My take:

A (good) graphic designer should be well versed in typography, as well as the other skills required to be consider a (good) designer. A typographer might be only versed in typography, and work strictly with type setting and page layout. The lines between typographer and designer are becoming more and more blurry with the onsluaght of the digital erra.

(It's a rough definition, but a defination at least)

... and what about a "typesetter"? ;-)

Well, the nasty snoot in me would say that the difference is that a graphic
designer, to really fit in, must have a strong disregard for good typography.

hhp

Hahah, Hrant, I was just waiting for such a comment.

I would like to think that I, as a designer, would have a very strong REGARD for typography -- as well as design.

Here is my mantra at the firm: Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art.

Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art.

Oooh, I want to quote that.

Please do.

Kyle,

"Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art".

I really like that comment too. Says it all really :-)

I like the 'merely' part. I've made the argument in class before, that there can be no graphic design, that is , no true communication, without type.

Nice. And the "merely" does rule. But could we possibly dump the "fine" Kyle?

hhp

Hmm. I can think of lots of examples of graphic design that doesn't use type, although it usually does.

To me, the difference between graphic design and fine art is one of purpose, not form.

True. But often a lack of typography -or more accurately/tellingly
of good typography- goes hand-in-hand with a lust for expression
over communication.

hhp

So, you would consider a highway sign showing a picture of a leaping deer to be fine art?

More like a work of fiction.
Has anybody ever actually seen that happen these days?!

hhp

As a matter of fact, where I drive, I sometimes see deer run across the road. Once, I saw one get hit when I was driving up north. For various reasons, it's actually becoming more common in Minnesota.

But it doesn't matter. The main thing is that the signs are intended to communicate a message (watch out for deer crossing the road) and you don't necessarily need type to do that.

You're right of course. Kyle's expression suffers from the same thing that any single phrase does: it can only say so much in such a short space, simplifying to the extreme, leaving out all the context and exceptions; at best it can offer a small if hopefully useful truth - but I do think it does that.

As for the deer signs, it sounds like where you live
they're actually needed, but around here all they
are is a cruel joke on expectant kids.

hhp

So I was waiting to see who would be the first to tackle that topic. Congratulations, Mark, you get the cookie. Of course I realize that this type of blanket statement can only hold so much truth with such a large context. Iconography is very much graphic design, and it mostly does lack typography. The same could be said for my area of expertise, trademark design -- more specifically designing 'symbols' as trademarks. Although in trademarks we usually have to leverage typography to elevate the symbol to a place where it can exist without it. Example: Playboy Bunny

I also grew up in a heavily wooded area and the existance of deer x-ing signs were much needed. I have acutally been in a car that hit a deer -- and let me tell you -- it is like hitting a truck.

That said, as a rule of thumb, typography exists as the cornerstone for graphic design. But, as we all know there are many facets to graphic design.

Revised Quote:

Without typography, graphic design is merely art.™

Graphic Design is more aptly called visual communication design. The point is visual problem solving of the client's communication issue. To me, anyone who uses art skills to arrange things to look nice on a page is not a designer, they are a "Layout Artist". Anyone who just is doing work to please themselves and not solve a clients problem, is just a prima donna Bull S**t artist. Typography, illustration, photography, communication strategy, symbol development, etc. are skills required by graphic designers. There is no certification in the field so anyone with a computer and CS Suite can call themselves a graphic designer (or a typographer). The proof is in the pudding. Hrant over-generalizes by unfairly putting his "Artiste" label on all designers. There certainly are some out there that deserve that label but there are many who don't. This is true of many professions of course. Design is completely unregulated and good designers take the heat for what the bad ones have done. Regulation would not help any either so the buyer must beware. In the mean time, instead of beating up on designers whom you don't even know, perhaps just looking at portfolios, interviews, and recommendations will help sort the wheat from the chaff.
ChrisL

"instead of beating up on designers whom you don’t even know,"

Who was beating up on designers? Certainly not I.

I don't think it says it all. Are you saying then that the "Apple" logo -- a pictographic design -- is merely fine art? and what's the "merely" part?
It's a catchphrase, but not really a good description of graphics, design, typography OR fine art.

ChuckGroth

Visual communication is the term I use when teaching. That's what we are -- communicators. But the artists (designers?) who painted on the caves of Lascaux 40,000 years ago were visual communicators as well, communicating hunting sites, techniques, religious aspects of the hunt, etc. Typography is a fairly recent addition to the communication biz. And it's an ASPECT of what we do, not an exclusive to compartmentalize our craft.

ChuckGroth

Any visual form of expression is invariably, art. There is good art, and bad (tasteless) art.

A typographer *is* a designer, but not all designers are typographers.

To me, this is saying quite a bit, especially after my third glass of rum and coke.

A well-set page is a page that is well-set by design. There is indeed art in the very mechanics of sound typography. Setting a nice, flowing rag is art.

So, the graphic designer who arranges type, ventures into the realm of the typographer by default, a realm in which he/she should have some appreciable level of skill. It's double duty.

Ya dig?

> Hrant over-generalizes by unfairly putting his “Artiste” label on all designers.

I've never done any such thing.

"Chris, have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no answer only, please."

hhp

I dig, all right. I have adequate definitions of my own. I was just saying that the previous definition, although it sounded nice and lofty, doesn't fit the bill for me.

