Is there an Illustration industry??

[xLouisax]

I'm studying Illustration for my Graphic Design course, and if anybody could answer some questions you'd truly be helping me out!

1) Currently I view the Illustration industry as a vast, deep ocean that you’re bound to be completely lost in unless you have the biggest, shiniest boat. And you only get the big, shiny boat if your Aunt, twice removed on you mother’s side, knows someone, or of course if you’ve gotten lucky and won the lottery.Do you think this is unecessarily negative?

2) I see ALOT of same-old same-old illustration, especially with pen and ink illustration. There is definately a current fashion, even to illustration, that people never realise until years later. Do you think it's better to stick to a trend in order to get work, or should you stick to your true identity as an artist and do exactly the kind of work you want?

3) I also feel that Illustration is underappreciated by general society, even more so than Graphic Design. Illustration is never categorised as it’s own thing, it’s simply under the wing of Graphic Design, or under the wing of fine art. Therefore, there is no illustration industry, it is just viewed as part of a bigger entity. Do you agree with this statement?


Thankyou for your time,

Louisa Brooks:assspank:

[Zapp!]

1) Yes, it is far too negative. It doesn't really matter if you know someone who know's someone, or if your super rich. If your work is awful people won't want it so you won't get hired. While someone who is good at illustration is eventually going to get noticed and given work.

2) Depends on how much you need the money. If you stick to a trend I think there is more of a chance that you will be hired sooner than if you do your own thing but nobody is really interested. There is a possibility that you could be hugely successful as a fine artist straight away, but it is a lot more risky than doing what you know is going to sell.

3) I disagree with this. If you wanted an illustration you would most likely go to an illustrator rather than a graphic designer or fine artist ( not that you can't have elements of graphic design or fine art in an illustration) and therefore they sell something different so in my opinion they would be in a different industry.

Hope that makes sense :)

[dpaint]

[QUOTE=xLouisax;2732132]I'm studying Illustration for my Graphic Design course, and if anybody could answer some questions you'd truly be helping me out!

1) Currently I view the Illustration industry as a vast, deep ocean that you’re bound to be completely lost in unless you have the biggest, shiniest boat. And you only get the big, shiny boat if your Aunt, twice removed on you mother’s side, knows someone, or of course if you’ve gotten lucky and won the lottery.Do you think this is unnecessarily negative?

This is false; if you have good work you will get hired. This is also a very amateur attitude that does more harm to your career than good.



2) I see ALOT of same-old same-old illustration, especially with pen and ink illustration. There is definately a current fashion, even to illustration, that people never realise until years later. Do you think it's better to stick to a trend in order to get work, or should you stick to your true identity as an artist and do exactly the kind of work you want?

Illustration, unlike gallery art is not for your own self aggrandizement, you must use it in service of someone else's idea, that is why it is illustrative. There is no trend other than what the viewers respond to; and publishers hire. When you look back over its history you see this. Artists have always pushed styles but they were good at what they did, I recommend 'The Illustrator in America' as an example of the history of illustration

3) I also feel that Illustration is under appreciated by general society, even more so than Graphic Design. Illustration is never categorized as it’s own thing, it’s simply under the wing of Graphic Design, or under the wing of fine art. Therefore, there is no illustration industry, it is just viewed as part of a bigger entity. Do you agree with this statement?

Actually that is wrong, any good illustrator is a good graphic designer. Any good illustrator is also a good artist. Gallery art with its grant writing, begging for money or painting the same motif again and again, can't claim any high ground against illustration. Graphic design is a subset of illustration, because it focuses on the abstarct part of the process. The only reason it isn't in schools is because most of the people teaching illustration never actually did it for a living. Far easier to be a graphic designer and not have to learn to draw and paint representationally. There are exceptions, but they aren't the majority. Check your facts, more people will go see a Norman Rockwell show than go to a modern art exhibit.

I would worry about getting accomplished and forget about style and trends.

[xLouisax]

Thankyou so much for your reply, it does make sense :)

[xLouisax]

Thankyou for your insight, and for the kick up the arse you gave me for being so negative! ^_^

[Ilaekae]

Please don't take this wrong, but I find it strange that the first two questions are so obviously biased and false, and from the way they're worded, they appear to be a personal belief of yours to some degree, that they make the statement you made in #3 almost comical/surreal. Did you even do any research before posting this, or are you looking for some kind of confirmation?

...and...for the record, just so you understand where I'm coming from; professional graphic designer, illustrator, photographer, writer, and exhibiting sculptor, painter, printmaker, textile artist, set designer, former design/production/illustration teacher, and President/CEO of four design studios/advertising agencies for nearly 45 years.

...and...(2), ILLUSTRATION is older than fine art, is a totally separate and self-supporting field in the modern world, and IS tightly tied to the advertising/graphic design fields because it is the visual arm of those fields by its very nature.

[ExiledRed]

I disagree with dpaint that a graphic designer is an underqualified illustrator. I also disagree that a good illustrator is by definition a good graphic designer.
As a GD I find this asssessment trivialises the field, and the claim that its 'easy' to be GD
is quite insulting actually.

Typography, page layout, web design, flash animation, photography, digital pre-press, brand marketing, packaging design, signage etc...

Few of these things are in the realm of the illustrator. Being able to draw an abstract representation of the subject matter in an article does not qualify you to do 90% of Graphic Design. Illustration ability is merely an asset to the GD, it allows the GD to employ his own artwork in his (or her) designs.

