Don't get married. Don't buy a house. While fulfilling, neither is conducive to having any spare time.

My advice would be to do one thing and do it well. In my opinion, life is too short to try to be an expert at everything. If you focus on one thing, you'll have a better chance of succeeding IMHO. I'm not saying having hobbies is bad (I've got plenty), but they should stay hobbies.

A social life is possible, with a supportive spouse, but you should rule out vacations and entertainment. Avoid housework. Multi-task: Travel should be combined with exercise, on a bike. Business should be combined with lunch. TypeCon is a vacation.

If you have a party, greet your guests at the door, "Hey everyone, so and so is here," introduce likely soul mates, then back to the studio. Reemerge every hour or so for 5 minutes.

Above all, don't fritter your days away on email and online forums.

The exact opposite of 'Get a life' works for me...

Also a job where you don't have to put in too many extra hours is a help.

Nothing is more motivating than a boring job.

If possible: go by train instead of car, less to worry about, more time to work.

who woulda guessed my degree trained me in economics? my solution to yer problem is charge higher prices for your web design projects.. evening out supply and demand. This allows you to have more time for fewer clients and maybe a bit left over for yourself. This solution works really great... in theory. maybe someday i'll find out if it really works when i'm in demand.

So far some very interesting feeback to my question...is there anybody out there who is actually successful in many mediums?

for ex. print, web, multimedia, illustration, typographer?

One thing is that good type designers seem to generally be lousy graphic designers. It might seem paradoxical, but I think it makes sense when you consider how different the two tasks are. Type designers don't make visual compositions - we make little machines.

hhp

Type designers don't make visual compositions - we make little machines.

True, but many type designers are very good typographers, which suggests that the big gap is between type and graphics. Give me a text, and I can design and typeset it so it will be a pleasure to look at and read, but don't tell me you want it to be graphically exciting, sell widgets to housewives, etc.

hi frank,

working in a network environment makes it possible for me to work in different media fields. i design print but leave the pre-press and production matters to others. i design websites but leave the coding and programming to others. i design typefaces but leave the distribution to others. and eventhough i also work as art director in the advertising field i still have time for my family, vacations, the gym, a social life, plenty of sleep, my ps2 and visiting online forums.

this only works because i have partners in my network that i can depend upon at all times, each an expert in his/her field. the output is therefore of high quality in combination with high efficiency, which as a result allows me/us to charge higher rates, but not as high as those of agencies that offer a similar quality.

so, eventhough it's hard and takes a lot of time to find the right partners, i would say that networking is the way to go today. i've been working like that for many years and it definately works for me.

simon

> I can design and typeset it so it will be a pleasure to look at and read

I'm not sure that's what might be called the "real thing". You don't need to be a good graphic designer to realize that classical typography* works, and what the "rules" are (think Bringhurst), but to me that seems like a formulaic application. I think good typography (the kind that produces notable degrees of pleasure and readability) is in fact the "graphics" you mention.

* Which can used to "sell" things (like ideas) just as much as any other style of design.

--

I think Simon's advice is wise: find people who can do a quality job on the stuff you can't, or simply don't have time to.

hhp

Well, I can also design good forms and other material in which the text is central, and this isn't limited to classical typography. But I still consider graphic design to be a whole other field. I'm always very disappointed when I pick up the latest 'typography' annual and find that it's full of graphic design, i.e. design in which text is entirely subservient to visuals.

I'm a new member but an old designer and I want to reassure you that you can do it all as long as you think you can. Think Descartes (I think, therefore I am.) not renaissance man, which is a hotdog term. Think of the work, not yourself. Your clients will thank you for it. So will your family.

Sorry about those caps. Anyone know how to get rid of them? I tried without success.

Sorry about those caps.

If it's good graphic design the typography should not be subservient to the visual.

It does seem curious though that designers seem to make better typographers then typographers make designers...

But they also seem to make really really bad type designers.

hhp

sounds like the beginning of a good fight to me. good thing i qualify as a hobbiest in all these categories so i don't have to be expected to be great!

But they also seem to make really really bad type designers.

There are some exceptions to that (I know--there are always exceptions). WA Dwiggins is a highly regarded type designer, even though some question his ability as a graphic designer. Within this forum there appear to be some very talented graphic/type designers--for example, Randy Jones and Kent Lew.

Those who would question W.A. Dwiggin's ability as a graphic designer wouldn't know honest graphic design if it bit them.

