Use your browser's PRINT function to print out this article in a full page format. Close this browser window to return to zeegen.com
'Computers are to design as microwaves are to cooking' exclaimed the legendary, American graphic designer, Milton Glaser. Milton, it has to be said, is recognised for two things; the design classic 'I[Heart] NY' and for his less than classic loathing of computers. The magazine you are holding in your hands is not one Milton would even soil his own hands with! Older designers, like Milton, all complained about the march of technology. Many were left behind and, apart from Milton, went to that place where old designers go to rest. Nowadays technology is not even an issue; it is, simply, just here. The central issues remain, however; what do we deliver with the technology, who we deliver to and just as importantly; how do we train those that deliver, to deliver? Has the rulebook, used in that training, been rewritten or just updated?
The training or teaching of the skills graphic designers require takes time. It is not just the acquisition of practical skills but the conceptual understanding of communication issues that have to be taught. How has the teaching of graphic design altered since the advent of the digital? In 1970 Richard Taylor, the, then, Head of the Graphic Design Department at the, then, West of England College of Art, published his book: 'A Basic Course in Graphic Design'. Twenty-one years ago he wrote, 'Any course of instruction depends on the teaching abilities and experience of its instructors. A graphic design course is no different'. The same rings true now. The expertise of staff is vital and the relevance of their own professional practice as important as ever.
Of course, it is clear that many graphic design courses still house designers/educators of the same era as our friend, Milton. In the book: 'Copy Proof: A New Method for Design Education' Hugues C. Boekraad of, the design school, St. Joost Academy in Breda, Netherlands, has recognised this fact. He remarks that 'many teachers lacked expertise in the new information technology and suddenly found themselves virtually incompetent, at least as long as we assume that teachers train students in the design tasks of tomorrow, not those of yesterday'. It makes sense to assume that being able to use a computer greatly assists in the teaching of graphic design. Others agree. In 'Becoming Designers' Stuart Mealing, of University of Plymouth's Graphic Design department, pushes the right button: 'I do not understand the concept of computer literacy any better than I would that of, say, electric motor literacy. There is no mystique to the technology. You need the skills of word-processing or image-manipulation or 3D modelling and it just happens that the tasks can all be carried out using a box called a computer'. Got that, Milton?
Graphic design is a new career path. Before the turn of the last century, the field did not exist and until quite recently was still known as commercial art. In Steven Heller's publication, 'The Education of a Graphic Designer' he recalls the publicity of one of the first big design schools, the Federal School of Commercial Designing in Minneapolis. Their brochure of 1924 posed the questions: 'what would you give to be able to draw professionally? Do you long for the ability to make splendid pictures, such as you see in advertisements, attractive story illustrations, richly colored magazines covers?' Prospective students were invited to join 'the newest art, the youngest creative force, in the modern business world'. Sound familiar?
The golden rules of graphic design, as taught to Milton and his pals as students, have been eroded, added to, updated and rethought. The rulebook is not just in the library; it is now also on-line. So, over the years, which golden rules remain in place and which fell by the wayside? Have the old guard still got relevant skills to offer? Are those skills taught over fifty years ago still vital today? What's hot, what's not?
In at number one and still regarded as a vital asset; ideas. Good ideas. You want to communicate- you must have ideas, original, creative ones. Ideas come from thinking, and learning to think creatively is an ability that all designers should be in possession of. 'Teach Yourself to Think' by Edward de Bono should be on the reading list for all graphic designers. Why? De Bono states his case; 'because you need thinking to make plans, take initiatives, solve problems, open up opportunities and design your way forward'. But has thinking always been high on the list of priorities? Well, probably not. Designers were once taught a set of skills and creative thinking did not get a look in. Equipped with a type scale, graphic design was more about putting the right parts of the jigsaw in the right places, not very creative. To produce great graphic design now, requires great creative thinking. Think about the best advertising, the best posters, the best film credits, the best web sites; all come with great creative thinking.
