Not all artists are designers

It is a common misconception if someone can make pretty pictures of one kind, they can make pretty pictures of any kind. Unfortunately, this is quite a myth. Though I agree that design is art of a sort, albeit commercial based art, it is most definitely not fine art. Fine art is almost entirely subjective, whereas commercial art, be it illustration, design, editorial photography, etc, has a very specific purpose. Generally speaking, that purpose is to sell the viewer something. It might not be selling directly in an economic sense, but just to get the viewer to read an article. Alternatively, it can be something like user interface design, so that something is simple to use.

A great example of this is in book design. Not only is the cover trying to sell itself to the reader, but the inside, if properly designed, makes the book a joy to read. These principles are usually something learned through research and training. Abstract expressionism has no place in book layout design. Things like font choice, leading (or linespacing for web folk), justification, and margins take a huge role in the reading comfort level of a book. I will go into the things behind book design in more depth in the future, but the point is that these things aren’t random choices. They aren’t even necessarily just based on the looks of it. For instance, a serif font, such as Times, is easier to read on the printed page than a sans-serif font, such as Arial.

In good fine art, there is a sense of movement through the composition. Nothing should hold the eye for a great deal of time before moving on to something else. In design, the ultimate goal is to lead the eye to the call to action. The call to action is what the designer wants the viewer to do. Examples of a call to action are things such as to go to a website, see the name of a product, or call a phone number. There are different ways to achieve a call to action, from the simple and oft over-used starburst to increasing the size, directing the eye, etc. So there is a different principle at work here than in fine art.

The main reason why not all artists might be able to do this is primarily a matter of knowledge. Someone that went to school for fine art wouldn’t have touched upon print terms such as kerning (space between letters), margins and widows (a single word hanging at the end of a paragraph). Why would they? There wouldn’t be a purpose unless you were trying to move into design. Chuck Close may be a phenomenal painter, but that doesn’t mean he can design a logo. Then again, not all designers are artists either. If you think of an artist as someone that is hands on, many designers can’t even do more than a basic stick figure sketch. So much has moved to the computers these days, some don’t even use a sketchbook (a travesty in my mind!). But then there are some fine artists that only work on computer, or with photographs or a number of other media. But suffice to say, not all artists are designers and not all designers are artists.

What do you think? Am I way off base on this? I like to consider myself as both an artist and a designer. In my work I think you can see both sides of the coin. I think this strengthens my abilities in the long run and I am able to do a large number of different projects. If you are interested in working with me on anything from a commissioned painting to wedding invitations, feel free to contact me about your project. And don’t forget to leave a comment below and get updates on the work I am doing, both art and design by following the links in the left hand sidebar.

_______________________________________________________________________
© This article is copyright of Chris Lane Photo and should not be found elsewhere.

No related posts.

Tags: artists, basics, commercial art, designers, fine art
Posted in Art, Design |