I find inspiring, etc.

By the time I do get to the computer, I find that I usually need to follow all my bad ideas down their respective rabbit holes and flesh them out before I can get rid of them and narrow in on the good stuff.

RE: Step Away from the Computer

I believe in starting with pencil sketches, but sometimes you just don't have time. But actually, it is easier to sketch quickly what is on your mind with a pencil and paper rather than software. I too, find myself doodling ideas while at work or in other classes. My mind tends to work differently in front of a computer, maybe its because I am still learning the software. I find that the computer can hold me back from being creative initially.

Re: Step away from the computer

I think there is something about having a pencil in hand that helps unlock solid design ideas. I also think it is important to write content by hand as well. When I have an article of essay to write, I often head straight from the computer to start structuring my thoughts; however, there is something about putting pen to paper that really helps me organize my ideas. It is also helpful to have sketches and notes written out to prove that your work is truly your work. Journalist, for instance, keep notes and drafts in case the authenticity of their work is ever questioned.

RE: Step Away from the Computer

I'm often thinking about my projects as I ride the bus, sit in meetings, read the newspaper, or work on other stuff--it's on the back burner in my brain. I always doodle at that stage to think of different layouts or illustration ideas. My drawings are almost never good--if they are, it's an accident--but they give me a sense of spacing and help me figure out my concept. However, it doesn't give me a good idea of what I'm capable of. I have a lot to learn still about how these programs work, and many times a concept that I come up with is a lot harder to implement with my abilities.

I think stepping away from the computer to look at stuff around you is also a good idea to get ideas flowing. Design doesn't function in a vacuum--when thinking about projects, I google endlessly, I look at magazines, signs on the way to work, storefronts, book covers, graffiti, everything to get inspiration. You can't dive in not knowing what some of the standards are for the type of product you are creating.

I will say, however, that no amount of mapping out would prevent me from the seemingly limitless amount of time I spend moving boxes and text this way and that until they look just right--that's just the way I am.

Step Away from the Computer

The computer has become the designers security blanket. Theyre expensive, we love them, they give us cachet but they also give us limits that only pen/cil and paper can overcome. Architects dont build buildings by just starting construction and seeing where things go. Same principals should go for graphic designers. Our computers are a tool to execute our ideas and our best ideas come from our mind to our hand. I would argue the best design work still shows the hand of the designer in some form or fashion. For a designer to become a great designer, they must start with drawing. As usual, Sesame Street put it best.

 

Re: Stepping Away from the Computer

Stepping away from the computer, something that I happen to have not been doing enough of lately. 

My love for art began with the basics, paper and pencils, in grade school and I find myself lately going to the computer before anything else. Don't get me wrong I'll sketch at the drop of a hat if theres a piece of paper in front of me, but I find myself not going to the paper and pencil at the beginning of a design project. 

With todays technology so rapidly growing and every answer easily at our fingertips it is sometimes very hard to step away. I am guiltily of it, as soon as I hear something I have a question about I say: "I'm gonna ask Google." (Rebecca can testify to me saying that almost every class) :- ) Although technology is wonderful I don't ever feel that the paper and pencil will be a mystery. Stepping away from the computer is and always will be useful. 

Rebecca, Thanks for bringing up this topic. You just encouraged me to start sketching a little bit more. :-) 

Re: Stepping Away from the Computer

Step far, far away... I really don't think it matters if you know how to draw. Stick figures, lists, flow charts, whatever; anything goes. The point is to get the concepts coming directly from your brain.

In some form or another, our computers are now the delivery mechanism for virtually all of our communication. If we begin that communication before we've worked out our ideas, we allow our computer's microprocessor to "fill in our blanks." Moreover, anyone one else following the same approach will have a similar user experience, which means that there will be a tendency toward commonality in execution, no matter what the media happens to be.

The one thing which will always make you marketable and set you apart from others in your field will be your ability to come up with truly original ideas. I believe your chances to do so will increase exponentially if you can work out those ideas out before your fingers hit the keyboard.

Re: Stepping away from the computer

In the long run, I think it's really helpful to start on paper before moving to the computer. I have a much easier time working through ideas by sketching them out first and comparing them side by side (and then drawing a giant X through the ones I dislike). That being said, I don't think every project requires elaborate sketches. Most of my career has been on the corporate side of the spectrum, and I've found that playing with layouts right in the program can sometimes be quicker under a tight deadline. For a logo design, or anything that requires illustration, I would definitely choose working on paper first. A friend of mine always shows his process whenever he posts new illustration projects to his website. Check it out:
 http://jpflexnercreative.blogspot.com/search/label/LOGO%20DEVELOPMENT

Re: Stepping Away from the Computer

I do have to 100% agree with Rebecca on this. I am by far no Leonardo da Vinci nor will I ever paint a Mona Lisa, but I love to "doodle" and sketch out everything. In fact, I think it helps drain all the information out of my head. I have found that if a professor gives me an assignment, if I don't immediately start sketching something, I will know that that assignment will take me forever to complete. It is just a sign that I am not inspired by it. I will eventually complete it, but I will have to find something about it that inspires my creativty to become more active.

