(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:104
092-109_28858.indd 104 8/30/12 4:46 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:105
092-109_28858.indd 105 8/30/12 4:46 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
104
The essay that follows, commissioned by the editors at Print
magazine, went through three edits. The first iteration included
many quotations solicited from well-known designers. These
quotations were originally integrated into the body of the text.
However, after a close reading by the copy editor, he felt the flow
of the narrative was disconcertingly interrupted by the quotes.
So, in the second version, they were removed. Still, the quotes were
a necessary component of the story, and I did not want to lose them.
In the final version, they were edited to remove redundancy and
reintroduced on their own, published on a separate page with my
text used to introduce them. Since this is an essay on how tech-
nology has altered design practice, I also wanted to call it “Not
Your Mother’s Graphic Design.” The editor, as is his prerogative,
changed that too. You be the judge of what worked the best.
W
hen graphic design was not brain surgery, it was much
easier to practice. The new graphic (or shall we say
cross-platform, multidisciplinary) design is more neurologically
complex than at any other time in history. Arguably, it is more
like brain surgery now—minus the life and death consequenc-
es. Nonetheless, today’s graphic design is not your mother’s
graphic design (unless your mother is 20-something). It is no
longer possible to launch a graphic design career with a ruler,
X-Acto, and glue pot on a kitchen table (although a laptop
would fit nicely).
Ken Carbone (co-founder, chief creative director, Carbone
Smolan) notes, “Twenty or thirty years ago, graphic design was
the domain of a select group of practitioners highly trained
in disciplines ranging from corporate identity and edito-
CASE STUDY:
enD oF tHe Glue-Pot eRa
An Editing Process in Three Versions
sTeVeN heLLer
ORIGINAL VERSION
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:104
092-109_C67944.indd 104 9/22/12 11:26 AM
section 3
the editorial role how to edit and be edited
(Text)
105
rial design to packaging and environmental graphics. They
were based in design hubs in major cities such as New York,
Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco here in the USA and
select cities abroad. All was good. The advent of the computer
ushered in the “Great Design Democracy,” and the ranks of
graphic designers exploded. Now, great designers can be found
in every 300-square-foot office around the globe, offering
an expanded range of digital and interactive design services
requiring new tools and new thinking. The barriers of entry
to the profession no longer exist. Design is now a commodity
business forcing “seasoned” design firms to quickly adapt to
the heightened competition. Clients benefit from this and have
more choice. Having a ‘contemporary’ suite of design services
keeps you in the game. However, the key to winning has not
changed. Fresh talent, great design, solid client service, and
the color red still breed success.”
Engineering has made progressive design concepts from
decades ago more economically doable. Massimo Vignelli
recently said about his flawed, yet revolutionary, 1972 New
York City subway map, that it was an “A.C. (after computer)
design in a B.C. (before computer) world.” The map was
recently relaunched as an online interactive diagram by NYC’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with all the bugs
worked out—forty years later. New technologies have given
and taken away. They have impacted designer and client per-
ceptions and anticipations. They have altered the fundamen-
tal approach to business and even how new revenue streams
are acquired. They have transformed designers from service
providers to entrepreneurs. There are so many variants in
this new flux that I asked some veteran graphic designers—
those who have lived in the B.C. and A.C. worlds—to reflect
on how “change” has altered their respective practices (and
sometimes, their lives).
Jonathan Hoefler (president, Hoefler Frere-Jones) also
identifies the past quarter century as a massive redirect of the
industry: “Both the practice of typeface design and the obliga-
tions of the designer have become considerably more complex
in the past few decades. Twenty years ago, digital type was
in its infancy and type design was a charming cottage indus-
try: independent designers, often working in isolation, could
invent ideas for typefaces, produce them on the desktop, and
supply them to nearby art directors. Today, the burdens of the
entire world weigh down on the profession. Both our clients
and their readers are distributed throughout the world, mak-
ing the linguistic demands placed upon a typeface ever greater,
and the requirement that typefaces function on a diverse and
explosively growing number of platforms makes them ever
more complicated to engineer and manufacture. A profession
of one-man-bands has developed into an industry of organized
specialists, not unlike the way the profession evolved between
the era of independent type founder Claude Garamond and the
advent of the Mergenthaler Linotype Company. But that evo-
lution took 350 years, and what we’ve experienced has taken
scarcely two decades.”