[dpaint]

Typography, page layout, web design, flash animation, photography, digital pre-press, brand marketing, packaging design, signage etc...

Few of these things are in the realm of the illustrator. Being able to draw an abstract representation of the subject matter in an article does not qualify you to do 90% of Graphic Design. Illustration ability is merely an asset to the GD, it allows the GD to employ his own artwork in his (or her) designs.

Yeah thats not insulting. What you are talking about is craft, not art. Are you really going to compare paste up and picking fonts to JC Leyendecker, Dean Cornwell, Bernie Fuchs Mark English or Sterling Hundley? Give me a break.
We disagree And you are right my opinion of GD as a skill is lower than good illustration. The golden age of illustration happened because people knew their place and stayed out of the illustrators way. Read any of the biographies of the illustrators and their editors of the time.

[ExiledRed]

Yeah thats not insulting. What you are talking about is craft, not art. Are you really going to compare paste up and picking fonts to JC Leyendecker, Dean Cornwell, Bernie Fuchs Mark English or Sterling Hundley? Give me a break.
We disagree And you are right my opinion of GD as a skill is lower than good illustration. The golden age of illustration happened because people knew their place and stayed out of the illustrators way. Read any of the biographies of the illustrators and their editors of the time.

I'm not sure if its the internet, but you do really come across as aggressive and condescending. Im not making any distinctions between craft and art, merely asserting that a good illustrator isn't a good GD by definition. I'm also not making comparisons between the work of successful Illustrators and that of graphic designers, the comparison is meaningless.

I dont rank one skillset over the other, there's no competition here for which is 'higher'. Again, trivialising the field to just 'paste up' and picking fonts' is not only insulting, its ignorant.

[QueenGwenevere]

1) Currently I view the Illustration industry as a vast, deep ocean that you’re bound to be completely lost in unless you have the biggest, shiniest boat. And you only get the big, shiny boat if your Aunt, twice removed on you mother’s side, knows someone, or of course if you’ve gotten lucky and won the lottery.Do you think this is unecessarily negative?

Yes, it is negative. The illustration field is so large and varied that many people can find their own comfortable niche in it without getting "lucky". It helps if you're creative (and persistent) about how you market yourself. If you're a graphic designer as well, that should open even more doors.

It may sometimes seem as though only the stars can make it when just a few trendy/famous illustrators get more than the usual amount of hype (appearing in all the illustration annuals, etc.) However, just because a few names are especially prominent doesn't mean there aren't thousands of other less-prominent illustrators making a good living.

2) I see ALOT of same-old same-old illustration, especially with pen and ink illustration. There is definately a current fashion, even to illustration, that people never realise until years later. Do you think it's better to stick to a trend in order to get work, or should you stick to your true identity as an artist and do exactly the kind of work you want?

There are trends, as with everything else in life, but there's also a lot more variation than you think. If you only look at illustration annuals and contests, they tend to have a narrow stylistic focus based on what the judging committee likes, which can give a very skewed view of the illustration field. In reality the field is broad enough to accommodate many, many styles at a time. Look around. You'd be surprised.

I'd never recommend trying to force yourself into a style that doesn't suit you... It's good to be aware of general trends in design, and it definitely helps if you're flexible enough to be able to use them when necessary. But if you're always limited to aping a current popular style, you'll never develop your own presence.

Find a balance. Develop your own look, but stay open to trends; and seek markets and clients that are most appropriate for the kind of work you like to do.

3) I also feel that Illustration is underappreciated by general society, even more so than Graphic Design. Illustration is never categorised as it’s own thing, it’s simply under the wing of Graphic Design, or under the wing of fine art. Therefore, there is no illustration industry, it is just viewed as part of a bigger entity. Do you agree with this statement?

What....... Where are you getting this from? Of course there's an illustration industry. Most of the top art schools have an illustration department. I graduated with a BFA in illustration from Parsons. Graphic design was a whole different department on another floor. Fine art was in a completely different building on the other side of town. There was no overlap. Last I checked RISD, Pratt, and SVA also had illustration departments, separate and distinct from the graphic design and fine art departments.

Children's book illustrators, editorial illustrators, storyboard artists, concept artists, fashion illustrators, illustrators who do book covers, illustrators who do images for advertising, cartoonists and animators, greeting card and licensing artists, etc, etc... these are all illustrators. They are not "graphic designers" or "fine artists", and I've never seen them classified as such. And many of them get a helluva lot more popular acclaim than a lot of graphic designers or fine artists.

And if there's no such thing as an illustration industry, explain the legions of Illustration black books, annuals, and contests, explain the Society of Illustrators, and explain why organizations such as the Graphic Artists Guild classify illustration as a distinct category?

If anything, it's graphic designers who get a bum deal - most people don't know they exist, they're just an invisible presence behind the design. And it doesn't help that a lot of people think graphic design is way easier than it actually is...

Of course you can combine illustration and graphic design, if you want. If you're an illustrator, it's a good idea to know at least some fundamental graphic design skills, as that can broaden the range of jobs you get.

[xLouisax]

I'll be honest in admitting that my questionnaire is very negative, and it was like that because I thought it would recieve a range of responses.

I personally believe, deep in my heart that as long as you are truly a hard-working talented artist you can indeed make a living, one day.