Sketching also helps me make complete thoughts. If I immediately go to the computer, I focus on one thing instead of the whole realm of the project or design. In turn, sketching for me is like making a big brainstorming web--almost like the ones I was made to do in grammar school. (Hmm... maybe I will have to send a Thank You card to my fourth grade teacher afterall.)

Stepping Away From the Computer

Whenever we get a new project, our first inclination is to run straight to the computer. This is the nature of our program, our line of work, and the time we live in, and I am as guilty as the next person. While the computer is almost always necessary to complete an assignment, sometimes stepping away from it for a moment can be just as helpful.

One of the most helpful tips I've learned since starting the program is to sketch out my ideas on paper before even approaching a computer. When I need to create multiple designs for one layout, I can sketch them all out in a matter of minutes, and then it's just a matter of executing it on the computer. If I try to do this on the computer first, I can spend a lifetime moving text and image boxes around on my screen trying to get them just right.

The article Why Graphic Designers Should Learn to Draw, by Douglas Bonneville, says "...but drawing by hand is nonetheless critical at some level, especially during the initial stages of a design. Brainstorming with a pencil is simply impossible to improve on." The author makes sure to say that you don't have to draw to be a good designer, but that it seems to help. The full article can be found here.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Do any of you find it helpful to think on paper before creating a design on the computer?

RE: Rebranding

The first rebranded logo that came to my mind was the Orioles bird. To celebrate the twentieth anniversary of Camden Yards, a retro cartoon bird was created. I was under the impression that it was a return to the original logo, but according the Orioles website, it is actually a new design that uses elements from the 1970 and 1983 versions. I prefer the logo that looks less cartoonish. Something about the retro bird reminds me of Family Guy although I understand the reasoning behind reminding the fans (and loyal customers) of when the team was doing well. Maybe that memory brought more tickets and wins this past season.

 

 



Re:branding disaster

I remember that Gap logo fiasco so clearly...Before the change, it didn't incite any kind of emotion in me towards the Gap brand, but when they changed it, it did. I'm not sure why, but it just seemed very out of character for the company.  I don't know if it was just the notion of change that made everyone cry out, but it wasn't received well.

As far as logos go, I hate the most recent Olympic logo. I think it us ugly, unclear, and bulky, and looks like crappy grafitti art from 1990. I would say I'd redo it, but who can say if I'd provide something any better.  As far as great logos go, i don't have any particular favorite. I have to say that I am, however, drawn to wine and beer logos, and not just because I love the product! I just think that  branding is obviously so important to a product like that especially when there are several versions under one brand, and they make it look cohesive but still different.

Re: Rebranding

The first rebranding that stuck out in my mind was Tropicana. I have to agree with Elizabeth, the first time I saw the new branding I thought it was the store brand. I am not sure why they decided to rebrand but if I was in the store looking for Tropicana, I would never think to pick that box up and put it in my cart. I think that Tropicana probably lost a good amount of customers which is why they went back to the old design. People might not notice design when it's all they know but as soon as it changes it's the first thing they have something to say about.

Rebranding Disaster...

I love this topic. In Season 2 of The Wire, Stringer Bell and Co. gave us a perfect example of how productive and sales generating (or poorly in a Karmic sense) re-branding any product can be. While they were selling drugs, simply re-naming the poor quality "bin Ladin" as "WMD" moved the product.

Blackwater, a security contractor, infamous for shooting down 17 unarmed Iraqis in a market, renamed and rebranded itself as Ze (pronounced "Zee"). While the logo is much more corporate and "designerly", no one knows how to pronounce the new name. Also, the founder has been implicated in the murders of two  people who were cooporating in an investigation of the Company formerly Known as Blackwater.

On second thought, maybe this is a delightful re-brand and a thought provoking conceptual idea...

Project 2 Comps

Hey All-

I will not be in class tonight, so I was wondering if you would provide me feedback on here. My company is the nonprofit BARCS (Baltimore Animal Rescue & Care Shelter). My new idea for BARCS is a mobile vet van, Rescue Rover, which will travel around the Baltimore area only. This van will differ from competitors in the area because it will be 24 hour emergency service with no appointment necessary. Services are free if you offer BARCS a small donation. I wanted the van to resemble the simplicity of a human ambulance. Here is the van vector:

I created a mobile ap for the service. It allows pet owners to request a service from Rescue Rover, then track the van using geolocation. The ap will inform the user of the arrival time and how far Rescue Rover is from your location.

Finally I have a mailer or print piece. It will be mailed to pet owners who have previously adopted animals from BARCS informing them our their new mobile vet, Rescue Rover. It is difficult to see on this white background, but it will be cut out as the paw print.

Have a great class everyone, Heather.