Digital tools and what they hath wrought are the first obvi-
ous differences. Only Gutenberg’s invention of the printing
press is on a par. In fact, what would Herr Gutenberg say if he
saw perfect type on an iPad screen? Granted, tools are always
changing but, as we are frequently reminded by historians and
futurists alike, digital tools and platforms have markedly and
eternally impacted the seminal definition of design like never
before. So what is different, exactly?
Reflecting on the discreet ways these tools have affected his
practice, Nicholas Blechman (art director, the New York Times
Book Review) suggests, “The profession has shifted in subtle
ways, mostly in how designers promote themselves and inter-
act with each other. Bulky black portfolios have been replaced
with slick iPads, and postcard promos with PDF attachments.
I no longer keep artists’ handouts on file, but instead book-
mark [Adobe] Illustrator sites in Safari. I spend more time
art directing through email than on the phone.”
Designers still conceptualize using their own brains. That
has stayed fairly constant since before the advent of printing.
Designers’ tastes have also remained fairly subjective, though
routinely tied to the fashions and styles of the dominant (or
alpha) designer.
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:105
092-109_C67944.indd 105 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:104
092-109_28858.indd 104 8/30/12 4:46 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:105
092-109_28858.indd 105 8/30/12 4:46 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
104
The essay that follows, commissioned by the editors at Print
magazine, went through three edits. The first iteration included
many quotations solicited from well-known designers. These
quotations were originally integrated into the body of the text.
However, after a close reading by the copy editor, he felt the flow
of the narrative was disconcertingly interrupted by the quotes.
So, in the second version, they were removed. Still, the quotes were
a necessary component of the story, and I did not want to lose them.
In the final version, they were edited to remove redundancy and
reintroduced on their own, published on a separate page with my
text used to introduce them. Since this is an essay on how tech-
nology has altered design practice, I also wanted to call it “Not
Your Mother’s Graphic Design.” The editor, as is his prerogative,
changed that too. You be the judge of what worked the best.
W
hen graphic design was not brain surgery, it was much
easier to practice. The new graphic (or shall we say
cross-platform, multidisciplinary) design is more neurologically
complex than at any other time in history. Arguably, it is more
like brain surgery now—minus the life and death consequenc-
es. Nonetheless, today’s graphic design is not your mother’s
graphic design (unless your mother is 20-something). It is no
longer possible to launch a graphic design career with a ruler,
X-Acto, and glue pot on a kitchen table (although a laptop
would fit nicely).
Ken Carbone (co-founder, chief creative director, Carbone
Smolan) notes, “Twenty or thirty years ago, graphic design was
the domain of a select group of practitioners highly trained
in disciplines ranging from corporate identity and edito-
CASE STUDY:
enD oF tHe Glue-Pot eRa
An Editing Process in Three Versions
sTeVeN heLLer
ORIGINAL VERSION
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:104
092-109_C67944.indd 104 9/22/12 11:26 AM
section 3
the editorial role how to edit and be edited
(Text)
105
rial design to packaging and environmental graphics. They
were based in design hubs in major cities such as New York,
Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco here in the USA and
select cities abroad. All was good. The advent of the computer
ushered in the “Great Design Democracy,” and the ranks of
graphic designers exploded. Now, great designers can be found
in every 300-square-foot office around the globe, offering
an expanded range of digital and interactive design services
requiring new tools and new thinking. The barriers of entry
to the profession no longer exist. Design is now a commodity
business forcing “seasoned” design firms to quickly adapt to
the heightened competition. Clients benefit from this and have
more choice. Having a ‘contemporary’ suite of design services
keeps you in the game. However, the key to winning has not
changed. Fresh talent, great design, solid client service, and
the color red still breed success.”