Among other things Dwiggins was a good illustrator and a master puppeteer. The handbills he designed and hand-lettered for his puppet theatre are works of art, as are the puppets themselves.

Below -- a ticket to his theatre, and four of the many marionettes he hand carved and painted. From the book by Dorothy Abbe: The Dwiggins Marionettes, published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc., NY.</

I agree, Dwiggins rocked. I have never seen any of his marionettes--very cool.

I'm not sure that's what might be called the "real thing". You don't need to be a good graphic designer to realize that classical typography* works, and what the "rules" are (think Bringhurst), but to me that seems like a formulaic application. I think good typography (the kind that produces notable degrees of pleasure and readability) is in fact the "graphics" you mention.

I agree, Hrant. Designers tend to forget typography � the traditional kind in which legibility and readability are important � is part and parcel what graphic design is, along with being 'expressive' (whatever that means) graphically. Being 'functional' or 'invisible' seems to be so pass� these days. Graphic designers want to be noticed, so they are more interested in big concepts rather than tiny details. How often do you hear people say: 'but this is not designed!' Designed means: Is it clever? Is it shocking? Is it stylish? Is it cool? Or even 'Is it Photoshopped?'

For me graphic design is about the big concepts as well as the small details. And graphic designers should be good typographers and perhaps type designers too (in a perfect world). But I think at the moment graphic design is moving further and further away from typography.

I'm always very disappointed when I pick up the latest 'typography' annual and find that it's full of graphic design, i.e. design in which text is entirely subservient to visuals

I agree too, John. It is disappointing. Type is very often the 'icing on the cake', mere decoration for images.

More than that, the textual paucity of design annuals strongly suggests that the kind of graphic design the annuals-industry values is that without content: design for design's sake, rather than to communicate. It will be interesting to see if the recent soul searching themes of design conferences like last year's AIGA translate into any difference in this year's annuals.

This is all a natural result of contemporary society's gravitation towards style, versus content.
It doesn't matter what you have to say, as long as you're dressed right.

hhp

Wise words Shinn & Simon Schmidt. I'm into this life for 6 years now. Lucky enought I found out at the same time I went into design a very special girl than just keeps "waiting" for me and the promissed weekends & vacations. The problem is that this is getting worse as time goes by and in fact I don't have a valid vacation for 3 years now and used the company vacations in August on very important works.

So, this post came out on it's perfect timming. I've been a web designer & programmer for 4 years (8 hours a day) at a multimedia company and when I return home I systematicaly turn on my computer and work on my freelancer work (mainly ID's & some cool"er" sites), usually more 4-5 hours a day. I admit this is a disease, being a designworkaholic, but I found out that the only thing that kept me going was the pleasure of what I did at home, and this got to a point that I loss all the will to work at the webcompany. So, typophiles I'm happy to report that from April to the end of the year I'm quitting the day job and focus on what I really like (as a freelancer) & hoefully have time for the family & the clouds.

I'd say: See what gives you more plasure on your work (don't be afraid if it just open Illustrator & place a real huge g on the canvas, change the colour, smile and close the program) and if it's economically profitable, and decide! It's better to make a wrong decision than keep on trying everything at the same time and never decide to change and feel miserable every day. Don't try to do everything alone! Get a good partner and share the work & vision.

*applauds*
very inspiring adriano, honestly.

This is my mantra -- and what I try to instill in designers that work under me.

I pose the question:

What seperates fine art from graphic design.

My answer is this: the addition of type, or typography.

There is not a place where design can be 'good', without 'good' typography, the result would be an oxymoron.

I truely believe it is not possible to be a good designer, with a firm understanding of typography. Good design is effective communication of a message -- even if the message is to confuse.


I would agree that type designers usually dont make good graphic designers. Much like good developers dont make good designers.


Hildebrant.

From various comments here, finally from Kyle's, I surmise that typography is necessary to graphic design, but graphic design is not necessary to typography. This makes practical sense, and also explains how it is possible to be a first rate typographer and have neither interest in nor aptitute for the broader discipline of graphic design.

This is not to say that such a typographer might not be capable of some kinds of extra-typographic design, but he will probably approach them in the same spirit as he designs and sets type. I'm thinking here of Jan Tschichold's covers for Penguin, which frequently employed illustration and other non-textual, graphic elements but always in a typographic context: the opposite of the general graphic design context.

John -- agreed.