RE: Rebranding Disasters

My first thought of a rebranding disaster was Radio Shack's attempt to being cool, by changing their name to "The Shack."  By taking away the word "Radio," I feel like the company has lost that connection it had with it's audience, and the products that they sell.  I'm not a big fan of AOL's new logo, as they have added a period at the end of AOL, as well as a unique background image behind it, each time it is used.  That being said I would rebrand AOL's logo and eliminate the period and background, because it is not consistent and it could possibly confuse their audience.

RE: Rebranding Disasters

Ah the ever-changing Starbucks logo. While I don't see this as a disaster, I think it is an interesting look at the evolution of the company and the brand itself. As a kid, my dad owned a couple of coffee stands--drive through espresso joints on the side of the road--in Seattle. I'm familiar with the culture there and Starbucks was obviously there from the beginning. There are many, many, many small coffee shops in Seattle, all serving above par espresso, and Starbucks is a bit of a joke, even if people still go there. I think this attitude comes from the fact that it started out like the rest of the small coffee shops, but it morphed into a commercial giant, smashing competition in cities where there isn't the coffee industry that there is in Seattle, and spreading to other countries that probably had no idea they needed espresso.

When I look at the first logo, it represents to me the kind of thing that would have been produced for a small coffee shop in Seattle. It's a little off the wall and wacky. Then we see it change to a more commercialized (and perhaps the least successful of the logos) version, followed by the one I was the most familiar with growing up. I like this logo, but I do think the newest logo is the most streamlined, clean, and simple. While it no longer reflects the company's Seattle roots, it is appropriate for what the company has become--a nationally recognized chain. They don't even need the words anymore, just the streamlined symbol and the color green. 

Re: Rebranding Disasters

They are part of Delta now, but when Northwest Airlines redid their logo I was sort of apalled. The original was SO much more clever...

The new one didn't even look more modern than the original.

And the one that has always bothered me is Verizon. It's sort of like the visual equivalent of mixing metaphors, in my opinion. Where do you focus?

Side Note: Brands & Branding

Not a branding disaster but a little something on brands and branding....

The video below is a 5-year old girls take on Brands that I came across while working on a project for my Words & Images class last semester.

Enjoy!

via: 1/2

re: Rebranding Disaster!

I know you asked for a fail, but I wanted to share a success in my eyes:

This is a really nice job of updating a logo without losing brand integrity. 

If I had the ability to rebrand any logo, it would be for IKEA. 

Their logo just doesn't do justice for the brand of the store. I would want to see something a little more hip and modern. And the primary colors just aren't working for me. 

Re: Rebranding Disasters

Science Fiction Channel
Since Elizabeth stole mine, lets talk about how SciFi changed the spelling of its name to "syfy".

I guess the science fiction channel forgot to check the urban dictionary because "syfy" is a slang term for ..... wait for it.... SYPHILIS! LOL

 I, of course, had no idea that "syfy" was a slang term for an STD, but I would hope the company would have done a little research prior to changing something so drastic. They changed the spelling of the name because the company was unable to trademark "sci-fi," so they decided to alter its spelling.

Re: Rebranding Disaster

Kathy Harvey of Harvey & Daughters, talked to my Word & Images class last semester. Her company had recently done some rebranding work for Phillips Seafood Restaurants.

The originial logo:

The new logo:

 H&D also did some packaging design for the company to update the design.

I think that redesigning and updating a logo for a company that is well-known to the public can be tricky. Sometimes loyal customers get upset when extremely noticeable design changes are made to certain products. Tropicana is an excellent example of this. In Phillips case, however, the logo is similar to the original logo. It's just a touch less ancient looking. The packaging is also cleaner and simpler. I think the redesign was successful.

Re: Rebranding Disaster

I'm not sure this really counts as a failed rebranding, but one thing that popped into my head while reading this post is Pepsi's constantly changing design. The company is smart enough to not change the look significantly so that it becomes unrecognizable, but I have never understood their need to change the packaging design every few years.

Elizabeth's comment also made me think about how difficult it can be to recognize a favorite brand on the shelf when they change the packaging significantly. I usually figure out pretty quickly that it's just a new look and the same product I enjoy, but I always take an extra second to make sure I'm buying the right thing. It seems like companies would want to avoid confusing their customers and potentially losing a sale.

Re:Rebranding Disaster

As we all know, rebranding is more than just a logo change. When Comcast renamed itself "Xfinity," in hopes of Comcast subscribers forgetting the years of being overcharged and neglected from a Customer Service standard, the design world must have sighed.
Now mind you, they are still Comcast. Xfinity is just the name for their triple play service packages, forcing users into phone, internet, and cable to get the best deal.
The rebranding was a fail, though its become an accepted name over time, because the consumer wanted to know what an "xfinity" was, and comcast failed to inform their audience successfully. This also failed to do what Comcast hoped to, which was take away the known customer service issues from their brand and drive sales. Xfinity tends to be referred to as Xfinity from Comcast, leading right back to the initial issue.