Engineering has made progressive design concepts from
decades ago more economically doable. Massimo Vignelli
recently said about his flawed, yet revolutionary, 1972 New
York City subway map, that it was an “A.C. (after computer)
design in a B.C. (before computer) world.” The map was
recently relaunched as an online interactive diagram by NYC’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with all the bugs
worked out—forty years later. New technologies have given
and taken away. They have impacted designer and client per-
ceptions and anticipations. They have altered the fundamen-
tal approach to business and even how new revenue streams
are acquired. They have transformed designers from service
providers to entrepreneurs. There are so many variants in
this new flux that I asked some veteran graphic designers—
those who have lived in the B.C. and A.C. worlds—to reflect
on how “change” has altered their respective practices (and
sometimes, their lives).
Jonathan Hoefler (president, Hoefler Frere-Jones) also
identifies the past quarter century as a massive redirect of the
industry: “Both the practice of typeface design and the obliga-
tions of the designer have become considerably more complex
in the past few decades. Twenty years ago, digital type was
in its infancy and type design was a charming cottage indus-
try: independent designers, often working in isolation, could
invent ideas for typefaces, produce them on the desktop, and
supply them to nearby art directors. Today, the burdens of the
entire world weigh down on the profession. Both our clients
and their readers are distributed throughout the world, mak-
ing the linguistic demands placed upon a typeface ever greater,
and the requirement that typefaces function on a diverse and
explosively growing number of platforms makes them ever
more complicated to engineer and manufacture. A profession
of one-man-bands has developed into an industry of organized
specialists, not unlike the way the profession evolved between
the era of independent type founder Claude Garamond and the
advent of the Mergenthaler Linotype Company. But that evo-
lution took 350 years, and what we’ve experienced has taken
scarcely two decades.”
Digital tools and what they hath wrought are the first obvi-
ous differences. Only Gutenberg’s invention of the printing
press is on a par. In fact, what would Herr Gutenberg say if he
saw perfect type on an iPad screen? Granted, tools are always
changing but, as we are frequently reminded by historians and
futurists alike, digital tools and platforms have markedly and
eternally impacted the seminal definition of design like never
before. So what is different, exactly?
Reflecting on the discreet ways these tools have affected his
practice, Nicholas Blechman (art director, the New York Times
Book Review) suggests, “The profession has shifted in subtle
ways, mostly in how designers promote themselves and inter-
act with each other. Bulky black portfolios have been replaced
with slick iPads, and postcard promos with PDF attachments.
I no longer keep artists’ handouts on file, but instead book-
mark [Adobe] Illustrator sites in Safari. I spend more time
art directing through email than on the phone.”
Designers still conceptualize using their own brains. That
has stayed fairly constant since before the advent of printing.
Designers’ tastes have also remained fairly subjective, though
routinely tied to the fashions and styles of the dominant (or
alpha) designer.
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:105
092-109_C67944.indd 105 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:106
092-109_28858.indd 106 8/30/12 4:46 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:107
092-109_28858.indd 107 8/30/12 4:46 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
106
Well, one thing that’s new is “design thinking.” Hmmmm.
Just a couple of decades ago, before the term was coined,
design thinking might have been called “conceptualizing” or
“strategizing” or even “designing.” Today, it is a distinct disci-
pline along with “design innovation,” another catch-term that
raises designer status above lower primates. Seriously though,
these terms did not just materialize because a motivational
speaker needed a hook to hang his aspirations on.
Jessica Helfand (co-founder, Winterhouse) looks to her teach-
ing for answers: “I tend to notice the changes in the profession
less in terms of my own work and more in terms of the shifts
in my students. There was a time in the early 1990s when the
then-new media skewed not only the perspectives of young
designers, but also the economic environment within which
they flourished. (As new opportunities proliferated so, too, did
the fat wallets that supported them.) Budgets ballooned, and so
did egos—and none of it made for work that was that trans-
formative or memorable or great. Leaner times make for better
designers. More meaningful work, and greater challenges.”
Digital technologies have made it possible to increase the
scope of design practice a hundred fold. It is not enough to
just instinctually make stuff. Design (including traditional
graphic design) is more integrated than ever into the daily
lives of us all.