John, I don't agree.
But I started out as an ad agency art director who became more and more interested in typography, and eventually ended up designing typefaces.

I don't think anything in the art/design sphere is that difficult that you can't get up to a good professional level in a few years studying and working at it (providing you have a general aptitude for visual art).
But there is a diffenence between plying several trades sequentially, and juggling them at the same time.

Multitasking is harder, because while the basic skill may be there in a variety of areas, getting your head into "where the scene is at" in a particular discipline is harder, and the design modality is slightly different than the typographic.

What's hard: switching modes. These days, I find myself favoring typographic solutions to art direction problems (in my book cover design work), and constantly have to guard against it, because letting a design ride on some clever typography is not often the best way to please one's client.

Sorry John, I do agree. Reread your post, and I think I just confirmed the second part of it!

When I was in high school, my art teacher used to call me "the Renaissance kid." My AP chemistry teacher insisted I had a career in science. And my AP English teacher thought I should become a writer.

>...is there anybody out there who is actually successful in many mediums?

I eventually took a degree in fine art, and I had a couple of exhibits in commercial galleries before I got sick of the art "scene." I have been a graphic designer for about 20 years. I have designed a few websites, coding the HTML manually in a text editor. I was competent, but didn't feel like trying to keep up with the ever-evolving standards. I have also worked as an illustrator and recently completed a set of twelve illustrations for a toy/gift packager. But I don't pursue that so much any more (the field has gotten so competitive). For the past few years I have been focused on book design (interiors and some covers) and type design.

I suppose it all depends upon how you define "successful".

The flip side of "Renaissance man" is sometimes expressed as "Jack of all trades, master of none".

I agree mostly with what Nick said. The distinction of working sequentially versus simultaneously in several disciplines is an important one. Switching gears is the hardest part.

As far as advice in how to pursue many interests, it boils down to what Paul Giambarba said above, which can also be summed up by that shop-worn Nike slogan.

I have found that working as a freelancer has afforded me the flexibility to pursue new opportunities as they arose and to follow my personal interests and natural curiosity. However, it is not the route for everyone. Especially if financial security is important. It helps if you maintain a simple lifestyle. And it helps to have an understanding spouse whose interests, talents, and strengths complement your own.

Incidentally:
W A Dwiggins [designer of Metro, Electra, Caledonia, among others] started out as a graphic designer (a term he actually coined), but was also a well-known illustrator. He spent the latter part of his career focused on book design and type design.

Rudolph Ruzicka [Fairfield, Primer] was a well respected and sought-after illustrator (mostly wood engravings) and book designer.

Warren Chappell [Trajanus, Lydian] was also an illustrator and book designer.

Eric Gill [Gill Sans, Perpetua, Joanna, et al.] was an illustrator/artist and stone cutter.

Hermann Zapf [Palatino, Optima, Melior, et al.] was a book designer as well.

-- K.

Frank,

I sooooo know what you mean. Especially in web, things go so fast it's really easy to get outdated. I've been called a Renaissance girl before, I blame this on the fact that I literally want to know everything and try everything and I'm extremely stubborn at this.

If I were you, I'd try to learn the very basics and widest aspects of each thing you want to know. These are less likely to change over time (instead of keeping up to date with the latest fonts, learn how to kern well. This can apply to everything). I'd ask people around for which books are best for learning certain things and also finding good resource sites with forums like this one where people can learn off each other.

Another advice would be to keep in good physical shape (and mental shape should come with it at the same time). I used to think working out twice a week was 2 hours less in my schedule, in fact it's not, it's probably an added 4 hours (if not more) in terms of being awake and focused at what I'm doing. Keeping a clear mind will help you learning more efficiently.

You can also ask yourself what you really aspire to. (i.e. Is being skilled in all aspects of designs your direct goal or would it be a way of achieving something else for which there might be other ways?) I know for one I've often aspired to things that once I had, I realized it wasn't all that important in the end. =)

Em

Ditto on the work out. I work out 5 times a week, for 90 minutes.

Hildebrant.

Ok, I'm not THAT disciplined yet ^.^

I agree on the beer drinking once a week and the dancing at home alone, that works for me too.
As for playing music, drums are for smelly people.*

(*) Sissy finger-exercising guitar player here...

Hello Everyone.
This thread is very timely for myself, for the juggling, flailing, mixing of many fields has been one of glorious disaster and horrible triumph for me.