At number two; what is it that graphic designers have that the photographer, the illustrator, the artist has to make do without? Yes, type! Typography, is the beast that all designers wish to tame. How have the rules of typography changed? Before the introduction of the computer, the graphic designer could rely on the skills of the typesetter to fully resolve the niggling little details before a job went to print. Specifying type for typesetters was a skill, in itself, and often this task fell to the artworker, brought in by the graphic designer to produce the final artwork. This process has changed, beyond belief; DTP software has given the job straight back to the designer.
The characteristics of typography were once known by every trained graphic designer. Twenty three in total; the apex, counter, bar, serif, arm, beak, ascender, ear, bowl, spine, cross-stroke, hairline, spur, bracket, tail, link, loop, descender, ascender line, capital line, x-height and base line. Quiz your average designer now and gasp if they can name as many as ten! But does it really matter? The quality of typography across many design jobs suggests that it does. Understanding leading, kerning, point sizes, ems and picas, rather than just letting the software make the decisions, empowers the designer. Gone, it seems, is an understanding of the history of the six basic groups of typography; Gothic, Old Style, Transitional, Modern, Egyptian and Sans Serif. Gone are the days of copyfitting tables; used to estimate the amount of space that copy would fill given the number of characters per pica for each size of every typeface.
For most of graphic design's short history it has been purely concerned with design for print and print throws up particular issues. How do UV inks sit on art paper stocks? Which varnish works best as a spot in lithographic printing? How many lines per inch work best for halftones on newsprint? How is blind embossing carried out? When a designer designs for print, it is with the understanding that the final solution will be the printed matter, whatever format that may take. That piece will then take on a life of it's own. It's in the real world, it will sit on a bookshelf, be stuck up on a poster site, be wrapped around a product. It has a physical property, is tangible, will age. We read from top to bottom, left to right, we start at the front and go towards the back. These are the golden rules that the designer and the audience always followed, in the real world of printed matter.
Then things changed, film and TV made sure of that. The top to bottom rule could now be reversed; the back could be the front. Type could move, flow, come to a life, it could behave in new ways. Adding sound, music, and that fourth dimension, time, meant that a whole new world really opened up. In the fifties and sixties, Saul Bass showed us how, with his titles for 'Anatomy of a Murderer', 'Man with the Golden Arm', 'Vertigo' and more recently 'Cape Fear', Goodfellas' and 'Casino'. Motion graphics, with Saul at the helm, played a real part in setting the scene for great movies. But whilst he worked on film titles, Saul also designed, and won awards for, logos, trademarks and corporate identity programmes for United Airlines, Moonlit, AT&T, the list goes on. Saul and his fellow designers did not desert print for the movies; they just got on and did both!
Fast forward to the heady days of the late nineties. Learning nothing from history, brand new designers headed off to the wonderful world of web and multi-media design leaving behind their colleagues back in the print world. These new designers needed new skills and so ignored many of the traditional skills and rules concerned with print. Web designers did not need to know about CMYK, they were happy in their RGB world. Why bother wasting time with printers when uploading seemed so much simpler? And then dot.bomb! Suddenly new designers wanted to be old designers and old designers were happy being, well, old. For those new designers that lost www.clients.com when the bubble burst, print seemed the best option.
Print is alive and well, outliving it's own, and much exaggerated, death as suggested, teasingly, by David Carson in 'The End of Print'. For those coming over to print, some of the age-old golden rules of design now have to be re-learnt. The jury is still out on how smooth the route will be for the new designer entering/reentering the traditional print world. Not all will make the transition intact. Peter Lunenfeld, Director of New Media Design at the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena puts it this way; 'Everyone is not a designer but the market would like them to think so. As the prices of visual communication tools drop and their learning curves flatten, people start to think they are, or will be designers'
Come on in from the cold, guys, and feel free to reboot your microwaves.
© Lawrence Zeegen