But I find it difficult to understand when some people are extremely deluded about the industry, and that students for example have this idea that they'll graduate and automatically get a sweet job and it will be smooth sailing from there. You have to be honest, this example isn't very realistic?

Maybe that's why I've used negativity in the past as a motivator to work harder?

[QueenGwenevere]

Typography, page layout, web design, flash animation, photography, digital pre-press, brand marketing, packaging design, signage etc...

mmmwell, Flash animation that involves flying type is in the realm of the graphic designer, but Flash animation that involves cartoon characters running around is squarely in the realm of the illustrator. ;)

Though I do agree with you that graphic designers get a lot less credit than they deserve. GOOD design actually takes a lot of thought, and awareness of aesthetics, design history, trends, semiotics, marketing, etc. I do illustration primarily, but I also do graphic design on the side, so I know how difficult it can be to come up with a really classy-looking design that works with the media it's intended for (in web design especially. Ugh.)

I've also worked with designers who have focused purely on graphic design all their lives, and I know I can't design as well as they can. There's definite skill involved. The best designers manage to get that extra level of elegance in their designs that I can never quite seem to catch...

[Elwell]

I'm studying Illustration for my Graphic Design course, and if anybody could answer some questions you'd truly be helping me out!

1) Currently I view the Illustration industry as a vast, deep ocean that you’re bound to be completely lost in unless you have the biggest, shiniest boat. And you only get the big, shiny boat if your Aunt, twice removed on you mother’s side, knows someone, or of course if you’ve gotten lucky and won the lottery.Do you think this is unecessarily negative?
No, you're exactly right. The world is massively unfair, there's nothing you can do about it, and nothing is your fault. Quit now.

2) I see ALOT of same-old same-old illustration, especially with pen and ink illustration. There is definately a current fashion, even to illustration, that people never realise until years later. Do you think it's better to stick to a trend in order to get work, or should you stick to your true identity as an artist and do exactly the kind of work you want?Again, bingo. Everything sucks, there's no originality anyway, so why even bother? The best you can do is find something successful, rip it off, milk it for all it's worth until it inevitably collapses, then move on the the next big thing.

3) I also feel that Illustration is underappreciated by general society, even more so than Graphic Design. Illustration is never categorised as it’s own thing, it’s simply under the wing of Graphic Design, or under the wing of fine art. Therefore, there is no illustration industry, it is just viewed as part of a bigger entity. Do you agree with this statement?

You've completely convinced me, screw this illustration stuff, I'm going to air conditioner repair school.



***

SERIOUSLY, if the above is what you've gotten out of your school's program, either they've done a lousy job of teaching, or you've done a lousy job of learning.

[ExiledRed]

mmmwell, Flash animation that involves flying type is in the realm of the graphic designer, but Flash animation that involves cartoon characters running around is squarely in the realm of the illustrator. ;)


In this case, the illustrator provides the cartoon characters and the designer/web developer animates them either within the Flash IDE or if he's capable by using actionscript.

learning actionscript or the flash environment is something an illustrator may do, but it doesnt fall under the typical illustrator's job description, and Ive never seen or heard of actionscript being taught on an illustration course. (Although I may be wrong, theres probably one or two that touch upon it)

[Kiera]

The questions the OP asked are every illustration student's darkests doubts... at least I recognize those questions from myself and fellow buddies and books like "How to be an illustrator" aren't exactly helping.
(the book is good, but it isn't really positive or calming)

No answering of the questions from my side though, best thing to do is not to waste energy and time on doubts and fears while you're in school. It just blocks your mind and doesn't help you in any way.

[QueenGwenevere]

The questions the OP asked are every illustration student's darkests doubts...

Not if they went to a good school with good teachers.

In this case, the illustrator provides the cartoon characters and the designer/web developer animates them either within the Flash IDE or if he's capable by using actionscript.

learning actionscript or the flash environment is something an illustrator may do, but it doesnt fall under the typical illustrator's job description, and Ive never seen or heard of actionscript being taught on an illustration course. (Although I may be wrong, theres probably one or two that touch upon it)

Er... Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "animating"? Because I'm talking about, you know, traditional-style animation - for games and TV shows and things like that. It mostly involves drawing characters walking and talking and prancing around, often drawn frame-by-frame with very little code in the actual animation - so it really is an illustration job. (Television animation barely uses any code. It's all linear animation in the timeline.)

I don't know what's being taught now, but when I was in school we learned animation for Macromedia Director (the forerunner of Flash), and we did learn at least the basics of the programming language (Lingo.) I would assume it's the same with Flash now, but I could be wrong.

Personally, I taught myself Flash, including enough ActionScript to be able to code games. But I know that what I do is unusual. Generally in my experience animators do all the animation, and programmers do the scripting. And designers may not be involved at all, I'm afraid, except for title graphics or interface design.

[xLouisax]

Not if they went to a good school with good teachers.

But to be honest, i think a good teacher should make students aware of the difficulties of the industry, and of how hard a student will have to be working when they graduate. It's reverse psycology to motivate students...

...which is what many of you are doing to me in this post :p

[ExiledRed]

Er... Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "animating"? Because I'm talking about, you know, traditional-style animation - for games and TV shows and things like that. It mostly involves drawing characters walking and talking and prancing around, often drawn frame-by-frame with very little code in the actual animation - so it really is an illustration job. (Television animation barely uses any code. It's all linear animation in the timeline.)