As for brands I would want to redesign? Anything that currently uses Papyrus in it's logo.

Re: Rebranding Disaster

At the risk of sounding like an old curmudgeon, for a society to go bat shit over a corporate logo change (e.g. the very loud backlash and subsequent switch-back of Tropicana's and Gap's logo) has to be a sign of a culture entering its terminal stage (surely, consumers have more pressing matters to attend to). I doubt this kind of stuff was news before the 1960s, but if someone knows of a pre- Mad Men era branding controversy, do tell.

Adding to my grumpiness over the matter, a marketing friend of mine sent me this link to famous logos re-imagined in Comic Sans imagining I would share in his hatred for the font since I can come off as a bit of a type snob.


Logos have become so culturally important to people and Comic Sans so hated that I've secretly developed an admiration for the font since joining this program. I'm not at the point where I'll use it but I'll certainly tip my cap to anyone or any movement that has the balls to push Comic Sans towards mainstream commercial territory.

Perhaps future generations of punks will use it to shove it in our snobby old faces for hating on it so much. Now I'm imagining my rebellious, hypothetical children looking through my portfolio and making fun of me for using Futura and Baskerville all the time.

Re: Rebranding Disaster

Tropicana was the first company to come to my mind about failed rebranding companies. I have to admit, I don't drink a lot of orange juice but I am familiar with Tropicana so when I have that random craving, I pick it up. I am also a savvy budgeter. I know that there are some foods you shouldn't buy the store brand for because it honestly tastes disgusting, but others taste almost exactly the same and you end up saving a couple bucks. When I went to the store to satisfy my craving for orange juice, I didn't even think twice about picking up Tropicana's new design product. I honestly thought it was a store brand and would get it for cheaper. When I got home and started examining it, I realized that only had I not saved any money, but this supposed store brand oj was the real deal. I was so put off by the design and I'm not even a loyal customer. But then I started thinking... was that the trick and their whole idea behind everything? They wanted to secretly make you think you were buying a store brand oj and start targeting the "buget savvy audience".

I'm not positive why they did it. I do know that they immediately changed it back to the original. It's one thing to change your logo but not your whole packaging product. People are loyal for a reason and changing the look of that product, no matter if it tastes the same or not, messes with people. People do not like that. I have learned in my undergraduate and even here that people do not like change--no matter how small it may be.

 

Rebranding Disaster!

As well all know rebranding is something that occurs often. Rebranding an entire companys logo can be very stressful for it's designer and can effect the companys current audience.
 

For example Gap looked to rebrand in 2010 and it caused a huge uproar. Gap consumers protested on Facebook and Twitter about how they hated the new logo design. The link below is an article that talks about how the repour from consumers made Gap rethink and scrap their design.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/12/gap-logo-redesign

While reading up on the failure of the Gap's rebranding an article, "Lessons to Learn from Gap’s Rebranding Disaster", made three great points. The article noted 3 things Gap's rebranding failure should have taught others who are looking to rebrand not to do:

1. Don’t underestimate the public’s awareness of design

2. When rebranding, make sure it effects the entire brand and not just the logo

3. Ironically, a redesign can show you just how much customer loyalty you have

To read more into the 3 things not to do when rebranding, the link is listed below.

http://www.allgraphicdesign.com/graphicsblog/2010/10/22/lessons-to-learn-from-gap%e2%80%99s-rebranding-disaster/


My questions to you all in reponse to this post are:

1. Can you name any other big companies who have rebranded and it was a fail, and why?
2. If you could rebrand a company's logo who would it be, and why ?

RE: Questions about Question 7

This past summer, I took a day-trip to Atlantic City. Nothing says class like drunk, elderly women yelling the most vile insults to each other in a casino restroom. I was also put off by the overcrowding on the beach and a pair of young men who seemed a little too eager for tourists to abandon their belongings while going for a swim. My snobbery aside, I do support Question 7 because casinos bring more tourists, local jobs and heightened security to the harbor. The youth-led flash mob violence and theft that occurred last spring makes me welcome a place that requires patrons to be at least 21 years of age. The Baltimore area needs all the help it can get.

 

As far as my ethics as a designer, I haven't yet had the opportunity to have a non-related paying client, but would put some thought into taking on a project if I felt it went against my personal morals. I now find myself supporting Question 6 because of a close and very loyal friend being in a same-sex union. Just because I may never marry someone that I love, it seems unfair for me to deny others the opportunity. While this goes against both my religious upbringing and my parents' political beliefs, the separation of church and state allows a loophole to prevent me from feeling like a total hypocrite. I once read that creative people are more open-minded when it comes to what is right or wrong. We think of a way to justify the means.