"Visual communications" (and even "graphic design" to some extent) make me think of "sanitation engineering." I rather like the old term "commercial art."

“Chris, have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no answer only, please.”

Yes well no well only when she doesn't stop starting to deserve none of it any longer than before she should have not wanted to afterwards being sure not to be . . . :-)

Sorry Hrant, I misunderstood you. I just can't ever remember you saying a good word about designers.

Kyle.
I never said you did.

ChrisL

Commercial art sonunds to me something like "cheap art"... I prefer graphic designer, visual communication sounds good and accurate but maybe doesn't cover the crafty side of our profession.

Héctor

Just to add to my earlier comment:

A well-made typeface is usually designed with the demands of sound typography in mind. It is easier to set a page well with a high-quality font.

For instance, Minion was designed for extensive, columned reading. It also works well with longer measures, although some would object to its relative narrowness. But I don't.

Basically we are stuck with "left over" terminology for professions whose lines have blurred (and in some instances, become obsolete).

"Graphic Arts" pertain to items produced by or involving such reproductive methods as those of engraving, etching, lithography, photography, serigraphy, woodcut, silkscreen, etc., and/or relating to the art of printing in the broadest sense, incorporating both fine and commercial art.

"Commercial Artist" is a lost term which was meant to differentiate between "fine artists" (individuals who produced ojects of no value but to itself) and individuals who produced illustrations, designs, adverts, etc. for strictly commercial purposes.

Somehow "graphic artists" started appearing on the scene during the sixties and were a little higher in the food chain than "commercial artists" but not as revered as "Graphic Designers." (You can look at old classified ads and college program descriptions to note the genesis.)

Meanwhile, printers were always printers, and more often than not apprenticed descendants of the "guild." Typesetters, typographers, pressman, composers, makeup, proofreaders were all participants of the same trade: PRINTING.

Type designers and punchcutters WERE the professional equivalents to fine jewelry designers and diamond cutters, rarefied and highly skilled, since it typically cost foundries hundreds of thousands $ to produce and distribute a new hot metal typeface.

Once photo offset lithography and phototype came into their own, the traditional print trades got skewed (screwed?). Typesetters now worked for type houses (commercial typesetting) and typographers started working in either ad/design agencies, type houses or publishers.

Buying galleys of phototypeset copy was an expensive proposition, so generally, type was "spec-ed" by trained individuals. Since so many professionals used to be quite sophisticated in type knowlege, the trade knew Sh*t from Shinola. Everyone had their purpose under the sun.

With the technological explosion of the last twenty years the medical profession (from doctors to technicians) has become highly differentiated into fields of expetise, but somehow the "Graphic Arts" workforce had a meltdown.

Basically, business graphic programs began to corrupt the gene pool, and production teams were swept out with "Desktop Publishing."

If you don't know (and I mean TRULY KNOW) typography, then how the hell can you even fathom the beauty and complexity of type designs.

But you know what, somehow music still seems to survive and delightfully surprise from time to time. I guess we have to be content that there may be a dozen or so people out there who can truly understand what you do.

p.s.> I'm tired of definitions... I'd rather just see good work produced.

OK, end of rant.

Well I would like to put my tuition dollars to use here and speak a little about Otto Neurath...

Otto Neurath invented the isotype, he created a system of Typographic Isotypes (or logo types) in an effort to provide a global visual language. So symbols, at their root should be somewhat typographic in nature (if they are good).

By the way I have also been in a car hit by a deer, the signs are definetly necessary. If I was to eliminate any signs I would get rid of speed signs! That way we could all go as fast as we want. Right?

> I just can’t ever remember you saying a good word about designers.

I guess I'm trying to give them what I think they (collectively) need: a reality check. Design as a field seems as full of itself as it is superficial. Even the FTF manifesto stuff seems off the mark; although its heart is in the right place it ignores the fact that designers simply don't have that much power (especially in a capitalistic system that controls people's wages and even channels of dissent).

On the other hand:
1) There are exceptions, as always. Like the ones who hang out at a typographic watering hole...
2) There are certainly fields that are even worse off, like journalism. But the further something is from the context of type the less sense it makes to complain about it here.

Individual designers, I have no problem complimenting (like Marian Bantjes). And as a group, if I were to say something nice, it might be that I think they have a lot of potential to really address the human visual reality, once they go deeper than the thin skin that is Style.

hhp

"p.s.> I’m tired of definitions… I’d rather just see good work produced.:

Amen.

Back to drinking -- uhh, I mean work.

Chuck,

"I don’t think it says it all. Are you saying then that the “Apple” logo — a pictographic design — is merely fine art? and what’s the “merely” part?
It’s a catchphrase, but not really a good description of graphics, design, typography OR fine art."

You didn't read ALL of my post, did you?

Hildebrant-
I read it all. I think I was referring to more to the replies that came after it. You repeat that like a mantra, and enough people will believe it... look out.
I guess my point was typographers, designers, ARTISTS --whomever -- see their own niche as the most important. When you have a hammer in your hand, the whole world looks like a nail.

I just got an email pointing to one of the latest Design: Talkboards articles -- Famous graphic designers, typographers and creatives

Also of note: New term coined -- Artworkers

> see their own niche as the most important.