Cheryl Towler Weese (founder, creative director, Studio Blue)
states, “One shift I’ve noticed is that in many projects, we’ve
moved from creating narrative to developing an informational
toolbox or dashboard. Working in interactive media has given
us greater control over how information is organized (formerly,
a role that fell within a writer’s or editor’s purview). I think the
development of new media has shaken up roles and allowed
cross-fertilization. Clients are also recognizing the value of
social entrepreneurship and the role that strategy and change
management can play in the front end of design.” Might that
be more communicative power in the hands of mere individuals
than even he could handle? Mr. McLuhan, can you answer that?
Together with engineers, and others, designers are now
developing, not just making, things. The capacity to make
design move in various dimensions is no longer a novelty—it’s
a necessity. According to Stefan Sagmeister (owner, Sagmeister
Inc.), “The still image will continue to lose in importance,
everything that can be animated will be animated—not always
to the advantage of the quality of the project.”
If there is one (drum-roll) fundamental change, among all
others, it is that graphic design is now time- and space-based.
Understanding the storytelling arc is essential in making analog
and digital design. How to move the viewer’s over-taxed eye
from point A to B to Z—over time, through space, and via
motion and interaction—is a skill that was once relatively minor.
Increased data flow has made narration the primary directive.
Graphic designers always thought about the end product
on their audience, but now “User Experience” is the mantra.
At Martha Stewart Omni Media, chief creative officer Gael
Towey traced the early evolution of Martha Stewart Living
meets user experience: “In November of 2010, we introduced
our first iPad issue of Martha Stewart Living called ‘Boundless
Beauty.’ It wasn’t available in print and it contained all new
stories. This was our ‘beta’ test for creating simultaneous
digital versions of our regular monthly issues, which we
launched the following January for Martha Stewart Living and
Everyday Food. For our ‘Boundless Beauty’ issue we created
stories that took advantage of the new functionality available
with the iPad. The issue had five videos and many slide shows,
scrolls, panoramas, and animations. We created stories that
would showcase these new functionalities; for example, the
before-and-after beauty story, the puff pastry story where you
touch the screen and it opens before your eyes, a peony story
where you can glide you finger across the panorama of Martha’s
garden. Working with these extra features is liberating, as a
how-to brand. The opportunities to be able to show before and
after, step-by-step slide shows makes it even easier to entice
the reader and easier to teach them. It was also relatively easy
for our staff to make the transition to video since we are also
a TV company; most of the senior staff has been on Martha’s
show, so we understood what was required to make good
video. However, we also had to produce video on a shoestring;
in other words, not like TV. Our still photographers were
eager to work with us because their businesses are changing
and many of them are enjoying the new cameras that allow
you to shoot still and video with the same camera. There are
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:106
092-109_C67944.indd 106 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Text)
107
FIRST EDITED VERSION
W
hen graphic design was not brain surgery, it was much
easier to practice. The new graphic—or shall we say,
cross-platform, multi-disciplinary—design is more neurologi-
cally complex than at any other time in history. Arguably,
it is more like brain surgery now—minus the life and death
consequences. Nonetheless, today’s graphic design is not your
mother’s graphic design (unless your mother is 20-something).
I reckon if El Lissitzky, Piet Zwart or even Paul Rand (who
owned a computer) returned from Valhalla to resume their
practice, they wouldn’t recognize the design field.
The first obvious differences are digital tools and what they
hath wrought. Only Gutenberg’s invention of the printing
press is on a par. But what is different, exactly? Designers still
conceptualize using their own brains. That has remained fairly
constant since before printing. Designers’ tastes remain fairly
subjective, though routinely tied to the fashions and styles of
the dominant or alpha-designer. These happen to be the key
ingredients in “design thinking,” right?
One thing that’s new is . . . “design thinking.” Just a couple
of decades ago, design thinking might have been called “con-
ceptualizing” or “strategizing” or even “designing.” Today it is
a distinct discipline along with “design innovation,” another
catch-term that raises designers’ status above lower primates.
These terms did not just materialize because a motivational
speaker needed a hook to hang his motivations on.
Digital technologies have made it possible to increase the
scope of design practice a hundred fold. Design is more inte-
grated into daily life. Engineering has made visionary design
concepts from decades ago more economically doable today.