I don't know what's being taught now, but when I was in school we learned animation for Macromedia Director (the forerunner of Flash), and we did learn at least the basics of the programming language (Lingo.) I would assume it's the same with Flash now, but I could be wrong.

Personally, I taught myself Flash, including enough ActionScript to be able to code games. But I know that what I do is unusual. Generally in my experience animators do all the animation, and programmers do the scripting. And designers may not be involved at all, I'm afraid, except for title graphics or interface design.

It's importrant that a web based GD can script. Allowing a left brained, straight programmer to have any control over the visuals is, in my experience, a bad idea. My programmer colleague will say its a bad idea to let a designer code anything that isnt XHTML/CSS, so there is a fuzzy line we both have to traverse.

Flash isnt the best medium for traditional style, linear, frame by frame, non interactive animation, it doesn't fully utilise Flash's interactive capabilities and the frame by frame stuff is memory intensive. As far as games go, the designer/developer/programmer needs to script when and why the character prances, talks, dies, explodes or whatever. He will access the relevant illustration sequence from the library and ensure that they display when and where theyre supposed to and in the correct order. Often he will create the movie clip from the various 'frames' provided by the artist and tween that.
Now since CS4 and the bone/bind tool, it is possible to do simple animations from a single image.

Actionscript 3.0 is much more robust and complex than previous versions. It used to be quite simple to make a button work or to control the timeline, but now you have to fully understand programming concepts, classes, event listeners and event handlers, and a boatload of other stuff, just to make simple things happen.

A lot of graphic designers, illustrate, and many others, especially those in web development, like me, code. We are the link between both artist and programmer, and the viewer/user, be it on a web page, a magazine, on the movie poster, the video games box, the graphic user interface on your game/application and so on.

Edit: I think the disconnect is that I've not been including 'animation' under the umbrella of 'illustration' and that was quite wrong of me. Many animators learn Flash at a basic level and employ it for their animations. In WD the line is blurred between animator/designer and programmer when you are dealing with the flash environment, all may play a part in the final product. In my case two developers are better than three, and it is easier for everybody involved if the 'graphics guy' handles as much as possible when it comes to animating the graphics, be they text or cartoon characters.

[JeffX99]

Michaelangelo was an illustrator - he worked for the Pope.

[Kiera]

Not if they went to a good school with good teachers.

But what do you do when you are in Europe where the schools are smaller and have less reputation like the US giants like CalArts or Ringling..
and where the industry for magazines, games and animations is tiny, where art can be less accepted depending on the region and where networking and country-switching on the continent is harder because of language barriers?

[Elwell]

But what do you do when you are in Europe where the schools are smaller and have less reputation like the US giants like CalArts or Ringling..
and where the industry for magazines, games and animations is tiny, where art can be less accepted depending on the region and where networking and country-switching on the continent is harder because of language barriers?
This is a legitimate issue. However, because the vast majority of illustration is freelance, and most promotion, client interaction, and delivery of artwork is done over the web, the industry is pretty much international these days. The flip side of that is that you are also competing with the whole world, so you better be damned good.

[Kiera]

This is a legitimate issue. However, because the vast majority of illustration is freelance, and most promotion, client interaction, and delivery of artwork is done over the web, the industry is pretty much international these days. The flip side of that is that you are also competing with the whole world, so you better be damned good.

good point - that means basically.. back to the drawing table :)

[QueenGwenevere]

Flash isnt the best medium for traditional style, linear, frame by frame, non interactive animation, it doesn't fully utilise Flash's interactive capabilities and the frame by frame stuff is memory intensive.

True as far as that goes, BUT Flash is increasingly used to produce a lot of TV animation, where interactivity and memory and all that don't matter. So there's a whole niche now of traditional-style animators who work in Flash and don't need to know any code at all.

And then there's those of us who perpetually seek a happy middle ground of animation that looks TV-quality but doesn't bog down performance. Fun, fun.

As far as games go, the designer/developer/programmer needs to script when and why the character prances, talks, dies, explodes or whatever.

Hey, I know that, that's what I do for a living. But someone has to draw the frames/animated sequences/long rambling animated cut scenes/etc. And that would be the illustrator/animator person. (And if it's me, I also do the code to make it all happen when it needs to happen.) (Actually, in the CD-ROM days, I didn't handle the code - instead I drew all the individual frames and then stood over the programmer and directed him to make them all run properly. Much like what you describe.)

Now since CS4 and the bone/bind tool, it is possible to do simple animations from a single image.

Simple animations. ;)

Actionscript 3.0 is much more robust and complex than previous versions. It used to be quite simple to make a button work or to control the timeline, but now you have to fully understand programming concepts, classes, event listeners and event handlers, and a boatload of other stuff, just to make simple things happen.

Actually, you need to know all that to make AS2 do anything really significant, too. I've been starting to learn AS3, and so far it looks like some things will actually be easier than in AS2 (fewer kludges needed, for one thing.) Looking forward to it.

Edit: I think the disconnect is that I've not been including 'animation' under the umbrella of 'illustration' and that was quite wrong of me.

I think another disconnect is that we seem to work in different markets - most of what I do is for kids, and is often based on TV shows, so it's VERY heavy on character animation - usually the client wants sites and games that look and feel like a TV show, so there's a lot of pure animation work involved, and some strictly illustrational stuff (backgrounds, concept art, character design, etc.) And if it's a game, there's a lot of pure code work involved. So the division of labor is more along the lines of illustration/animation team + programming team + voice actor(s)/sound person if necessary + writer if necessary, and sometimes a designer to handle some aspects of look-and-feel or non-illustrational interface.