Very true. But then you can think about what other people think is important, and what other people actually need, and then the relative merit of various professions becomes untangled. For example, politicians think they're important (and hold a huge amount of power) but other people don't think much of what they do.

> Artworkers

Sorry, that sounds like calling a prostitute a "Fornication Engineer". I think "artisan" can work. But for [text] type design, I prefer "craftsman/woman".

hhp

I thought Artworkers sounded pretty lame myself.

When will HR and "marketing experts" quit with inventing labels?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I was once a Creative Director, but now I'm non-imprimatur!

hhp said:

“Chris, have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no answer only, please.”

hahaha, that really is quite witty! (unless it is true)

I don't think typographers exist anymore..maybe in some places
like Switzerland.

Graphic designers are also expected to be typographers,
however the high standards of that craft, has been lost among us.

Why?

My instinct is that they don't teach it adequetely or well enough
in schools. On my own, I've had to go buy books and learn, the
intimate details of the topic -- and I still feel insecure!

As a professional, I've seen that clients don't know and don't seem
to care about good typography, and that has given designers a crutch
not to value it as well -- especially in our society where project
schedules are based on speed, speed speed -- not the white stuff.

p.s. All those fancy computer composed collages that are self-expressions, really belong in the category of digital artisan;
that is the confusion between them and real graphic designers.

Forget that the term already exists -- I think that since graphic designers basically select fonts, they should be called fontographers!

My "formal training" with type and typography proior to graduation was just "slightly" better that average. My REAL training began when I started spending time and LISTENING to skilled veterans of the trade (literally tradesmen) and the "elders" of design and typography.

The rest came from hours upon hours and days upon days of looking at poking at typefaces, typeset copy, classics of fine print, Graphis and Type Directors Club annuals, good and bad publishers, ad/design agencies, specing and fine tuning MILES of type output... and ABOVE ALL, studying the OLD type specimen books of ATF, Linotype, Berthold and Monotype.

Oh, BTW -- do graphic designers closely proof type output prior to press proofs anymore? This is an honest question.

Norbert--
I don't think so, at least in practice. I remember specifying type on a VDT for velox output. That's wen you really get a handle on faces, size relationships, etc. since you were working blind (the screen didn't display the face, and it wasn't until the velox was output some 15 minutes later that you saw the leading was all off or something). And hand-kerning (here I mean actually x-actoing the letters apart and reassembling them to get the letter spacing correct.
But that kind of work developed a sensitivity toward type that's hard to equal today, at least with young students who don't know any world other than typing on a mac and hitting "print."

⇒ But that kind of work developed a sensitivity toward type that’s hard to equal today

That's a theme that runs through several threads at Typophile. Some of us are trying to determine if there are any kind of exercise or activity that might help graphic arts students to develop/refine some of those critical skill sets.

We had to do it by necessity, but designers today needn't see output any greater than 72 ppi before sending to press (you know, "don't have the time, rush-rush, it's due yesterday" everyday pressures).

-------------------------------------------------
Yes, I'm old, but I'm can throw a mean X-acto!

My bottom line is, the bottom line. If I can solve a clients communication problem and turn a profit, you can lay any label you want to on me.

—Oh, BTW — do graphic designers closely proof type output prior to press proofs anymore? This is an honest question.

Do I count as a graphic designer? If so, then yes, I do. I always print to check, and always make corrections. It is impossible to tell otherwise! It may make you feel better if I tell you that I am rather young, so this bears well for the future. I also know quite a few other young 'uns who do the same. I am slowly discovering isolated pockets of typographers here in NZ that are completely into it—and damn good at it too.

Oh, BTW — do graphic designers closely proof type output prior to press proofs anymore? This is an honest question.
Did anyone see the hilarious little note that the printers of the Cabinet magazine left in the last issue?
I think it sheds some light over some of the issues discussed in this thread. Proof-reading, typesetting, the role of the printer... Basically, the printers were so tired of proof-reading and correcting the magazine files before printing - hyphens to em dashes, which to that, and so on - that they just stuck a note to the first page stating just that before adding a list of corrections that should have been made to the texts in the magazine. They thought it would serve as a wake-up call to the editors/designers of the magazine.

I was well impressed by the level of responsability and care the printer took, prompting him to take such a drastic measure.

It's a pretty good magazine though, Cabinet.

...the bottom line.
I like the bottom line.

My personal favorite, a term I think I coined, is aesthetician ™ .

Interesting question.

Both typographers and graphic designers must be able to use composition and space for any given shape, folio or bottle. I think they cross-over too often to separate them and would like to think that most people would rather be able to have all the tools necessary to answer their clients needs.

"Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art." -- I wonder if there is a little something missing from your, Kyle, initial quotable catchphrase. I, personally, refuse to think of graphic design as fine art. Fine art implies the wrong sort of thing. It implies a world lacking any sort of balance as the customer opinion only occurs after the piece is completed, because the customer is buying what the artist has created. Designers on the other hand always has -- whether we want it or not -- the clients opinion to act as a sort of guide. Artists are self-guided. We, designers, are guided by our clients' needs.

I always say, "Without typography, graphic design is merely superficial decoration." I suppose it is because decoration, for me, implies that a client is still involved.

> what is the difference between a graphic designer and typographer.