Massimo Vignelli recently said about his flawed yet revolu-
tionary 1972 NYC subway map, that it was [an] “A.C. (after
computer) design in a B.C. (before computer world).” The
map was recently re-launched as an online interactive diagram
by NYC’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with all the
bugs worked out—forty years later.
The capacity to make design move in various dimensions
is no longer a novelty, it’s a necessity. If there is one (drum-
roll) fundamental change, among all others, it is that graphic
design is now time-and-space-based. Understanding the sto-
rytelling arc is essential in making analog and digital design.
How to move the viewer’s over-taxed eye from point A to B to
Z over time and space and via motion and interaction is a skill
that was once relatively minor. Increased data flow has made
narration the primary directive. Graphic designers always
thought about the end product, but now User Experience is
the mantra.
The new technologies have given and taken away. They
have altered the fundamental approach to business, how new
revenue streams are acquired, and transformed designers from
service providers to entrepreneurs. There are so many variants
in this flux that I asked some veteran graphic designers—those
who have lived in the B.C. and A.C. worlds—to reflect on how
“change” has altered their respective practices (and sometimes,
their lives).
also lots of new tools to help make shooting video work, like
shoulder harnesses for handheld and extra audio equipment.
This is the changing world of publishing: our technology tools
are giving us more flexibility than ever, and we can tell stories
in ways that give more dimension, texture, emotional impact,
and information. Our monthly digital issues contain moving
covers (think Harry Potter); how-to videos where you may
learn about a particular vegetable in the farmer’s market, or
learn how to make a weeknight meal of four recipes in three
minutes, or you may just have fun looking at our stop-action
well openers that are always surprising and delightful. All
of this does require new training and, mostly, a curiosity
and willingness to solve problems differently.”
I reckon if El Lissitzky, Piet Zwart or even Paul Rand
(who owned a computer) returned from Valhalla to resume
their practice, they wouldn’t recognize the design field.
SEcTION 3
HOW TO EDIT AND BE EDITEDTHE EDITORIAL ROLE
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:107
092-109_C67944.indd 107 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:106
092-109_28858.indd 106 8/30/12 4:46 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:107
092-109_28858.indd 107 8/30/12 4:46 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
106
Well, one thing that’s new is “design thinking.” Hmmmm.
Just a couple of decades ago, before the term was coined,
design thinking might have been called “conceptualizing” or
“strategizing” or even “designing.” Today, it is a distinct disci-
pline along with “design innovation,” another catch-term that
raises designer status above lower primates. Seriously though,
these terms did not just materialize because a motivational
speaker needed a hook to hang his aspirations on.
Jessica Helfand (co-founder, Winterhouse) looks to her teach-
ing for answers: “I tend to notice the changes in the profession
less in terms of my own work and more in terms of the shifts
in my students. There was a time in the early 1990s when the
then-new media skewed not only the perspectives of young
designers, but also the economic environment within which
they flourished. (As new opportunities proliferated so, too, did
the fat wallets that supported them.) Budgets ballooned, and so
did egos—and none of it made for work that was that trans-
formative or memorable or great. Leaner times make for better
designers. More meaningful work, and greater challenges.”
Digital technologies have made it possible to increase the
scope of design practice a hundred fold. It is not enough to
just instinctually make stuff. Design (including traditional
graphic design) is more integrated than ever into the daily
lives of us all.
Cheryl Towler Weese (founder, creative director, Studio Blue)
states, “One shift I’ve noticed is that in many projects, we’ve
moved from creating narrative to developing an informational
toolbox or dashboard. Working in interactive media has given
us greater control over how information is organized (formerly,
a role that fell within a writer’s or editor’s purview). I think the
development of new media has shaken up roles and allowed
cross-fertilization. Clients are also recognizing the value of
social entrepreneurship and the role that strategy and change
management can play in the front end of design.” Might that
be more communicative power in the hands of mere individuals
than even he could handle? Mr. McLuhan, can you answer that?
Together with engineers, and others, designers are now
developing, not just making, things. The capacity to make
design move in various dimensions is no longer a novelty—it’s
a necessity. According to Stefan Sagmeister (owner, Sagmeister
Inc.), “The still image will continue to lose in importance,
everything that can be animated will be animated—not always
to the advantage of the quality of the project.”