I'm sure what you're describing is typical for your market, though - actually, that's why I was curious to know what you were thinking, I like seeing how different markets approach this stuff. It's always educational.

[ExiledRed]

^^ The truth about AS3 is that its made a lot of stuff that was very hard to do in AS2 much easier, but on the flip side its made a lot of the very easy stuff that non programmer designers could handle, extremely convoluted.
AS2 was your stoner friend from highschool, AS3 is a strict german mistress. (no offence to the germans)

My kid would love me to be in your market, he's probably played some of your games, but I/we only develop in Flash when there is a specific requirement to do so. Its not unlikely that I could end up working on another flash game in the near future, we are talking to a client about developing an educational game as part of their website, but I dont have too much experience with the type of games you develop, maybe when Flash appears on every smartphone but the iPhone, it'll be something we think of.

[Ilaekae]

Yeah thats not insulting. What you are talking about is craft, not art. Are you really going to compare paste up and picking fonts to JC Leyendecker, Dean Cornwell, Bernie Fuchs Mark English or Sterling Hundley? Give me a break.
We disagree And you are right my opinion of GD as a skill is lower than good illustration. The golden age of illustration happened because people knew their place and stayed out of the illustrators way. Read any of the biographies of the illustrators and their editors of the time.

"...any good illustrator is a good graphic designer. Any good illustrator is also a good artist. Gallery art with its grant writing, begging for money or painting the same motif again and again, can't claim any high ground against illustration. Graphic design is a subset of illustration, because it focuses on the abstarct part of the process. The only reason it isn't in schools is because most of the people teaching illustration never actually did it for a living. Far easier to be a graphic designer and not have to learn to draw and paint representationally."

dpaint, I don't care if I get banned for this for life, but, as well as being absolutely false, this is just too fucking grotesque an insult to allow to pass without comment. If you believe that Design is paste up and picking fonts, you are either the least knowledgeable person within the art community I have ever met, or you're simply to stupid to understand the difference between truth and lies. You just insulted one of the premiere fields in the modern communications world, and one that you probably couldn't survive without. I suggest you apologize to every Designer who browses/belongs to this forum right now (of which I am one) or I'm going to file a formal complaint...and for ME to stoop THAT low gives you some idea of how motherfucking pissed off I am right now.


Revised to add additional comment by dpaint.

[bcarman]

I just stumbled onto this thread and the line that Ilaekae just commented on was the only line that really stood out to me in all of what was said above. I am agreeing with him 100%. Maybe I won't say it in such vehement terms, I'm a bit of a wuss, but denigrating graphic design in this way is just uncalled for. Kind of what every person who desktop publishes believes; anyone can do it. I did graphic design for a lot of years as I built my illustration career but even with all of that experience I still don't call myself a graphic designer. Not good enough. Oh I can do it at some level but a real graphic designer has a passion for type and design, makes text sing, and composes complex visual problems so most of us don't even notice as we read through daily life. It's this kind of attitude that points every wayward "art" student toward graphic design.

[ExiledRed]

How do i thank a post twice?

[Elwell]

Overlap, not subset.

971336

[Raoul Duke]

Normally I don't agree with charts, but yours is pretty accurate.

[dpaint]

[QUOTE=Ilaekae;2732690]" I suggest you apologize to every Designer who browses/belongs to this forum right now (of which I am one) or I'm going to file a formal complaint...and for ME to stoop THAT low gives you some idea of how motherfucking pissed off I am right now.


I thought we weren't allowed to type bad words?
I feel like I'm trapped in Tom Wolfe's book 'The Painted Word'

Shape is shape; even text is only shape unless you understand the language. Everything starts with shape and builds in complexity until you end up with representational art at the top.

Not all art is equal; and all forms of it have crap and genius but all representational art ( sculpture, drawing and painting and film}have all of the things design and nonrepresentational art have, plus it has mimetic illusion.

This is why when representational artists get involved in the subsets of
representational art they kick ass, but it doesn't work the other way around with nonrepresentational artists;

Representational artists like Arthur and Lucinda Matthews, Frank Brangwyn, Alfonse Mucha, Louis Comfort Tiffany,William Morris Hunt. Hell, Syd Mead, Iain McCaig and Luigi Colani. All have done type design, fashion design, building design, furniture, jewelry, books; you name it. If you compare great to great in their respective fields what Saul Bass and Jackson Pollack have done aren't equal to what Rubens or Kubrick have done.

So I don't care if you like what I said. Its my opinion. I didn't say graphic designers are bad people or make any attack on their persons. I'm just not impressed by it. I've been paid as a professional for just about anything related to art so I'm entitled to my informed opinion. If that makes me a snob and an asshole in your book well yeah, fine; you don't have to hire me or buy my work. Yawn...

[Raoul Duke]

dpaint- Obviously you don't understand graphic design. Which means you may not have a firm grasp on aesthetics. Not "anybody can be a graphic designer" either. There is allot of technique and math involved that takes a life time to master.

[QueenGwenevere]

If that makes me a snob and an asshole in your book well yeah, fine; you don't have to hire me or buy my work. Yawn...

No, it just makes you shockingly ignorant. However, as you seem to be willfully so, and seem to have a personal (subjective) belief that mimetic art is the highest ideal in all fields, arguing further is probably going to be as futile as arguing about religious beliefs.