No difference. Just more definitions, philosophy.

> Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art.

With or without typography, graphic design is graphic design. Bad or good — this is another issue.

> Fine art implies the wrong sort of thing. It implies a world lacking any sort of balance as the customer opinion only occurs after the piece is completed

Not true.
Fine art is fine art. Not the same world as graphic design. Nothing to compare. Unless we want more definitions, philosophy.

That is what I just said.

How about: "Without typography, graphic design is just pictures."

(Of course, every picture is worth a thousand words.)

I like Marks' comment.

Frivolously expressing myself all day gets boring, quick, thats what I don't like about fine art. Not to mention those who 'do' fine art to try to make a living are a ... nevermind.

p.s.- Don't throw kittens at me, I itch. Horribly.

Then there's my PR Writing prof who refers to all of it, even the visuals that contain nary a letter, as "text". Does that make the photographer a typographer?
;)
But I don't suppose we want to go there -- too much airy fairy philosophy and semantics.

K

I still don't know where this is headed or why. Without typography, graphic design doesn't have typography. Let's get t-shirts printed up. Typoography is an ASPECT of graphic design. It's like saying "Without a cuisinart, a house is merely a gymnasium." No, it isn't. It's a house without a cuisinart. That's all.

"Fine art is fine art. Not the same world as graphic design. Nothing to compare."

Extract from a lecture by Paul Rand at MIT.
John Maeda is the host.

John Maeda: "What is design?"

Paul Rand: "Design is the method of putting form and content together. Design, just as art, has multiple defintions, there is no single definition. Design can be art. Design can be aesthetics. Design is so simple, that's why it is so complicated."
 
JM: "What is the difference between a designer and an artist?"

PR: "There is no difference between a designer and an artist. They both work with form and content. I try to create art, whether I make it or not is not up to me, it's up to God."

From:
http://acg.media.mit.edu/events/rand/ideamag.html

> "There is no difference between a designer and an artist."

Hogwash of the century. And a telling parallel with GN's "there is no essential difference between handwriting and type".

hhp

Back to topic --
Graphic Designer vs Typographer
If a graphic designer should arrange type well, as well, what is the difference between a graphic designer and typographer.

Last thoughts before I go to bed --
The problem is in the construction of the question.
The graphic designer must incorporate (not necessarily create) ALL individual elements that comprise a project into an integrated piece (ad, brochure, package, etc.).

Those individual elements can be block text, headlines, illustrations, graphics (graphs, diagrams, etc.), photos, and so on.

Currently photographers, illustrators, copywriters, layout artists, art directors, graphics designers, graphic artists, pre-press/production artists, retouchers (digital), lettering artists, cartoonists, and type designers are still contracted or employed in the graphic arts. Who contracts a typographer for a project anymore?

On highly professional projects:
When you need photography done you get a photographer.
When you need copywriting done you get a copywriter.
When you need custom type or special heads done you get a type designer or lettering artist.
When you need pre-press files done you get a production artist.
OR you get a talented and skilled graphic designer to do all of it.

All of the above are still professions with real people you would call.
Typography is no longer a profession and typographers have no listings in the Yellow Pages:

Search results for Typography from Verizon SuperPages
Matching Categories ~ 6 listings in 3 categories (More Info)
All categories related to "typography" in New York NY
Media & Communications
Printing Services (1)
Arts & Entertainment
Visual Arts
Commercial & Graphic Arts (3)
Commercial & Graphic Artists (2)

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, this is NEW YORK CITY we're searching.

So what's the difference between a graphic designer and a typographer?
Answer: you can't find typographers in the phone book.
TYPOGRAPHY IS NO LONGER A PROFESSION! Get it? Get over it!

I think typography as a professions does exist, it has simply evolved to stay current with the times and technologies. Books still need a typographer. Only coffee table books could work with only a graphic designer involved.

However, with every other job description needing the potential employee to wear many hats, I would agree that someone, usually, cannot only be a typographer. Although, I'd be willing to bet Kent Lew is a typographer first and designer second, for instance.

Tiffany, I tend to agree that there are still typographers out there.
My only point (and perhaps narrow viewpoint) is that one can no longer be SOLEY (and soulfully) a Typographer in the same way a graphic designer or photographer can be.

Typography has become only one of several disciplines that graphic designers possess (in varying degrees of proficiency).

One sees the crystal goblet half full and the other sees the crystal goblet half empty?

Tim

> One sees the crystal goblet half full and the other sees the crystal goblet half empty?

:0)

One of the problems is that the software is too good. Because the software gets you 90% there, the time and effort to get that extra 10% -- which 99% of the clients won't notice -- gets spent instead on other things, like proofing the spelling, & tweeking the photo in Pshop so the client's niece isn't green.

Jay

>“Visual communications” (and even “graphic design” to some extent) make me think of “sanitation engineering.” I rather like the old term “commercial art.”

Me too. Puts the truth right up front, and avoids the confusion of the word "design".

Up until the demise of phototypesetting companies before the turn of the century (yes, we are in the 21st century), typographers and type directors were the sentinels of quality typography.

All of the top phototypesetting houses had one or more typographers reviewing, marking up and refining output for key clients. A type house's reputation was based on the consistency of quality typesetting.