Re: Questions about Question 7

I have never been in a situation like that before. I found this website that has great references for anyone struggling with an ethical issue.
http://www.ethicsingraphicdesign.org/?page_id=443

On another note, in my Business Link class last night we had the opportunity to hear a copyright attorney lecture. TJ O'Donnell discussed how you are only copyrighting someones work if you are stealing the expression (design elements/style) not the ideas. Meaning its okay to use other's work for inspiration if you are only using their idea; but you must execute/express the idea in an original way.

Re: Questions about Question 7

In my past life I worked for the government and have had to deal with the same sort of issue - believe in an idea, be supportive, etc. I can count a number of times where I was just totally against an idea. I think for the most part there were times I put my feelings aside and rolled with the job. As Becky mentioned, I probably didn't put my best foot forward with that particular project but I got the job done to the best of my ability so that it could be over (and fast).

I think it's hard for most designers to put aside their feelings/values when working on a project because we are bonded to our work and our work represents us.

Re: Question 7

I have never had to design anything that I objected to on any level but I certainly have to photograph events that I would not attend on my own or am outright against. Most of the time these events are protests in Harford County. I have to cover these protests for the paper without any bias. I might not agree with the things people are saying but I still have to tell their story and opinions in my paper. As a photojournalist I have no problem doing this, it is my job and I will always do my best to cover an event the way it would have been seen by any person walking down the street.

Questions about Question 7

I think, unfortunately, when we're put into this position as in-house designers, we have to follow the company line. If the organization says, this is our stand, than we have to follow that. We have the choice to refuse and pay the penalty (be it demotion, losing our job, or just creating a hostile work environment for ourselves).
The other options include doing the work and doing it well, or my preferred method of subterfuge, do the work, and pardon my language, do a piss poor job of it.
We have the skill set to communicate messages clearly, so we also have the ability to muddle the message, though usually not purposefully.
I vote Muddle Question 7 til your message is indecipherable!

re: Questions about Question 7

If you've been honest with yourself and truly have conflicting feelings about the issue, go ahead and do the work. If you felt strongly one way or the other I think it would be a different story.

I do things for the petroleum industry's trade association, which advocates for the Keystone Pipeline, oil sands extraction and other issues that I don't agree with. The industry's "science" on global warming is hilarious, even to an uninformed semi-literate like me. But the way I look at it, I use petroleum products like everyone else and not every aspect of what they do is problematic for me. So I do the work.

I also do work for the ethanol industry, which may or may not be "greener" than oil, depending on who you believe. I think the bottom line is that most issues are complex, with legitimately different points of view, and unless you know there's some evil being done (hello Big Tobacco) you shouldn't sweat it too much.

Re: Questions about Question 7

I've never been in this situation as well, but I know as a designer there are going to be projects I am not comfortable with that could eventually cause controversy, but I'm not going to let that stop me from completing the project. However, if there is an assignment or job given to me that goes against my beliefs, I would most likely choose not to work on it, and risk being fired.  In the case with Question 7, you may have to jot down pros and cons and see which one out weighs the other. 

question 7 question

It seems like the Question 7 issue is nuanced for you as are many issues that we face as designers and just being in the workplace. I think it's rare to be 100% behind the cause you are working on from every angle. I think if you feel very strongly about your position, as Elizabeth's friend did, then it may be time to move on. But if your contribution isn't going to make or break an issue that you have nuanced feelings about, it might not be as big of a deal. 

I am an editor for a non-profit health care advocacy organization. When I started here, I was coming from a science background. I wrote and edited educational materials for 2 years. The transition from an educational company to a political organization was difficult as I often felt the language we were using was more manipulative than the science writing that I had been doing, which was devoid of emotion. We work on an issue that I find incredibly important and we do good, honest work. But sometimes I am turned off by the messaging that exists in the world of politics and I struggle with balancing truth and persuasion. 

Re: Questions about Question 7

I have not been put in this situation before, but I'm sure it's something every designer has thought about. People who work for a company have less choice about what assignments they work on. Depending on the size of the organization, they may be able to request an assignment they have a major problem with is given to someone else. Freelancers can more easily choose the work they take on, but several things factor in, such as they might really need the work and they don't want to get a reputation that they're hard to work with.

I agree with Elizabeth that any time you can separate yourself from the real meaning behind the work is best. If you are not totally opposed to something, but only confused about which way you lean, it is probably a good idea to take on an assignment to the best of your ability.

Check Out Google's Doodle Today...

...if you haven't already. For fans of Winsor McCay, Chris Ware, etc. It's beautifully done.

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-winsor-mccay-doodle-20121015,0,6405297.story

Re: Questions about Question 7

I have never faced that problem while designing but have had the aftereffects of a project make me a bit embarrassed to be involved.

My first graphic design projects outside of the classroom were for a non-profit group that was managed by my supervisor at Buffalo City Hall. My intership included working on their Mural Arts Program, organizing fundraisers, finding donors, musicians, and facilities to host these events in.

I also did the design work for these events and handled media requests. It was all pretty exciting for a 21-year old.