Last Saturday, I had what I considered my most fruitful day of work ever: up by 6am, read a good portion of Chaplin's autobiography, set three pages of type for a book of poetry, read about Elizabethan drama, wrote 5,000 words of my novel, finally structured the short film I'm shooting on Friday & Saturday and then read some letters of Lord Byron. I was in a strange exhausted sort of ecstasy following some time with Bach searching for the themes in his variations, content with the days work.

But the next few days were pure hell, the deepest depression I've ever had. In my more coherent moments, I have accused that terrifyingly perfect Saturday of ruining my mind, which already was unfocused for decades but not to such a complete degree of fruitfulness.

It seems that discipline and a time of reflection before and after the time of work is absolutely necessary. Probably keeping my body in shape is a good idea, too, though I haven't extended my discipline to that area of life.

Personal routine:
everyday I must do three of these four things, and must never skip the same thing three days in a row: 1. Memory Palace (don't ask) 2. read fiction 3. read non-fiction: aesthetics or philosophy or history 4. draw

If I do not do these things, I do not allow myself to work on any of my projects. It's harsh, but it seems to have worked. Notable on Saturday was that I did not prepare myself and on Sunday and Monday I was unable to do the routine (family, teaching, etc).

But I am young and certainly foolish. I registered for typophile before finding this thread and I used a quote from my own novel (forgive me) to attach to my profile. I don't know if it will appear on this post, but it had to do with Leonardo da Vinci and his own dissatisfaction with his life. I fully expect to have the same dissatisfaction, but I doubt it will be for nearly as a great a body of work.

A body of work, a corpus, is exactly that. The final assessment of a person's life comes as they are finally making their house in order as death draw's near. I've fought to keep notions of success out of my head, and failed all too often: perhaps I should listen to that clear-thinking rascal Schopenhauer, and simply live.

I feel blessed that type is a part of that living.
~h

For everyone who would like to be good in every aspect of what they do (and more), I would strongly suggest to read Le mythe de Sisyphe by Albert Camus (I'm sure it's been translated in english and many other languages). It's about the absurd. If you don't kill yourself while reading it, you should be good to go for a while and not worry about stuff =)

This is reminds me of the typophile of old.
Hudson, Berkson, Stand�n and Papazian in a 15 foot philisophical steel cage... I digress.

Professionally, I think trying to do it all will be a disaster. Everyone measures the opportunity cost of say, learning Flash action scripting, and makes a judgement to proceed, or hire someone. Most often it is more cost effective to hire someone. If you enjoy a challenge, you may do it yourself anyways for the sheer pleasure of kicking Flash butt. (or Fontlab, or watercolor, or construction, or whatever it is).

I don't recommend buying a copy of Home Surgery for Dummies and grabbing some cutlery and a few paper towels.

Randy

>>everyday I must do three of these four things, and must never skip the same thing three days in a row

I have that rule too, but my four things are:
Eat
Drink beer
Sleep
Laugh

The problem is that too often I've done 3 without noticing, then I realise I'm not allowed to go to sleep until tomorrow.

Only 45 minutes to go...

Did I leave alcohol off of my list? Don't get me wrong, a fine glass of slivovitz after the requisite cups of coffee makes a page shimmer beautifully...

Emilie, I'm glad you mentioned Camus because by sheer accidental and wholly american association, I think of Gide. His Lafcadio is one who must be thought of and emulated when thinking of the Renaissance man (doubtful term though it is) and intending to keep suicide far from home. For to Lafcadio was given the gift of laughter (forgive this sententious speech, laced with words like sententious), which Bataille embraced so strongly. Such joy is the only thing to give life to a person that tries to "do everything," which we all know is an impossibility and truly something ridiculous. A man who writes and wishes to preserve his text in type, must (or may) learn the art of typography [this sentence seems absurd now that I reread it]. A storyteller, if he believes that medium is as important as the message (a typographer's attitude if ever there was one), may try to learn as many different media as he feels are necessary to telling the story the best way possible (be it book, film, poem, play etc). But the despair which follows, something I recently experienced, is more likely to be based in fear than utter disappointment. Recall that in my post above, I considered it to be a "successful" day. Blasted wondrous life of paradox. Thus, Lafcadio to your Sisyphus. (Les Caves du Vatican is translated into English as Lafcadio's Adventures, by the way��which doesn't quite match up when you read it).

And yes, you've guessed it��my career in surgery ended early. Stupid wiggly fruit flies.

Brian, cool for the authors, I'll try and check them out sometime!