Art directors, creative directors, graphic designers would do general type specing, but the tiny nitty-gritty stuff was the typographers' responsibilities. Type houses would lose clients if the quality wasn't consistently top notch, and typographers could lose their job if they were not up to standards.

Now the type houses are gone and the type sentinels with them, placing the entire burden on the designers, who are generally too maxed out to go that last 10% . It's a problematic situation that is mostly resolved by lowering the bar.

It's a shame, though, that we're forced to lower the bar. Jobs I do now that I didn't do twenty years ago:
Type output, Color separation, Scanning, Color correction, Final production, heck, even copywriting, photography and printing in some cases. The job desciption has grown dramatically. What's to be done, though? Now that we wear the hats, we're expected to wear them well ALL THE TIME.

It is all about speed now (and last second changes). Projects took longer in that era. There was no instant gratification of seeing how something would work right before your eyes but there was time between phases of a job. You had to wait for galleys to come in and be proofed by the client. You had to wait for corrections to come back. Delivery was not instantaneous as it is now. This time allowed for a step back (and work on other jobs) and made planning ahead a real necessity. Spec-ing type took time but if you screwed it up, it was an AA on you and you had less time to do the job. Now, nobody ever thinks something is done. You can putz and change right up until press time. Sure, it was a pain to do all that handwork but people (clients) let go of a job sooner because it cost a fortune to make changes and took too long for the deadline to be met.
I don't know about Norbert, but I wouldn't go back to it. There was good work done then which is easy to remember. There was crap too which we all try to forget.

I had some great typesetter to work with and found some bad ones too. Like Norbert says, you dumped them quick.

There may be a difference between the U.S. and Europe regarding typographers. In Europe, a typographer was a designer who used type as well as being a typesetter. In the U.S., the Art Directors and Designers spec-d type and typographers followed their specs (making great improvements which many art directors never noticed). I was teaching at Ohio State when Will Kunz was there teaching as well. I would consider him to be a typographic designer in the European mould I mentioned. He was an ultimate craftsman and typographic designer but would not call himself a graphic designer. I think that was a European thing. Here, it was different. Typographers rarely got that kind of freedom here in the U.S.--it was an art director's world with the stroke of a marker pencil on tissue overlays.
It isn't all today's designers who are at fault, it is the whole business, clients and all (armed with cell phones and Blackberries).

ChrisL

> It isn’t all today’s designers who are at fault, it is the whole business, clients and all

Yes, that's very true, Chris. It is the nature of the beast now to have as little time and as few people involved in getting a project out today.

It is also the current nature of the business world whose attention span goes no further than a few bulleted slides in PowerPoint.

For a period of time I was very lucky having a very unique position of Creative Director at Agfa/Compugraphic' s Type Division. My principle task was to make all type output on all ads and collateral rival the quality of any manufacturer of typesetting equipment. If the type didn't look good, then it was impossible to sell typesetting equipment to the high-end type houses.

With millions of dollars of equipment and type sales on the line, I had the power NOT to go to print unless the type and typography looked its best. Not all work got the same amount of attention, but every piece of literature that went out was up for criticism by the typographers and type directors around the world.

I don't yearn for the "good ol days" but I'm sad to see an era of professional craftsmanship fade into the past.

Chris..nice post!

Will Kunz..I love his work; unfortunately you won't see
much of that type of design outside the realm of academia.

We all acknowledge that typographic excellence in the industry
is becoming extinct if not already.

What can we do? We can't change what clients won't and don't care for.
Design had its heyday in the 50s and 60s when ads were designed by artists and designers...but all of such are deemed too "high" art for the public nowadays.

The point: I think graphic design and typography is becoming ever dumber and has plateaued as an industry.

Can anybody prove me wrong?

> The point: I think graphic design and typography is becoming ever dumber and has plateaued as an industry.
Can anybody prove me wrong?

I can't PROVE you wrong, but all is not lost. I am still surprised at how many visitors are on the site at any given time in relationship to the amount of members online. It must mean that there is something of worth on this site. Why else would anyone plod through the various rants and squabbles.

I don't think any of us working now can shoulder the blame for the current state in the field. I would like to think that there will always be good design to come. It is easy to look back at past times and see the good examples that remain to represent the time. The crap ends up wrapping the garbage and is never seen again. There was plenty of real crap in the 50s and 60s too, just like today. All we can do as individual designers/typographers (insert your label of choice here) is do the best work we can in our own small worlds and let the future generations decide what was good. I don't really care what critics think of my work. I care about my clients and their audiences but I am my own toughest critic.
There is a potential for a future in our field but it can only be realized with our own sweat and fortitude. Just keep working, the future isn't written by projection. It is written by people actually doing in the ever-moving present.

ChrisL

Some really good points made there. When d says "nobody ever thinks something is done," that's accurate on one hand, but the reverse is also true: many people think something is done immediately, because they're looking at a digital rough instead of a tissue or marker comp. "Looks good to me!" "... But I haven't worked out the kerning or lea..." "Looks good to me!"

I'll join in and say I don't really miss the old days. Technological advances have allowed for more freedom -- typographically and creatively -- than we ever had before, but it has come at a price.

