http://www.no-spec.com

NoCopyright manifesto up on homepage!

http://www.no-spec.com

Can you change your avatar size to the proper dimensions, Fred? It's messing up the posts you're making.

David, admit it -- I've had to -- we just don't like it being "irregular" compared to our "normal" size. :^D ;^D

Hahaha! Here we go David. I have now deleted
my shockingly big and irregular avatar. From now
on I will have no avatar as a statement of non-design.

We already have 5 typographers on the brief so keep
coming! Only the best will be selected in the end
and shown on the exhibition in Stockholm.

http://www.no-spec.com

http://www.peerpressuresoicanmakemoremoney.com

hhp

Phihranthropy.

hrant->What u mean by that?

Different things work for different people. Sure, sometimes people do spec work out of weakness, but not always. Pretending it's Evil and it should be verboten is a good tactic if you're an established professional in an affluent society who is mostly interested in making more money (by trying to discourage spec work on the part of others). To be fair though, some people discourage spec work because they -incorrectly- assume it's pure bad for everybody. Humans aren't so simple.

hhp

making more money

Well yes, that's one way to distinguish professionals from amateurs.

Of course there is self interest involved, but it's cynical to assume it's the only motivation; as you say, humans aren't so simple. The people who organize their professions are volunteers whose bottom line would have been much better if they hadn't spent so much time volunteering. But they do it to raise the status of the profession in general, and part of that is increasing the value of that kind of work in the marketplace, for everyone who does it, not just the professional elite who made the grade and pay their dues. By having a code of ethics that prohibits members from doing spec work, professsional organizations may in fact hamper members from getting work that goes to those prepared to compete with spec.

If professions don't organize, they will be populated by contract workers without benefits -- Bush's "entrepreneurs" -- who will be exploited by a capitalist marketplace dominated by powerful corporations. Graphic design freelancers are such entrepreneurs.

I'm surprised you would favour capitalism over the worker, Hrant.

> Of course there is self interest involved

Which is totally fine. The problem is hiding that fact, for example by
making distracting statements like "does a disservice to the client".
As if.

And I never said it's the only motivation. It's just that there's
only so much one can say in a domain name, even a fake one! :-)

> By having a code of ethics that prohibits members from doing spec work ...

... a professional organization helps out its top-tier members. :-/

> I’m surprised you would favour capitalism over the worker

Yes, I'm sure that's what I'm doing.

hhp

It has to be http://www.no-spec.com - Chris Mitch

As if.

Not so. If a client will only entertain spec work, it is extremely likely to get second-rate submissions.

That's not what I meant.

But since you brought that up: again, why so absolute? A client could try its luck with spec work, and then go "pay-first" if needed. Ethical? Maybe not. But this does not make it OK for a designer to be phoney and manipulative, especially not when it comes to his peers; except I guess if he thinks he has no peers.

Whose side am I on? I guess mostly the highly talented designer who
doesn't have the luxuries of time and opportunity that most of us do.
Sorry, but I'm not at all interested in making the rich richer and the
entrenched more entrenched.

hhp

why so absolute?

If an organization has a code of ethics, the members should abide by it.
But it's not like professional organizations want to outlaw the behaviour for non-members.
They will point out how it's in the interests of design-buyers to avoid commissioning spec work, because they truly believe that's better for design in general, as well as for professionals.

I'm on the side of not seing people exploited, irrespective of talent.
I'm suspicious of "public good" projects that ask for volunteer work, such as preparing briefs for illustrators, with pefect typography, because the person asking usually has some kind of grant paying them for their work.

I checked out this Caravan Project web site, and there's nothing about "who we are", which sets off the bullshit detector alarm bells. Betcha Big Oil ain't paying to tow the caravan from A to B. Also, I think copyright is a good way to protect intellectual property, so creatives don't end up working for nothing -- so I ain't got no kind words for the we-want-your-best-for-nothing "no copyright" crew.

I don't enter competitions these days, because, especially in type design, it's a lot of work and expense preparing specimens, and those who organize the competitions (and print the literature and awards books) get paid for their work; the winners get publicity, funded by the losers.

> they truly believe that’s better for design in general

I'm not buying.