But leaving aside the aesthetic argument, I thought I should just point out that REAL graphic design goes way beyond aesthetics. It's not the same thing as abstract fine art. Besides aesthetics, it also needs to involve usability, practicality, message, brand identity, and, these days, interface architecture and accessibility.

If you think that making good aesthetic decisions will get you a good interface design, think again.

(You know, I usually respect your opinion in other areas, but... not on design, I'm afraid.)

[ExiledRed]

dpaint, as youve been paid to do absolutely everything art related, Im very interested to read about your forays into music, dance, theatre and literature. I mean you understand shapes, so these things must come naturally to you as well.

also, Ian McCaig is one of my all time favourite illustrators ever since I read 'Forest of Doom' as a child, I loved the runic typeface and the design he created for the Jethro Tull albums, but Im not sure he could design packaging that would make condoms or tampons less embarassing to take to the counter, make a rather bland drink compete with the likes of coca cola and red bull, or design a monitor that will take a computer company from the brink of collapse to become one of the most celebrated technology companies of all time.

Your 'informed opinion' seems to be formulated to put yourself and your discipline on a pedestal above all others, and your post is so steeped in your ego, that its difficult to read without getting a little nauseated.

I apologise if you find this offensive, but youve offended me, others of my profession, and denigrated the gruelling years of specialised study and hard work that Ive endured in order to get me out of dead end jobs and into a creative profession denied to me for many years by poverty and lack of university education.

Im definitely not a good illustrator yet, but Im quite proud of my achievements in graphic and web design, and I got paid too, believe it or not.

[sharprm]

Dpaint - I work in a deli cutting and arranging meat for display. I've got a real beef with you saying this is less valid than the Mona Lisa painting.

[ajvenema]

[QUOTE=Ilaekae;2732690]" I suggest you apologize to every Designer who browses/belongs to this forum right now (of which I am one) or I'm going to file a formal complaint...and for ME to stoop THAT low gives you some idea of how motherfucking pissed off I am right now.


I thought we weren't allowed to type bad words?
I feel like I'm trapped in Tom Wolfe's book 'The Painted Word'

Shape is shape; even text is only shape unless you understand the language. Everything starts with shape and builds in complexity until you end up with representational art at the top.

Not all art is equal; and all forms of it have crap and genius but all representational art ( sculpture, drawing and painting and film}have all of the things design and nonrepresentational art have, plus it has mimetic illusion.

This is why when representational artists get involved in the subsets of
representational art they kick ass, but it doesn't work the other way around with nonrepresentational artists;

Representational artists like Arthur and Lucinda Matthews, Frank Brangwyn, Alfonse Mucha, Louis Comfort Tiffany,William Morris Hunt. Hell, Syd Mead, Iain McCaig and Luigi Colani. All have done type design, fashion design, building design, furniture, jewelry, books; you name it. If you compare great to great in their respective fields what Saul Bass and Jackson Pollack have done aren't equal to what Rubens or Kubrick have done.


besides, everyone can teach himself representional drawing, just practice a lot and a lot of lifedrawing, and you'll get somewhere. but on the opposite, its a lot harder to manage without being able to draw representional figures.

i think its strange that you think represential art is a higher thing then the abstract subset. would that also mean that sculpture stands above them all because its 3d, you can see it from all sides and even touch it?

I think at the abstract level you can choose to make it represential, or to advance on the abstract level. Probably if you choose the tre represential way things are even easier, because people will get the story much easier.

besides, the target of graphic designers is much different. all those fancy illustrations wont work for a lot of advertising, and product designs. they would look rather cheap instead. and i doubt if those great illustrators you recall could make them work as good as the best graphic designers do. even if they also go back down to the abstract level.

[Ryan K]

Not "anybody can be a graphic designer" either. There is allot of technique and math involved that takes a life time to master.

I'd say a lot more people would have success at becoming a graphic designer than an illustrator even though GD is a pretty crowded field. So that says something about the amount of skill that's required to go into a work right?

[ExiledRed]

I'd say a lot more people would have success at becoming a graphic designer than an illustrator even though GD is a pretty crowded field. So that says something about the amount of skill that's required to go into a work right?

Not really.

Graphic Design is huge, and exists practically everywhere you look, from the website you are currently viewing to the label on the clothes you are wearing. (Im assuming you're dressed)

The field can support more graphic designers, simply because the world is built on marketing and communications, and there is more of a requirement for graphics in all its forms than there is for illustration.

This isnt about which is more difficult, or which is 'higher' or requires more skill, I have a huge respect for the amount of work required to become a succesful illustrator, I just take exception to the fact that graphic design has been reduced to 'paste up' and 'picking fonts' which is a false assertation.

[dpaint]

seem to have a personal (subjective) belief that mimetic art is the highest ideal in all fields, arguing further is probably going to be as futile as arguing about religious beliefs.

Agreed

But leaving aside the aesthetic argument, I thought I should just point out that REAL graphic design goes way beyond aesthetics. It's not the same thing as abstract fine art. Besides aesthetics, it also needs to involve usability, practicality, message, brand identity, and, these days, interface architecture and accessibility.

If you think that making good aesthetic decisions will get you a good interface design, think again.