If there is one (drum-roll) fundamental change, among all
others, it is that graphic design is now time- and space-based.
Understanding the storytelling arc is essential in making analog
and digital design. How to move the viewer’s over-taxed eye
from point A to B to Z—over time, through space, and via
motion and interaction—is a skill that was once relatively minor.
Increased data flow has made narration the primary directive.
Graphic designers always thought about the end product
on their audience, but now “User Experience” is the mantra.
At Martha Stewart Omni Media, chief creative officer Gael
Towey traced the early evolution of Martha Stewart Living
meets user experience: “In November of 2010, we introduced
our first iPad issue of Martha Stewart Living called ‘Boundless
Beauty.’ It wasn’t available in print and it contained all new
stories. This was our ‘beta’ test for creating simultaneous
digital versions of our regular monthly issues, which we
launched the following January for Martha Stewart Living and
Everyday Food. For our ‘Boundless Beauty’ issue we created
stories that took advantage of the new functionality available
with the iPad. The issue had five videos and many slide shows,
scrolls, panoramas, and animations. We created stories that
would showcase these new functionalities; for example, the
before-and-after beauty story, the puff pastry story where you
touch the screen and it opens before your eyes, a peony story
where you can glide you finger across the panorama of Martha’s
garden. Working with these extra features is liberating, as a
how-to brand. The opportunities to be able to show before and
after, step-by-step slide shows makes it even easier to entice
the reader and easier to teach them. It was also relatively easy
for our staff to make the transition to video since we are also
a TV company; most of the senior staff has been on Martha’s
show, so we understood what was required to make good
video. However, we also had to produce video on a shoestring;
in other words, not like TV. Our still photographers were
eager to work with us because their businesses are changing
and many of them are enjoying the new cameras that allow
you to shoot still and video with the same camera. There are
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:106
092-109_C67944.indd 106 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Text)
107
FIRST EDITED VERSION
W
hen graphic design was not brain surgery, it was much
easier to practice. The new graphic—or shall we say,
cross-platform, multi-disciplinary—design is more neurologi-
cally complex than at any other time in history. Arguably,
it is more like brain surgery now—minus the life and death
consequences. Nonetheless, today’s graphic design is not your
mother’s graphic design (unless your mother is 20-something).
I reckon if El Lissitzky, Piet Zwart or even Paul Rand (who
owned a computer) returned from Valhalla to resume their
practice, they wouldn’t recognize the design field.
The first obvious differences are digital tools and what they
hath wrought. Only Gutenberg’s invention of the printing
press is on a par. But what is different, exactly? Designers still
conceptualize using their own brains. That has remained fairly
constant since before printing. Designers’ tastes remain fairly
subjective, though routinely tied to the fashions and styles of
the dominant or alpha-designer. These happen to be the key
ingredients in “design thinking,” right?
One thing that’s new is . . . “design thinking.” Just a couple
of decades ago, design thinking might have been called “con-
ceptualizing” or “strategizing” or even “designing.” Today it is
a distinct discipline along with “design innovation,” another
catch-term that raises designers’ status above lower primates.
These terms did not just materialize because a motivational
speaker needed a hook to hang his motivations on.
Digital technologies have made it possible to increase the
scope of design practice a hundred fold. Design is more inte-
grated into daily life. Engineering has made visionary design
concepts from decades ago more economically doable today.
Massimo Vignelli recently said about his flawed yet revolu-
tionary 1972 NYC subway map, that it was [an] “A.C. (after
computer) design in a B.C. (before computer world).” The
map was recently re-launched as an online interactive diagram
by NYC’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with all the
bugs worked out—forty years later.
The capacity to make design move in various dimensions
is no longer a novelty, it’s a necessity. If there is one (drum-
roll) fundamental change, among all others, it is that graphic
design is now time-and-space-based. Understanding the sto-
rytelling arc is essential in making analog and digital design.
How to move the viewer’s over-taxed eye from point A to B to
Z over time and space and via motion and interaction is a skill
that was once relatively minor. Increased data flow has made
narration the primary directive. Graphic designers always
thought about the end product, but now User Experience is
the mantra.