> I don’t enter competitions these days, because

Again, no sale.
I think you have "better" reasons.

hhp

Also:
> the winners get publicity, funded by the losers.

Yes, advertising is much fairer: all the qualification you need is being rich.
And nevermind that many competitions are/have_been free.

hhp

I’m not buying.

Well Hrant, your reasons for doing "volunteer" work, if you do any, may be self serving, but don't judge others by your own motives.

I think you have “better” reasons.

True, I rarely won anything when I did enter competitions, and usually didn't like the stuff that did win! There are a lot of people in the same boat.

Yes, advertising is much fairer: all the qualification you need is being rich.

At least it's not gambling.
Pay the cost of high-res output and shipping, plus entry fees, and don't make the cut -- total write-off. Do that a few times and it adds up.
Participate in Indie Fonts: value for money.

Nick Shinn-->
The only thing we can tell you
is the truth. TCP is a non-profit
project. Your view of volunteerwork
is very dark and I think its sad since
probably many designers agree with you
after failed specworks and such.

Who we are? We are three graphic designers
from Sweden. We are all freelancers. What more
info do you want about us? Do you want us to
put pictures of ourselfs on the page? Then we
would def be accused of voyerism and we don't
want that since we dont want individual attention.

We will not pay anyone for doing design
that we view on our webpage or show at
an exhibition BUT we want TCP to be an
online and rolling gallery that shows and
bring together all parts of the designculture.

We will not sell other peoples work and
we will not take any profit from other
peoples work. We think galleries, be it
online or rolling, should never charge
designers or people for using it.

TCP might get attention due to other peoples
work but isnt that a good thing? To get more
people involved in ethical and moral issues
surrounding our culture and design today.

TCP is a rolling gallery free for anyone
to use or view. It is supposed to bring
art, design & culture together and back
to the people, not manipulate or fool
designers to do free work.

We can only be honest about this and it's
up to you to believe in our ideas or not.
We just hope that if you dont want or dont
have time to get involved just visit the
website now and then to see how the project
on bringing culture together is going and maybe
you will see that it's for the good of the
designers and the people and not for commercial
matters.

Np-copyright logo was created since we think
everything in our culture today is appropriations
and interpretentions from other peoples work.
We agree with your view that the copyright symbol
is good in its way of protecting creatives but we
also think that those who only copy other peoples
design and call it theirs isnt real designers and
probably won't gain from it in the end.

> At least it’s not gambling.

And I don't gamble.

--

If you're really the helpful kind of person,
try doing it right here, like in the crits.

hhp

Fred, I apologize for doubting your motives.
Anarcho-syndicalism, go for it.

My dark view of volunteer work is based on a lot of experience with non-profit groups -- so often the money goes to bureaucrats, and the interests of the organization become compromised by those of the sponsor, in order to keep the organization running. Meanwhile, volunteers are used to do the grunt work. The worst-case scenario is when a non-profit activist group that's been around a while needs to fund a project, but can't pay themselves for the work, however, others may be hired to work on the project. And of course tradesmen, services and materials are also paid for.

Do you want us to put pictures of ourselfs on the page?

Maybe, but I think as designers you should be able to find some way to discreetly provide reassuring background information and context.

We can only be honest about this and it’s up to you to believe in our ideas or not.

That's naive. You really can't expect people to take anything on trust. How is a potential contributor to know whether you intend to publish a book reproducing the typographic briefs, or the illustrations? Good intentions are not enough, people's attitudes can change. What if one of your partners has a change of heart and decides to make some money off the TCP material?

the best typographers ... natural selection

How can you mix elitism with "art for all?"

try doing it right here

I don't need you to tell me what kind of volunteer work I should be doing.

> I apologize

You see? That wasn't so hard. Now, Phase II: try doing that with
somebody who has openly criticized some of your design decisions.
No pressure though - it would be for you, not me. You're welcome.

> based on a lot of experience with non-profit groups

It seems you've hung out with the wrong people.
Choosing carefully, I've managed to work in and
with non-profits to good satisfaction.

> You really can’t expect people to take anything on trust.

That's quite a telling statement, Nick.
I myself think it's all about trust.

> I don’t need you to tell me what kind of volunteer work I should be doing.

