Comments on: The question: Are Graphic Designers Artists?

By: Anne C. Kerns, AIGA

Anne C. Kerns, AIGA — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:19:05 +0000

In response to the comment:

“While there is some restriction in graphic design, there are also ways for personal expression to shine through.”

Why should personal expression shine through? A client who hires a designer to design a report conveying factual information and data is not interested in anyone’s personal expression. They are paying for clarity, organization, and communication of information. Different techniques and styles of aesthetics can be utilized to set a tone, enhance understanding, etc., but that type of design project has no place for personal expression.

By the way, “some restriction” is putting it mildly. Graphic design is ALL about parameters and how to creatively communicate the client’s message within them.

By: Buy lorazepam online.

Buy lorazepam online. — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:16:17 +0000

Buy lorazepam….

Buy lorazepam without prescription. Buy lorazepam. Buy lorazepam online. Buy lorazepam no prescription….

By: Ibrahim

Ibrahim — Sun, 17 May 2009 14:14:49 +0000

I think you need to simplify your topic..Art and Artists are very broad and general…Anyone who is working in a creative field is considered as an artist…Such as Photographers are also considered as an artists…IF you are comparing graphics designer with fine artists….yes then you can say graphics designers are not fine artists…but they are also artists and design is also field of art.

‘The definition of an artist is wide-ranging and covers a broad spectrum of activities to do with creating art, practicing the arts’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artists

By: .: Designers who Blog: Design, Illustration, Photography, Web, Advertising, Branding … » Blog Archive » Writing for Designers

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:33:18 +0000

[...] Interesting Posts: The question: Are Graphic Designers Artists? and Ideas about having a career as a Graphic [...]

By: Sarah

Sarah — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:36:18 +0000

In my opinion the term “artist” is a sacred one that should not be used lightly. Although some graphic desingers have the flicker of artiste in them not all do…like me for example. However it is not as important for me to be an “artist” as it once was. As it stands now I am more concerned with learning the rules of good design…the standards…instead of riding the waves of the term “artist.” I think some do embrace the title too freely when they have nothing to back it up but that’s just me being critical.

By: jandos

jandos — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 14:34:12 +0000

Interesting comments. I think there’s a bit more to say though. Everyone seems to agree that designers are (at least to some degree) artists. A few more questions—is it important to you to be an artist? Is there, or should there be a separate term that distinguishes “fine” art from art produced for commercial purposes? Do you think you embrace the title “artist” in part because you are currently students in an art department with others who embrace the title? Will you still embrace it once you enter the business world—in which the term is often met with derision? (Art in a business context is often dismissed as being “mere” aesthetics, rather than being goal-oriented or strategic.)

By: Jashcrof

Jashcrof — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:31:23 +0000

I would agree that Graphic designers are artists. As for the question of what art itself is, I think that art is BOTH visual expression and communication that any form of either can be art. I don’t think it matters whether the art is made for one’s self or whether it is commissioned for money as in, in a job setting. While there is some restriction in graphic design, there are also ways for personal expression to shine through. This is a tough question, one i don’t think everyone will ever be able to agree with.

By: ben

ben — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 05:39:02 +0000

The American Heritage dictionary defines the term “Graphic Design” as the practice or profession of designing print or electronic forms of visual information, as for an advertisement, publication, or website.

The definition listed for “Graphic Artist” is an artist who designs and makes prints.

I think that graphic designers should be considered artists to a certain extent. The label “artist” is definitely a broad term. To be a successful graphic designer you need to have a good aesthetic eye, a trait that is shared with most successful painters or sculptures. One major difference is that as a graphic designer you find your self taking direction to produce the end product whereas a painter generally is expressing themselves with no restrictive guidelines.

I think it would be an obvious conclusion that a graphic designer with what is thought to be a stereotypical artistic background (fine arts) combined with technical design skills would produce superior work. That being said there are always exceptions to the rule. The one continuous critique I’ve heard about graphic design is that it is to restrictive, people say there is little to no self expression and thats why they prefer fine arts, for the freedom to create things with no guidelines.

I like that there is no concrete answer to this question, I think it allows more creative freedom. Defining and labeling things or people brings a certain amount of restraint into the picture. This is something i think everyone would agree has no place in art or design.

By: jhartsel

jhartsel — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 02:31:37 +0000

My answer is that graphic designers are most definitely artists…but their focus and motivation for creating their art differs from that of ‘traditional’ artists. If a painter wants to create a work of art they might do so as a response to personal emotions or social injustice…Whereas a designer usually designs at the behest of an editor or client. However, I dont think that the designer’s final product is any less a work of ‘art’ than the painter’s. Perhaps the definition or ‘artist’ is a more pertinent question here, but I dont think that ‘art’ and ‘design’ are mutually exclusive as a rule…

By: Jandos

Jandos — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:22:05 +0000

I think you’ve summarized a dodgy question quite well—but the problem may be deeper than you think. After all, what is art? Visual Expression or Communication? 2D or 3D static representations? Is opera art? is pottery? Is any painting by definition art, or only good paintings? If art is by definition not functional, or not commercial does art stop being art when it becomes financially successful? One problem with the word “art” for everyone in the creative fields—not just designers—is that it’s very hard to disentangle the sense of value the word implies from the meaning of the word as a simple descriptive name.

Here’s another question: should designers identify themselves as artists? It seems to come with advantages in some contexts and disadvantages in others.