The new technologies have given and taken away. They
have altered the fundamental approach to business, how new
revenue streams are acquired, and transformed designers from
service providers to entrepreneurs. There are so many variants
in this flux that I asked some veteran graphic designers—those
who have lived in the B.C. and A.C. worlds—to reflect on how
“change” has altered their respective practices (and sometimes,
their lives).
also lots of new tools to help make shooting video work, like
shoulder harnesses for handheld and extra audio equipment.
This is the changing world of publishing: our technology tools
are giving us more flexibility than ever, and we can tell stories
in ways that give more dimension, texture, emotional impact,
and information. Our monthly digital issues contain moving
covers (think Harry Potter); how-to videos where you may
learn about a particular vegetable in the farmer’s market, or
learn how to make a weeknight meal of four recipes in three
minutes, or you may just have fun looking at our stop-action
well openers that are always surprising and delightful. All
of this does require new training and, mostly, a curiosity
and willingness to solve problems differently.”
I reckon if El Lissitzky, Piet Zwart or even Paul Rand
(who owned a computer) returned from Valhalla to resume
their practice, they wouldn’t recognize the design field.
SEcTION 3
HOW TO EDIT AND BE EDITEDTHE EDITORIAL ROLE
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:107
092-109_C67944.indd 107 9/22/12 11:26 AM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:108
092-109_28858.indd 108 8/30/12 4:46 PM
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
#175 Dtp:225 Page:109
092-109_28858.indd 109 8/30/12 4:46 PM
Writing & research for graphic designers
(Text)
108
FINAL EDITED VERSION
W
hen graphic design was not brain surgery, it was much
easier to practice. The new graphic—or, shall we say,
cross-platform, multidisciplinary—design is more neurologi-
cally complex than at any other time in history. Arguably, it is
more like actual brain surgery now (minus the life-and-death
consequences), with as complicated a network of synapses to
navigate as anything you’ll find in your head. It is no longer
possible to launch a graphic design career with a ruler, an
X-[A]cto blade, and a glue pot on your kitchen table. I’d bet
that if El Lissitzky, Piet Zwart, or even Paul Rand (who owned
a computer) returned from Valhalla to resume their practices,
they wouldn’t recognize the design field.
The obvious engine for these changes is digital tools and
what they have wrought. Only Gutenberg’s invention of the
printing press is on a par. Digital technologies have made it
possible [to] increase the scope of design practice a hundred
fold. Design is now tightly integrated into our daily lives, and
engineering has made visionary design concepts from decades
past more feasible. Massimo Vignelli told me that his flawed
yet revolutionary 1972 NYC subway map was “created in B.C.
(before computer) for the A.C. (after computer) era.” The map
was recently relaunched as an online interactive diagram by
NYC’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority, with all the
bugs worked out—40 years later.
The capacity to make design move in multiple dimensions is
no longer a novelty; it’s a necessity. Because if there is one fun-
damental effect of technology, among all the others, it is that
graphic design is now time-and-space-based. Understanding
the storytelling arc is essential in making analog and digital
design alike. Knowing how to move the viewer’s overtaxed
eye from point A to B to Z is a skill that was once relatively
minor. Increased data flow has turned narration into the
primary function of design. Graphic designers have always
thought about their audience, but now “user experience” is
their mantra.
The new technologies have also altered how designers ap-
proach doing business, often transforming them from service
providers to entrepreneurs. But since there are so many varia-
Final Article in Print magazine, December 2011.
tions in this flux that I asked some veteran graphic designers—
those who have lived in both the B.C. and A.C. worlds—to
reflect on how the last decade has altered their practices and,
sometimes, their lives.
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:108
092-109_C67944.indd 108 9/22/12 11:26 AM
section 3
the editorial role how to edit and be edited
(Text)
109
(Ray)
(Fogra 29_WF)Job:08-28858 Title:RP-Writing & Research for Graphic Designers
09-C67944 #175 Dtp:225 Page:109
092-109_C67944.indd 109 9/22/12 11:26 AM
..................Content has been hidden....................
You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.