And then it turned out the non-profit was my supervisor's tax evasion scam. She never showed her face or name on any promo materials or events. She used the money we raised as her own lunch account, she and her mom would win the biggest prizes and then sell them afterwards. I had to file a suit to get my money back.

Needless to say, if anyone remembers the fundraisers and the promotions for it, they'll think to themselves "Oh yeah, that worthless organization run by that 21-year old kid. Wonder what he did with all the money since they never did any murals."

I still have those pieces in my portfolio. I probably shouldn't. They're not that great to begin with and for anyone who cares, they'll know that it represents a shady, corrupt organization.

Re: Questions about Question 7

I agree with Becky, I have supported most of the causes I have dealt with in my internships and workplace. I will say however that there have been projects that I am not at all interested in and I just find completely boring. It makes it even more difficult to put your best foot forward right away when working on a project that does not strike your interest. When being assigned a project that you do not like nor support it's just another issue that comes with being a designer, but as designer we know it's just part of the job. I know for myself when I am not fascinated with a project I have to push myself even harder to get it done and focus. I have to mentally make myself think that I support or like the project in order to get through it. That's just me, but I wish you the best of luck with the Question 7 task!

Re: Questions about Question 7

Sounds like you're between a rock and a hard place. I've never found myself in a position where I was designing for a cause I didn't necessarily believe in. That's tough. This ties into the discussion from last week, doesn't it? We were talking about designing for a cause - unfortunately, in this case, you don't get to decide what side of the cause you design for.

This might be completely off-base, but, when I read the post this week, I thought of Leni Riefenstahl's documentary The Triumph of the Will. I know there was a lot of controversy around that documentary because it promoted the unethical Nazi regime... but Riefenstahl must have had some kind of inner struggle over whether or not to do the documentary. Although, I don't think Hilter was the kind of boss you said no to when he asked you to do something.

 

Re: Questions about Question 7

For the most part, I have supported the missions of each company that I have worked for. However, in my first design job out of undergrad, I was involved in an ad campaign for a certain local health club, which received a lot of negative feedback for being too "edgy". Long story short, some billboards went up on 83, which were poking fun at people who needed to get rid of their "muffin tops", and it ended up really offending many members of the health club. So, it was a pretty awkward having to explain to angry members why the company chose to run those ads. Either way, I suppose it's our job as designers to put our personal opinions aside (as much as we can), to come up with the best solution that will make our customer happy. 

And while we're on the topic of designing for clients we may not agree with, check out this link for "The 100 Most Shocking Adverts of All Time"!

Re: Questions about Question 7

I have not been put in a predicament to that extent before. I'm sure, though, that every designer, or really any job, will have the potential to put you in a spot where you may not really appreciate, understand why, or even agree with the campaign you are representing. In fact, I know of a person who was known for their public relations and marketing expertise when it came to politics and political campaigns. (I will not name any names) They were brought on as a freelance consultant to help with a local political campaign to not only help guide the designers in a more successful approach, but to make up a slogan or a tagline from the political person's beliefs, and pretty much represent them. They had offered this person a lot of money because they came highly recommended. After working on the campaign for I believe 6 months, this person just couldn't do it anymore. They were lying to their family about their new client, struggling with representing something they fully did not believe in, and ultimately couldn't perform at their highest. They spoke out to their family to ask for help on what they should do because they came from a very Republican family and this person was working on a campaign for a democratic party. They believed that their morals and beliefs were ultimately more important than the job they were hired to do. The person ended up leaving the campaign, giving both great references to newer people and on a good note (or at least as good as it could be).

I am not saying you have to leave your job because you are confused with what side you are going to vote for, but sometimes you may have to take yourself out of the position you are in. Reflect on what you are doing. Is this something you literally can't go on doing because you feel as if you are living a lie? Or are you just confused and your job means more to you than designing for something you may or may not fully agree with?

Sometimes it may just be better to not really think about the meaning of what you are designing it for, but rather pull your own opinions out of it and design for the purpose.

Questions about Question 7

In the upcoming November election, Maryland voters will be asked to expand gaming in the state to include table gaming. You will see it on your ballot as Question 7. Voting for Question 7 will mean the state will sanction slots and table games such as blackjack, roulette and craps, and rake in hundreds of millions of dollars and provide many jobs, both temporary and permanent during the construction of an MGM Grand resort and casino at National Harbor, Maryland (in Prince George's County at 495 and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge). A vote against Question 7 will mean the state sanctions only the 7 existing gaming sites and the state will continue to see hundreds of millions of dollars continue to go into West Virginia and Delaware coffers.

Since I work for the Prince George's County and the official position of the County Executive and County is to support Question 7, I am put into the position of advocating for gambling/gaming. Though some design work and photographing pro-Question 7 press events, I am accessory to helping bring what many people deem a vice to the state. Needless to say, the financial stakes are high, at the last press event, the pro-Question 7 lobby folks were taping the event with a $100k+ Red Epic camera.
 