Typographic excellence becoming extinct? I don't think so. At least I hope not. I believe there are still many people who strive for excellence in type, design, and all the other aspects of the field. The hardest part is getting the client to recognize and expect excellence.
I was bidding on a logo design job for a fairly large midwestern company, and when I quoted my price, the director coughed and said (this is absolutely true), "What?! My nephew has a computer. I can get him to design the logo for $50." What do you say to that? If the client has no idea of the difference, no amount of convincing by a designer is going to enlighten him. We do the work and fight the good fight where we can.

I think a lot of typographic problems today are created for the same reasons as the past, blivits, 10lbs of (stuff) in a 5lb bag. Communications are being rushed rather than thought-out. Even the concepts I'm seeing are weak at best. It seems gimic is better than content. An example is a duck screaming the insurance companies' name, its funny, but tells you nothing about the quality or pricing policy of their products, weak!

"...a duck screaming the insurance companies’ name, its funny, but ..."

The company might say it was very aflactive at getting the name remembered though :-)

ChrisL

Chris... you quack me up! ;)

Dan, as you have observed, clients are more interested in buying mind-share, and marketers have been peddling stealth and guerrilla marketing techniques for years now. Image (mental concept) is no longer based on personal perceptions or judgements, therefore "quality" need not be supported by exceptional design.

Today's consumer perceptions are shaped by peer branding, and marketers spend more time and client money on creating "buzz".
After all of those tricks have been played out, the marketers will move on to something else.

Marketers pitch "marketing" and clients buy it. (I better be careful since I brand myself as a marketing consultant now).

"(I better be careful since I brand myself as a marketing consultant now)."

Just don't duck the bill when it comes:-)

Marketers do sell marketing. They make more money on doing surveys/focus testing than anything. After all, they can't be wrong, they have data! They would not make much money if all they did was send you off to find a good designer, they would rather you spend it on them than design.

ChrisL

^
I was setting type before marketing ate the world. It was enlightening to realize that no amount of skill or experience could trump a focus group, and that everyone would soon be working for marketing.

I prefer, a 2 dimensional communication architect.

you must be at least 100 years old jupiterboy. snake oil salesmen used marketing. i'd have to say that early advertisers all used marketing. i think it would be a mistake to not consider the industrial revolution and the birth of advertising to not have included marketers.

Now the type houses are gone and the type sentinels with them, placing the entire burden on the designers, who are generally too maxed out to go that last 10% . It’s a problematic situation that is mostly resolved by lowering the bar.

Well, I'm here because I'd hate to see that bar lowered any further than it has already. I became a Graphic Designer in about 1995 coming from a technical (CAD) background. I am completely self-taught and, as such, am constantly striving to further my knowledge (I just can't help it - there is so much I'm sure I don't know).

I have taken fonts and typography for granted for many years and have really just become aware of its intricacies and finer points. I have much to learn and read your posts with smug relish in the knowledge that I am amongst those who really care about one of the underpinnings of my chosen profession.

thanks

pd

"(Of course, every picture is worth a thousand words.)"

Not quite. When the web first started to emerge, a lot of people asked if type was done now, that we'd just use icons, pictures and audio (eventually) to get about and find out...So, I started thinking about a world without type, (just for excercise of course), and I realized that some pictures don't work, are useless in fact without a word or two type, like "where, or who, is this?" or at least those occasional words make the difference in pictures that are "informational" vs. "art".

And: "typographer" is a job that doesn't exist, and a "type designer" is one that does...'r that's my definition :)

someone who fancies themselves as a typographer enjoys opening the glyph palette. a graphic designer hopes the type designer has put all the glyphs in obvious places.

Hi, i read that no type=no communication, well what about a picture is a 1000 words, once you are so obsessed with this "VS" thingy, remember that letters came out of figures, drawings, and letters used to be simplified versions of imagery, still some of them are. Later on we have the simplification of letters, combination of letters and formation of words, wow isnt that amazing! , and further on we have the "attention to detail" and legibility and taking typography to the edge, deploying all the technological medium to make type better! All this just sounds like creation of tags over people!...

do we always tend to simplify, and then reanalyze because we are bored of simplicity?

I have been searching for information on legibility testing, grading, and standards for printed material. You folks are keen on good design. Some of you may know where I should be looking. If you do, please read on and e-mail me at gfmueden@verizon.net

My old eyes were offended by chairmen's letters that had been gussied up more as monuments to the designers ego than to help convey the message. So this is an effort to find, or if necessary create, legibility standards and ways of testing and rating the legibility of printed matter. My search has found but two standards: for material State sends to the President and for labeling the aircraft wiring.

My Internet search first produced little but how to produce good legibility. This has been covered extensively in college psychology departments and Lighthouse International, APHB, etc., and is not what I am after; I want to know the legibility of the finished product, (1) what proportion of the reading population can read it without difficulty, (2) where it stands on a legibility scale. If no such scale exists, I will try and create one. I have been given, by low vision professionals, scholarly reasons for abandonning this effort, but I feel that even an imperfect scale would be better than none. It is as if they feel that I am trying to rain on their parade, "not invented here".

Actually some work is being done in the education field under the title of Universal Design, having tests printed legibly, but, so far as I know, it has not had widespread introduction.

