Where the design community meets.
Let's talk through the context of individuality. Yes, teamwork is important and sometimes is necessary, but at the end of the day, it's a pile of compromises. This may be good for the technical part of the project, e.g. for UX or for developers and engineers but it's not (always) ok for creative development. Just look at the history of art for example (yes, design is art), I do not see any teams, only brilliant individuals.
well, design is always a compromise, even if you do it alone. There is value in doing it collaboratively. I don't agree with the premise of the article, but it is not true that great design is only driven by individuality. I also find it quite disturbing to exclude any form of systematic work, development UX from creative processes, they are as much part of creative work as visual design is.
It depends on the type of project, as well as your "celebrity status" or client's trust if we talking about commercial design (I'm talking about compromise). Also, I did not say that great design is driven by individuality only :)
Design is not art. Art is art. Good design SHOULD come from a very different place than art. They have similarities, but the main difference is that design has goals, needs to work to be considered good. Art can leave you angry, outraged, and it's still good art. The process behind it is also quite different.
Design is a lot closer to UX and development than art, but all of those can be considered part of the "Creative field", depending on what's being done.
It’s a different topic but graphic design is (in most of the cases) art, like logo design, poster design, illustration, digital manipulation, "new media" design ... Some UI / GUI and especially HUD design is art etc. Yes, UX is something else, but it's still creative thinking.
I’m sorry man but you’re way off. Logos, posters etc. have to serve very specific purpose. If you don’t manage to create a strong, recognisable logo mark you have failed. If you don’t design a poster that conveys the information it should what’s the point? Art is a lot more harder to judge since it’s always an expression of the artist and open for interpretation.
Really? So, random photorealistic portrait or random brush stroke is art but an expressive typographic or illustrated poster is just an informational medium. The new generation of designers obviously does not know enough about the history of design.
It depends on the intention of the creative process and the purpose of the thing created. But the line between art and design is blurry and cannot be defined objectively. Look for Dadaism to explore this topic further.
But as a rule of thumb, I would also recommend to not equate design with art - it would not do service to either.
It depends on the intention of the creative process and the purpose of the thing created. But the line between art and design is blurry and cannot be defined objectively. - Well said.
This. I imagine the debate has been going on for decades as I distinctly remember when I started my career in the early 2000s, we were all debating "but is it art?" regarding Joshua Davis' or David Carson's work.
The only difference between them is that Design is the expression and purpose of a Brand/Product/Service and Art is the expression and purpose of an artist.
But Art uses design like design uses art, so technically and methodology speaking they are the same, even though the line between them is blurry.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.