Wrong, thats what aethetics is. Its always about aesthetics. I've worked on 25 shipped games, on all aspects of the art and designed the working interface for probably ten of those on my own. Many of those games got game of the year in thier catagory and top marks for graphics including interface. So you can be as dismissive as you want but that success is a fact. All this was accomplished using my personal philosophy of art. I've read Hegle, Ruskin, Kant, Greenberg, and Donato; some of it I agree with and some of it I don't, I've formed my own philosophy based on my experience and I've been pretty successful. Hows your philosophy and opinions working for you? Because in the real world that is the ultimate test.

I'll say it again the fact you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm stupid or ignorant about the subject.

I've worked for ad firms, I've worked with engineers to help bring products to market, I've worked in illustration,corporate logos and brand, set design, murals, educational videos, and location based entertainment for theme parks. All applied with the same philosophy. People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.

[ExiledRed]

People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.

Nobody here has suggested that functional graphics belong on display in an art gallery or a museum, even though you will find graphics everywhere you look in those buildings from the signs, to the electronic visual displays, the posters, informational brochures, and packaged products in the souvenier shop. The museums and art galleries will pay good money to a designer to help them get people through the door, so there is a touch of irony to your comment.

Seriously guy, I suspect your success is bloating your head, and making you as arrogant as they come. Ive noticed how you unneccessarily rip holes in other people in other threads, merely to assert yourself as a stupendous artist. I personally see much more humble and much less succesful artists on here producing work that blows yours away, and they dont feel a need to urinate on every novice that offers an opinion on these boards.

You're entitled to your opinion, but like I and others have stated here, (and this is the crux of mine and Ilaekae's problem) if you believe graphic design is merely 'paste up' and 'picking fonts' (and I dont believe you do) then you obviously dont understand the nature of graphic design, which transcends the relatively new game industry and permeates through almost every aspect of visual communications.

Anyway Im done with this argument, this is the last forum I wanted to get into it with somebody on, and if I could add you to an ignore list id have done it already.

[Ilaekae]

Believing something does not make it true. Stating a "fact" that actually is nothing more than your opinion, especially of how things work or are in the real world, does not make that fact true. And please...don't explain to me how the world of medicine, physics, geology, distillation, or off-world survival works...in your humble opinion. I don't think my remaining three brain cells could take the pressure of such god-like knowledge...

Have fun in your world, dp'. I prefer reality based on the truth, experience, and informed documentable facts. End of subject for me...

[bcarman]

I'm afraid if we all starting listing our resumes as support for ignorant opinions this could really get ugly.

[Elwell]

Normally I don't agree with charts, but yours is pretty accurate.
Thank you. If I was a graphic designer, rather than an illustrator, it would have looked better.

[Elwell]

People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.
Most people don't go to museums, period.

[QueenGwenevere]

People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.

Actually, yes, people do go to museums to look at design. And yes, museums do display design. Often, and with significant attendance by large crowds of those normal people who you seem to believe don't care about design. Have you ever heard of the MOMA? Have you ever heard of the Cooper Hewitt? The MOMA has an entire floor dedicated to design, including everything from helicoptors to Legos. The last few National Design Triennials at the Cooper Hewitt have included everything from sneakers to website design. And they were packed with crowds.

I think I'm done with this argument, too. It's starting to devolve into "my resume is bigger than yours, so nananana-boo-boo" - I refuse to sink to that. (Especially if people are going to start flaunting their oh-so-huge resumes with no supporting portfolio...)

[Ryan K]

I don't understand what's so wrong in the opinion that illustration takes more than graphic design. It's an opinion just same as illustration and graphic design are on the same level. Neither are fact, are they?

[ExiledRed]

I don't understand what's so wrong in the opinion that illustration takes more than graphic design. It's an opinion just same as illustration and graphic design are on the same level. Neither are fact, are they?

Thats not the opinion that caused the insult, and I wouldnt have even entered the debate if it was.

[Raoul Duke]

People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.

Graphic design has changed the face of modern civilization. It's everywhere. I think the world would be a better place if good taste took hold in mainstream graphic design. It would turn our stores into museums. Unfortunately we are surrounded by lack luster trash.

Here (http://www.designlessbetter.com/blogless/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/shepard-fairey_barack-hopethumbnail.jpg) is a piece of graphic design that may have changed the course of history IMAO.

[pegasi]

one thing about design that's different, in my opinion, from illustration is that you can do design work and be accepted as a designer with less knowledge required, comparing with illustration.
I'm not saying that you need less knowledge to be good at it, your not good if you don't know nothing, but you can decieve more easily other people that want a designer and are even less knowledgeable than you.

[serhc]

I've read Hegle, Ruskin, Kant, Greenberg, and Donato

For someone who has studied aesthetics in philosophy, you should be more careful about distinguishing between opinion and fact. Your claim that graphic design is really just a subset of illustration is objectively false, because if that were the case, any design could be replaced with illustrations to the same, or better effect. If graphic design serves better than illustration in even one case, then graphic design is not a subset of illustration.

However, I'm supposing that your actual claim was that the skills necessary for good illustration more than encompass the skills necessary for good graphic design. If that were true, any illustrator could produce graphic design of similar relative quality. That is - not just some, or most, but all, because they have all the requisite skills. This is an empirical question, but I'm more than a little skeptical that every competent illustrator could produce graphic design work on par with their illustration abilities. There are, as many people have pointed out, different considerations for a graphic designer beyond those of formal visual qualities, things that are concerned with language, branding, culture, etc. These seem to be separate considerations from the principles of formal design, but are requisite qualities of a good graphic designer.