I am somewhat conflicted with this. Im not sure I want a place I grew up in and work for looking like stretches of Atlantic City. Yet, a world class resort and casino would bring awesome concerts, sporting events and conventions and open new revenue streams without raising taxes. Im not sure I want to come to work in a place where there are seniors pumping coins or tickets into a slot machine at 7:30am. Yet, I and my family would see direct economic benefit from having the MGM built in the county.

I am not a gambler, I have a few fantasy football teams, participate in a survivor pool and bet Subway lunches with my friends and family.

I think it's important for us to discuss when we as designers are put into situations where we are asked to work for clients and goals we may not be totally on board with. Is this something anyone else has dealt with?

Class Poll

I'd love to hear people's thoughts on Shepard Fairey. I dont like to think of him of a designer, I think of him more as a painter/street artist. And I'm far from in love with his work, I think its kind of one dimensional and cliche at this point. Am I alone in my thinking? 

My Graphic Design & Professional Hero

There is no question in my mind the biggest influence on me and my attitude about design comes from a former professor of mine, Bernard Canniffe (http://cause-affect.org/do-gooders/peeps/bernard-canniffe.php). I had the luck of having him for two classes in undergrad where he taught me to love collaboration and constructive criticism and to reject and despise bullshit. Ive been even luckier to call him a friend since graduating and moving to Baltimore after he took a job at MICA.

Bernard has since moved on to Minneapolis, but while at MICA, Bernard dedicated himself to building a program around "Social Responsibility". I wont go into the details of his work because I think the scale of the work and clients as well as his theories about design speak for themselves. http://www.piecestudio.com/

It's hard to write about someone who has had the kind of influence Bernard has had on me. He is the reason I finished my undergrad program despite my terrible grades. He is the reason I chose to come to grad school. If I could model my career after anyone else's, it would probably be Bernard.

I hear his Welsh voice telling me "your project is pure shyte" when not putting forth the right effort and that during the rough times when I need motivation, "design is hard and if you dont like it, there is an easier job waiting for you at the grocery store."

Re: Graphic Design Heroes & Citizenship in Design

I had never heard of Jan Van Toom prior today and I can’t necessarily say that there is a designer that I admire for his/her contribution to social change. I am at awe when I do see a great design that influences or makes one aware of an issue. I do believe that when trying to communicate a particular political or cultural message, a designer should take into careful consideration and thoughtfully portray society and reality in their work.

An example that I can think of is not necessary a designer but an artist - the late Theodor Seuss Geisel better known to most as Dr. Seuss. Most people are familiar with Dr. Seuss through his children’s books however, he was also a political cartoonist from 1941 to 1943. He worked as a cartoonist for the New York Liberal Newspaper PM, and his work portrayed and commented on issues of the time.

"Listen maestro...if you want to get real harmony, 

use the black keys as well as the white!" PM, June 29, 1942 (Via)

“What Have You Done Today To Help Save Your Country 

From Them?” PM, March 5, 1942 (Via)

Later in his career a large portion of his influence on his political works at the PM newspaper could be seen within his children's books (i.e.: The Cat In The Hat, The Lorax, The Sneetches, etc.), where he used the themes such as fairness, tolerance and democracy in an attempt to help make for a better society. It is with his work I believe Dr. Seuss communicates various political and social messages not only as a part of making a living, but based on beliefs, his experiences, and a quest to reshape society. 

Re: Graphic Design Heroes & Citizenship in Design

A designer or artist I have admired for quite some time is Banksy.  "Banksy is a graffiti/street artist known for his risky stencils, and his satirical approach at mocking centralized power, hoping that his work will show the public that while power does exist and work against you, that power is not efficient and it can and should be deceived" (Wikipedia.com). I admire the fact that he is willing to take a stand against the government or higher authorities and their views on graffiti, and illustrate his work in a way that makes them look unintelligent.  Graffiti does receive a lot of criticism while it is illegal, and there are people that still don't view it as a form of art. In the book Banksy: You are an Acceptable Level of Threat, the author Patrick Potter mentions that "during the nineties the UK witnessed the rise to power of political class based on spin and big smiles, and the idea that all you needed to succeed was to have a positive attitude.  While this idea grew popular in the corporate culture, trains were being sold off to financiers at tax payers expense" (Potter).  In response to this Banksy stated "If you don't own a train company, then go and paint one instead" (Potter), an example of him going against the social norm and creating art that others will follow.


That being said, I think Van Toorn's argument is very important, while it is often that designers come across projects they think are unethical, and are soon in a bind. The designer wants to stick to what they believe, but at the same time they want to continue to create what their client thinks is popular.  But, I also agree that "everyday life is falsely represented and causes tension between ethics and symbolism."




References

"Banksy." www.wikipedia.com. Wikipedia The Free Encylopedia, n.d. Web. 10 Oct 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

 Potter, Patrick. "Banksy: You Are An Acceptable Level Of Threat." Carpet Bombing Culture. n. page. Web. 10 Oct. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/banksy-graffiti-book_n_1827644.html?view=print&comm_ref=false>. 
 