It's certainly true that you need a lot of other things first.

hhp

Your manifesto is a farce of contradictions.
A gallery should never forbid an artist to show his/her work... Unfinished and weak concepts should not be exhibited since it destroys the value and meaning of the art and design itself and can create a negative interest for galleries... Provoking art should never be disallowed as long as the artist can explain why he/she wants to create it... There must always be a general interest in art and design. Today the public tend to avoid the galleries that from the beginning was made for them.

I’ve managed to work in and with non-profits to good satisfaction.

Bully for you.

I myself think it’s all about trust.

Right. But be sure to tell your children not to trust strangers they meet on the internet.

I think that since we never have had any interest
in profit in The Caravan Project we didnt question
how other people would see it. Now I start to see
why people missunderstand our whole message.

1. TCP is not a company or sponsored by a company.
The Caravan Project is a rolling gallery that will
give local artists and designers the chance to show their
work without having to go through the posh and pretentious
galleries.

2. The whole idea with the brief was not to get alot of
spec work. We simply wanted others to be as passionate as
us about our project and instead of just showing our own
work and copyright everything we did we wanted to show as
many talented designers as possible and also try to make
people think about copyright since it nowdays is missused
in many ways through interpretentions almost identical to
the originals.

3. We on TCP wanted to contribute to swedens most cultural
and alternative music festival. We didnt want anyone to
specwork for us. We simply wanted as many motivated creatives
as possible to join in, be it illustrators, typographers, artists
or musicians, and in the end try to get the ones involved attention
through an exhibition in Swedens capital Stockholm.

4. To answer both Nick and Chris about elitism and art for the people I would like to clarify the manifesto since it obviously is missunderstood as it is today.

"A gallery should never forbid an artist to show his/her work"
No discrimination shall be allowed be it racial, genderbased, ethical, class etc..

"Unfinished and weak concepts should not be exhibited"
Just because it isnt pretentious and posh it doesnt have to be a unprofessional and less qualitybased gallery.

"Provoking art should never be disallowed as long as the artist can explain why he/she wants to create it"
Art and design that are provoking should never be rejected just because it is provoking. The artist or designer must always have
the freedom to provoke. But the artist/designer must have a meaning as for why he/she wants to create the provocation.

"There must always be a general interest in art and design. Today the public tend to avoid the galleries that from the beginning was made for them"
What about it? Who can argue against that most galleries today have a strange athmosphere where people are not quite themselves and dont dare to ask or debate the works on the big white walls.

I don't think the way to get people interested in art is to keep making conceptual art, as I assume you are, Freddeuk, from all the stuff about art as communication, the virtue of provocation, and bad art as the product of "unfinished or weak concepts". The problems with conceptual art are that most visual artists are bears of very little brain, so their insights are worthless; that the people don't want to spend their weekends going to see the embodied big ideas of idiots; and that visual art, contra every exhibition catalogue produced in the last forty years, cannot "explore" "issues" because it doesn't have the structured semantic opportunities that language has. If you want to end the low-grade elitism of galleries now, direct your bile at conceptual art. Race-gender-class prejudice is hardly a dominant force in the art-world, for God's sake! Attributing all ills to that kind of elitism seems a bit odd after the long purge of elitism has has created this sea of gurk, in which people as obviously incompetent as you expect to be taken seriously as theorists.

Today the public tend to avoid the galleries that from the beginning was made for them

That's not true in Britain, where places like Tate Modern have succeeeded in engaging the public, by the million, with the kind of sensational "conceptual-lite" art that George derides.

My last post was much too harsh, Freddeuk; I apologise for being so rude, since your intentions are honourable.

We have now changed our way of working thanks
to the constructive critique from some people
here and Catherine on No-spec.

http://blog-omotives.blogspot.com/2006/03/caravan-project-and-others-in-...

http://www.no-spec.com

We have now two Typography briefs on
the webpage: http://www.thecaravanproject.com/typebrief.php

So stupid (from their webpage): "The Caravan Project is Petter Johansson, Magnus Berg and Fredrik Öst. We all have a great passion for design. TCP is a non-profit group that will strive to bring design and art back to the people. TCP will also work to gather all parts of culture together. For example: let music inspire design and design inspire music."

They've put up a no-spec logo on their site.. how does that work?