People don't go to museums to look at website graphics or clothing labels and there is a reason for that; its because most people feel the way I do, they don't hold it in as high esteem as fine art or illustration, if that offends you complain to them not to me.

That's irrelevant. What does the esteemed-ness of illustration versus the esteemed-ness of graphic design have to do with the set of skills needed to produce quality work of either? Can you appreciate the amount of technology, design, knowledge, and mechanical work that goes into the computer you're working on?

By your logic - if there's no museum for your computer, then we must conclude that it requires fewer skills to produce than illustration, and that is absurd.

[QueenGwenevere]

However, I'm supposing that your actual claim was that the skills necessary for good illustration more than encompass the skills necessary for good graphic design. If that were true, any illustrator could produce graphic design of similar relative quality. That is - not just some, or most, but all, because they have all the requisite skills. This is an empirical question, but I'm more than a little skeptical that every competent illustrator could produce graphic design work on par with their illustration abilities.

Exactly. I know I can draw better than any of the designers I've worked with, (some of them can't draw at all,) but many designers I've worked with can do much better graphic design than me. I've also met some brilliant illustrators who couldn't design their way out of a paper bag. Though they often overlap into fuzzy gray areas, illustration and graphic design are not the same thing, neither is inherently superior to the other, neither is a subset of the other. Both fields deserve to be appreciated for their own unique merits.

[squidmonk3j]

but...

...is eet Art?

[citrusfrukt]

I think it's safe to say that if you are a graphic designer and you just want your respectz, this is probably not the place for you, because most people around here simply don't care about graphic design.

[Craig D]

because most people around here simply don't care about graphic design.

Says who?

[bcarman]

because most people around here simply don't care about graphic design.
__________________

I think you're selling this place short.

Bill'sStudio (http://billcarman.blogspot.com)

[Bill]

Graphic Design vs. Illustration, Illustration vs. Graphic Design... Really, I hate to see the infighting. Can't we all just find some common ground, like maybe that photographers suck?

[Ilaekae]

I...really...fuckin'...hate...mayonaisse...

[OmenSpirits]

Graphic Design vs. Illustration, Illustration vs. Graphic Design... Really, I hate to see the infighting. Can't we all just find some common ground, like maybe that photographers suck?
We already HAD that thread.

It got locked.

[Raoul Duke]

I think it's safe to say that if you are a graphic designer and you just want your respectz, this is probably not the place for you, because most people around here simply don't care about graphic design.
you better learn about good presentation. It can make or break a piece. There are art books I passed on because of poor presentation.

Here's a good example of bad presentation. http://www.iainmccaig.com/ You'd think he was a 2 bit hack, but it's quite contrary to his body of work. Ashley Wood (http://www.ashleywoodartist.com/) only has formal training as a graphic designer. What ever flaws he has as an artist he makes up for it with dynamite presentation.

[sharprm]

I doubt an illustrator would be able to tell the difference between honey leg ham and Virginian ham. There's alot of knowledge you need to master - like if food drops on the floor you throw it out ONLY if a customer sees it.

Meat is everywhere. I'm pretty sure if Obama ate Tofu he wouldn't have been elected.

[bcarman]

Ashley Wood only has formal training as a graphic designer. What ever flaws he has as an artist he makes up for it with dynamite presentation.

What flaws would those be?

[Bill]

We already HAD that thread.

It got locked.

Do you expect that this one won't?

[OmenSpirits]

Hey, you never know.

KEEP. HOPE. ALIVE! :D

[citrusfrukt]

you better learn about good presentation. It can make or break a piece. There are art books I passed on because of poor presentation.

Here's a good example of bad presentation. http://www.iainmccaig.com/ You'd think he was a 2 bit hack, but it's quite contrary to his body of work. Ashley Wood (http://www.ashleywoodartist.com/) only has formal training as a graphic designer. What ever flaws he has as an artist he makes up for it with dynamite presentation.

I am not dismissing the importance of graphic design, but graphic design as a subject does not really interest me and i don't think there are many around here that really care that much. I think most of us just cares about drawing or painting. Not trying to be a dick or somehting but i just think it gets a bit weird when someone goes like "I've been doing this for 20 friggin years, now give me my props".

I definately agree with you though, it seems like many of the more famous artists have fugly websites and definately need to work on their presentation.

[ExiledRed]

I am not dismissing the importance of graphic design, but graphic design as a subject does not really interest me and i don't think there are many around here that really care that much. I think most of us just cares about drawing or painting. Not trying to be a dick or somehting but i just think it gets a bit weird when someone goes like "I've been doing this for 20 friggin years, now give me my props".

I definately agree with you though, it seems like many of the more famous artists have fugly websites and definately need to work on their presentation.

I think there's plenty evidence to suggest that there are many graphic designers on here with an interest in concept art, and likewise, plenty of concept artists with an interest in graphic design. I also notice a lot of graphic design students are posting on here. I also think that some of the artists dpaint referred to validate the notion that design and illustration can be interrelated.

I think as the CA community has evolved and is evolving, more cross disciplined artists are finding themselves here, and while there are whole boards dedicated to photography, fine arts and motion graphics, there is surprisingly no outlet for those of us interested in design.

So I'm making this post as an official request for somewhere for those of us who love concept art but have a primary or secondary interest in graphic design to talk shop.