Re: Graphic Design Hero

I have never given too much thought to designers who are making social change. I guess it's just the way I have always been but a few semesters ago I did write a paper on Shepard Fairey. I know someone else has already mentioned him but I think I will too. Fairey started out on a small scale with his political designs but is now very well known for them. One piece that I will mention because it draws from the past and in a way sends a tribute to designers of social change from long ago, "Guns and Roses" (right) is extremely similar to "Political Power Comes From the Barrel of a Gun" (left)

A lot can be said about Fairey and plagiarism, believe me it comes up all the time. Feel free to read this article I found while writing my paper http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm But he still gets a ton of attention for his socially conscience designs. He is making a difference whether we agree with him or even like his work.

Graphic Design Heroes & Citizenship in Design

I find this an interesting argument. I tend to agree with Andy when it comes to this subject. As designers, we have to deal with client's needs and it is hard to insert a political stance into the design work we do. Mark has a good point as well about what eventually happens to rebellious design trends--even if who you are working for lets you do it, it might get incorporated into popular culture in a way that removes the edginess. But then, if it is incorporated, is it helping society to change. This makes me think about long hair in the 1960s. It was a big deal to have long hair as a man, but as the trend spread, it removed the stigma, and now it's a normal thing.

This paragraph in the main post sums up how one could take a stance in the work they do if they wanted to: "In order to make what van Toorn refers to as an “oppositional cultural production,” the designer must take care not to create a specific alternative to an established convention, but to simply present it in a creative and new way, while keeping the universally accepted concept intact. A designer’s opportunity to upset the status quote can only be sought when a political or ideological shift is underway, which results in “creating new public polarities,” usually targeting real social problems. Now the designer can encourage an oppositional stance, one that goes against the communicative order. The ultimate goal of this approach is to evoke questions and reflection among the public and encourage a more pragmatic view of reality, forcing them to identify their own needs and desires." 

I believe it is difficult to operate outside of the norm if you are selling things--the design of a product or a campaign must be within the realm of the consumer's experience, it can't stray too far or it will not be appealing. I think this is more possible in the art world, like Andy was saying, then in the context of graphic design. Graffiti is an example of an art form like this that really upsets the status quo and evokes questions and reflection among the public. However, it is because of the placement of the pieces of art outside of the normal space and the illegality of the art that makes them oppositional. 

Re: Graphic Design Heroes & Citizenship in Design

Is it terrible that I've never thought about my "favorite?" It just isn't something I have put a ton of thought into. If I may be quite honest, I feel as though I am just someone who thinks that things either look good, or they do not. Sometimes I may recognize someone's work because I am drawn to the style ( like Chipp Kidd's book covers, and I use book covers because I love looking at them all the time). Still, I don't think I have anyone that I necessarily idolize. I think I just respect them for their work and sometimes, I don't even now who "them" is.

Maybe my complacency when looking at design sometimes is a result of not feeling stimulated enough for the reasons van Toorn is stating. When something is popularized and used at excess due to the preferences of a ruling class, there is a great possibility that I am "numbed." It may explain why I am often drawn to styles of design that are not as current, or that are cleaner or more sparse in nature. It isn't my style to create work like this, but it certainly is something I enjoy looking at.

RE: Graphic Design Heros & Citizenship in Design

In response to Marie's question: I admire the work of J. Howard Miller and his "We Can Do It" posters.  Miller was hired by the Westinghouse War Production Coordinating Committee to create a series of war posters. The intent of the posters was to boost employee morale not persuade more female workers to join the work force. It was not about women's empowerment and the name "Rosie" had no association with the poster. In fact, the poster was only shown to workers in the Westinghouse factory during a 2 week long period.

Many believe that J. Howard Miller's design is that of Norman Rockwell's.  As the world began to misinterpret Miller's "We Can Do It" posters as female empowerment, he decided to base his design off of the same concept. In Rockwell's poster, which was mass distributed on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post on Memorial Day, features a large, strong woman holding a lunch pail that reads "Rosie", carrying a rivet gun on her lap. 

Would you call Rockwell's poster un-orgininal because he copied the same concept from Howard? Or would you disagree because Howard did not intend for his poster's to persuade women to join the work force? I think both posters do an excellent job contributing to social change.

Re: Graphic Design Heroes & Citizenship in Design

I found this article, Design Ignites Change, at commarts.com and thought it fit into our discussion this week. A quote from the article says,

“As designer Victor Papanek said in Design for the Real World, ‘Design can and must become a way in which young people can participate in changing society.’ By instilling these ideals in the next generation of creative talent, we will help them to carry these ideals into their professional lives.”

I think it’s possible to get involved and make social change in your community as a designer. You might have to do it on your own time, and you might not get paid for it, but, if you’re passionate about the cause, this probably wouldn’t bother you. Right?