===gm===

I missed this when it started, but it caught my eye now. I will just respond to this comment by David Berlow:

<< “typographer” is a job that doesn’t exist, and a “type designer” is one that does...’r that’s my definition :) >>

"Typographer" is a job description that exists at least one day a year in my house. Late every April 15th, when I fill out my tax return, I get to the line that asks for occupation. & there I write "typographer."

powers

No veo antagonismos entre tipógrafos y diseñadores gráficos. Ambos roles son complemetarios y se necesitan. Y es más, a veces se conjugan felizmente en una sola persona.

Y no olvidemos que en hay muchos artistas que se valen de la tipografía y de la caligrafía para realizar sus obras.

Saludo a todos!

/ / /

I see no antagonism between typographers and graphic designers. Both roles are complementary and needed each other. And indeed, sometimes happily combined in only one person. :^)

And let us not forget that there are many artists who make use of typography and calligraphy to perform their works.

Greetings to everyone!

“Without typography, graphic design is merely fine art”.

merely fine art?
in my days at college if you couldnt draw you did 'graphics' (sic) and if you could you were in the higher echelons and did fine art.

These days most graphic designers want to be artists and amost artists want to be graphic designers.

Me - i do all of them

>There is no difference between a designer and an artist.

The difference is that a designer has a client.

In the old days, designers hired typographers to set their type. It was a specialty that has now largely become part of a designer's job. Some designers are better at it than others. The publisher I used to work for had a staff typographer who formatted all our type and made it beautiful, leaving us free to do the design and layout.

(Please excuse me if I'm repeating something already said, I didn't have time to read every word of this thread, but it's a good one)

> higher echelons

More like higher bullshitelons.

> These days most graphic designers want to be artists
> and most artists want to be graphic designers.

So all of them should just get a room (and lock the door).
Leave the craft to the thinkers.

hhp

Well, fortunately none of that is true, of course. Most graphic designers want to make graphic design, period. If you are provoked by those who balance between art and design, well, they do it because they can. If a brand or an art institution pay them to gather friends to perform a relational esthetic piece, what will differ in the arts/design department is not what actually goes on but on who's paying and how it is referred to. Context.
Design needs to work. Art doesn't need such limitations. That's not to say the artist avoids certain limitations. And typography won't help you (see Lawrence Weiner, Jenny Holzer, Barbara Kruger.) In the end what matters is context and purpose.

Art is expressing oneself. Design is expressing what others want expressed.

Nothing can be purely one without some of the other.

"Fine Art" is failing to express anything and propping it up with prolix explanations. It has its counterpart in design, usually foisted upon government tourism boards.

Nothing fully reaches either extreme of this axis, either.

I'm sorry, it seems as if my Kruger link got weird.
Regarding what art is, self expression could very well be some part of it, but in contemporary art You'll find that it's the Institutional art theory that rules: Art is what the art world considers art.

higher echelons

More like higher bullshitelons.

Right on, Hrant. The only thing high about fine art are the prices people pay for ugly crap in the name of concept. Graphic designers are the artists of our era, and those “fine artists” in the higher bullshitelons will be lost to obscurity when future generations realize that the only people who every gave two shits about concept art were the idiots that Charles Saatchi suckered into buying it. I’ll take Paula Scher’s drawings over Damien Hirst’s stuff any day.

Fine Art is not all Damien Hirst and his ilk, that's not fair. I agree that the art market has gone insane, but that's been more a reflection of this weird economic bubble than anything else, like the real estate market. Be interesting to see what happens now. But recent trips to the Louise Bourgeois show at the Guggenheim, the Kara Walker show at the Whitney or the Morandi show at the Met served as a reminder that plenty of amazing artists have not succumbed to the hype and frenzy. It's not fair to make generalizations, nor to put type designers on any loftier a plane. Comic Sans anyone?

A useful analogy on art vs graphic design might be background music in a movie, vs a popular song. Writing background music is a servant art: it must serve the story and drama of the movie. This doesn't make it less challenging or important. Famous screenwriter William Goldman said that music is one of the 5 things that are make-or-break for a movie being good. But the success of it as 'underscoring' will be judged by how well it enhances the movies. In the case of the song, it has its own story, and is judged on its own, not by how well it serves something else.

Graphic design is largely a servant art also. It has to serve the publisher and author, or the building or signage it is on.

And just as with movies, part of it may succeed judged independently from its original context. But that's generally not the point of it.

>leave craft to the thinkers

No leave craft to the craftsmen.
And the best craftsmen have both thoughtfulness and artistry.

[By "craftsmen", I include the women designers as well, of course.]

The only thing high about fine art are the prices people pay for ugly crap in the name of concept

Those are harsh words! But I sense that You don't really get art at all, do you James?

@pettyFab: Today, I have no client, do I magically turn into an artist now when I'm drawing ideas? And when Mark Wallinger - lots of text here, maybe he's a typographer?- gets a commission, does he transform into a graphic designer? No, that doesn't make any sense.

I studied 'fine art' for 5 years. Then I needed to earn a living and started taking on work as designer. I quite liked it, so I stayed at it. But I think in principle, I'm still the same person. And I tend to think of myself _not_ as taking part in "higher bullshitelons" or anything like that but someone who tries to communicate, whether previously through an installation in an art gallery or currently more likely through a website design. In both cases, I would express myself, however, it's almost never about expressing myself.

Like Fredo says: Context.

