Comments on: Is Graphic Design Art? (guest post by Brandon Hunter)

By: Anja Mohn-Mitchell

Anja Mohn-Mitchell — Mon, 07 May 2012 03:49:32 +0000

Forgot this: my art website is: http://www.anjamohn.com
I am working on merging the two disciplines myself, including process and approach.

By: Anja Mohn-Mitchell

Anja Mohn-Mitchell — Mon, 07 May 2012 03:47:29 +0000

Thank you, Brandon, for this post. Having dealt with this question for years myself, turned it over and over, and also having heard people’s opinion, I would add to the definition: Graphic Design is a form of art, where the artist uses his or her skill to accomplish an assigned project. He basically uses his skills on behalf of a client’s vision, plan or mission and finds an appropriate solution to it. Historically, until the beginnings of modern art (19th century) art and design were not separated, to define more clearly: art until then was solely commissioned work, commissioned by church or kings and rulers.
Only in the early beginnings of modern art (French realism) the artists started to make art for arts sake alone. But for example in poster design during French Belle Epoque, there was no question, that it would be the artists, who would design the famous posters. The further modern art progressed, however, the more the two disciplines separated and graphic design as an entirely separate discipline emerged; leading to the idea that the latter was of lower value than Fine Art (Art for Art’s sake versus commercial art). I definitely agree that a visual creator, be he artist or designer, who has in depth training and study of visual language under his belt, will be able to produce the more far reaching work. These are just a few thoughts; I think this discussion will be ongoing, at least for me. I like to see a renaissance of the multidisciplinary artist, and the two disciplines merging back into one.

By: Samantha Jones

Samantha Jones — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:12:27 +0000

This article pretty much sums up the amount of frustration that we artists feel on the daily basis. The term ‘graphic design’ is so broad and misinterpreted today that it fails to call out the fine arts talent that many designers possess as well as the concept development and time that goes into every detail of the piece. Graphic design is definitely art, and now at this time the most relevant and in demand style of art and advertisement. Everything you see is art, and has more than likely came from a graphic designer.

Just to realize and understand that graphic designers don’t just use default fonts and put them on a flyer, or use found imagery and make a collage and call it a day. We often go back to the fine art roots. We hand draw images and make up our own fonts (mind you takes hours/ days to perfect). We go out with our own cameras, just like photographers and capture our own stock images to use for future projects. We take pictures, scan fabrics and anything we can get our hands on to create textures. It’s not easy being in the industry and can be mentally draining to be constantly pushing out ideas and executing piece after piece.

Designers are so underestimated.

By: Keaton Taylor

Keaton Taylor — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 07:24:14 +0000

Colin Wright said it best – “Art is like masturbation. It is selfish and introverted and done for you and you alone. Design is like sex. There is someone else involved, their needs are just as important as your own, and if everything goes right, both parties are happy in the end”

Art and design share some of the same DNA but are inherently different. I’d also like to reference something Marvin Malecha posits in his design thinking courses at NCSU: Art takes the conversation to the people and most times the conversation between the artist and the people ends – a great example is Serrano’s Piss Christ – he’s said little about the piece since its conception. Serrano’s silence has made waves and mostly made people mad, that anger ends the intelligent conversation. What happens -more or less- is that the artist is circumventing all accountability. A designer, however, justifies his work with reason and structure. Explaining (hopefully) with wit and brevity the purpose of the work and the specific aesthetic qualities falls on the designer instead of the audience. Those among others are the details that separate art and design for me.

By: Edward M. Corpus

Edward M. Corpus — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:31:15 +0000

Kudos to everyone for keeping this discussion alive. It’s actually an old topic, updated for the last two decades and the advent of digital audio-visual media. The discussion used to be “illustration” vs. “art” or “commercial art” vs “fine art”, with the implication that the former was less art because of their monetized consumerist ties and more transitory nature tied to immediate product consumption. I personally think the distinction between the two “sides” has become more obscure and ambiguous nowadays. The music video has been instrumental (yes, a pun) in putting motion graphics on the map as possible art forms in themselves, irrespective of the “commercial” aspect of selling recordings. I would recommend going to motionographer.com for examples of motion graphics destined for use in commercial applications, yet some of which are stunningly beautiful and moving art. And if commercial ends in of themselves were to disqualify compositions as art, what then is to be said of popular “fine” art e.g., Thomas Kinkade? Yes, there are the very forgettable (and deliberately so) graphic art posters that hang in office cubicles and medical waiting rooms. When we work for someone else and are assigned to advertise their products, we often don’t have the freedom to express our own creativity. There is also a lot of not-so-fine art, forgettable and mediocre. I do not claim to have the be-all and end-all definition, but in my opinion the elements of (visual) art are: 1) the visual expression of the artist creatively posing a problem and solving it in an elegant way 2) visual ironic metaphor (something akin to musical and poetic art) and 3) unique use of materials, be they traditional draughtsman’s media or digital or mixed media.

By: bobn

bobn — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 03:03:53 +0000

This is an interesting discussion.
Skill levels of individuals vary – and also the quantity and quality of skills. At what point in the process do we call a practitioner able, skilled, talented or an artist? And are there only certain traits and skills that are demanded to be possessed before someone is an artist. How about originality? or style? Or variety, or outstanding quality? How how about making a living? Or having honor, friends, respect and success? And when in the process do we become artists? Or at what point does it matter?
And just who is the arbiter?
Artists are of all stripes and colors and sizes and genders and especially – skills. It would be nice if we could have all these things and the joy of the work also. I often think of the countless people who created this world of beauty we live in – and wonder if they all had the same feelings of wonder, If they had the same misgivings – were famous, respected, wealthy or happy just doing what they love to do. And be paid to do it?

Thank God I don’t think I am an artist. I know I am an artist! I used to resent it when people took my work for their own. Now I wonder if it makes them happy!

By: Abby

Abby — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 18:01:22 +0000

What a great post! I just love your point of view.