Are you one thing all of the time?
No magic, just intent.

hhp

Fredrik, you take my words way too literally. You are the one not making sense.

I am both a graphic designer and an artist. The former - I am contracted by clients, for pay, to provide a service to their specifications. The latter - well that's up to me. Both types of work are creative, stimulating and fulfilling. I'm lucky. And yes, I am the same person when I do both, but the types of work are different, as is my approach.

I realize the lines are fuzzy. The fact that Michelangelo was commissioned to paint the Sistine Chapel doesn't suddenly make him a designer.

I think *most* of you get the idea.

What I was trying to say is that the 'client' argument falls totally short of a working distinction between Designer and Artist. Artists have always had clients, and most often briefs and deadlines. Problems to address and solve, economical and spatial considerations to take into account.

It's the market you are working on, the discourse you are addressing, the institution that founds your creative exploration, that 'defines' you as 'artist' or 'designer'.

To be an artist does not equal creation in isolation. You can do that for a hobby, a way to meditate, or for sublimation. But that doesn't mean you are an 'artist'. Just as writing letters doesn't make you a calligrapher.
Being an artist is just as much about communication as being a designer is.

Hrant, no, I'm not one thing all the time, but the swap does not make me a better or worse person. Nor does it in my opinion make my output more or less 'valuable'.

You're not listening...
I guess that makes you an artist for sure! :->

hhp

Dinosaur Kristin reporting for duty!

I am a real-live typographer. I am paid to create beautiful type for advertising. I don't deal with art, photos or other such "fine art" nonsense (kidding). I concentrate on the type alone. I take what I've learned from 34 years in the craft to create a typographic product that stands above the rest.

We actually have had up to seven full-time typographers here but are down to a mere four at present. We used to have time to create fonts and/or alter existing fonts. With the cutbacks, we now hire outside vendors (thank you, Mark Simonson!) to do our font creation so that we can concentrate on producing beautifully crafted type.

This subject is near and dear to my heart, obviously. I wish there was an easy way to communicate our craft to students and graphic designers in general. I look to fellow craftspeople, such as Ilene Strizver at [[http://www.thetypestudio.com/]The Type Studio], who are making great efforts to pass on our traditions.

Of the 100 or so typesetters I have known over the years, only a few are still crafting type for a living.

Kristin

This thread is reminding me why I don't spend much time at Typophile anymore. It gets so boring arguing semantics with contrarians rather than anything of actual substance. It's more or less a given around here that if you say the earth rotates around the sun someone here will take issue with you and insist on driving the point home with a sledgehammer. I used to find it refreshing; now it just seems old. There are better uses of my time, like designing and making "fine" art.

It's a shame because there are so many amazing minds here one could actually learn from if it were possible to get rid of the noise.

Ahhh!!! Finally--I haven't seen a good old-fashioned Norbert "I may be old but..." tag line in ages. Sounds good again you old fart! :-)

ChrisL

Howdee Dez...
yup, it was time to come out from under my rock and stop threads from becoming more farty than I am!

Like the old days during talent shows when they used a hook to stop the act :^)

Besides, I promised Tiff that I would instigate those brilliant pun runs we had from time to time.

Patricia, is that what's been happening? I haven't been paying enough attention. Well, that's unnerving, but not insurmountable. I think the best chance of getting rid of pedantic sophism is to beat it down with a large stick: let's show that it's not acceptable in this society via Massive Public Ridicule. Enough of us have to simultaneously come down hard on it, shred it apart, every time, for everybody to realize it's not OK to demote the substance of type around here.

I will probably miss the next time it happens, but when it does please let me know and I will send Cerberus. hpapazian at gmail dot com

hhp

You’re not listening...
I guess that makes you an artist for sure! :->

Hrant, unless You're witholding some revelatory facts about, say, armenian clay pottery that you would like to share with us, perhaps a wise suggestion is to leave your misconceptions about art and artists, and stick to type.

Patricia,
If you are referring to my comment, I think 'sledgehammer' is a bit harsh. English may not be my first language, but I tried to make my sentences carry some argument, and I can assure you I was not taking issue with you just for the sake of it. I was reacting to what I felt was an interesting but too-simplistic distinction between designer and artist:

The difference is that a designer has a client.

If you state a 'truth' like that, you are inviting 'contrarians'. You set the volume.

I'll be leaving this channel now, and avoid inserting my comments next I see you here as they're offending you.

I'd appreciate if you stayed.

Fredrik, sorry. Sledgehammer may have been harsh and I certainly don't mean to drive you off. You have as much right to your opinions as anyone - and your English is fine. And the problem is as much me as anyone else - when I feel I'm not being understood I can be equally stubborn. But coming back to Typophile after an absence and finding this same sort of pointless (to me) and endless argument still taking place (and it wasn't only this thread mind you) reminded me of why I drifted away in the first place. Kind of like reconnecting with a lost friend and thinking "oh yeah, this is why we stopped hanging out together in the first place".

I should add that the title of this thread promised this sort of navel-gazing discussion; I should never have opened it to begin with.

And you know you are a Production Manager rather than either a Graphic Designer or a Typographer when you arrive at work at 8.30 a.m., leave for work at 5.15 p.m., and you never open any design software until 4.50 p.m.

The rest of the day is e-mail, spreadsheets, phone calls, meetings.

Crap!

powers