From The Archives

Illustration: Graphic Design’s Poor Relation

Admit it. Oh, come on. Everybody knows that illustration is nothing. Nothing compared to graphic design. Nothing compared to photography.

The first time I applied to RISD, in 1973, I was rejected. The following year (after a bizarre experience at the California College of Arts and Crafts) I was accepted. In California, all I remembered was doing lithographs and that I had a little white dog. Photo Realism was all the rage and I hated it with a vengeance. Since my questionable skill as an artist had deteriorated, if anything, during that time, the reason for RISD’s change of heart remains a mystery.

There I decided to major in Graphic Design, because I loved type. I had discovered El Lissitsky, Lebedev, Malevitch and Rodchenko- those were my gods at the time. Also, it was a political decision. I came from a privileged and artistic family, so naturally the pursuit of “Art” with a capital “A” I considered suspect; an indulgence only the elite could afford. Surrounded by books on Matisse and Picasso, I vowed to create the world’s loveliest pizza box. Give them art where they didn’t expect it- not on a gallery wall, but on shampoo! Maybe something influenced by Stuart Davis. But nobody ever asked me to design a pizza box.

Basel, Shmazel. At RISD in the ‘70’s, what I called the Swiss Miss style prevailed. Among other peculiar assignments was a concrete book (as in concrete poetry) and I was immediately aware that I had been catapulted into an even more rarified artistic environment. “Univers” was the only acceptable typeface, and then there were the grids. Grids! No pictures allowed, unless they were grainy black and white photos. Here’s a word I’ll hate forever: “conceptual.” I think it means “un-stupid.” Design turned out to be even more snobbish and existential than painting. I longed for a down-to-earth project, like a new candy bar or something. Besides, I missed drawing.

So I transferred to the Illustration department. There, luckily, I met Mahler Ryder, a teacher who encouraged every possible kind of artwork, up to and including things that looked kind of like graphic design. I feel sad because he died so young. Marcel Duchamp, Man Ray, Warhol and Ed Ruscha, were my influences. My theory will always be this: look for the passionate teachers. It doesn’t matter what they teach. Of course the other Illustration professors encouraged me to return to the Graphic Design department, since every single piece I produced included typography, and they didn’t think that was Illustration, really. Uh, okay. I was young and insecure. Now I’m old and insecure. It’s much better!

Here’s the absolute worst thing you can say to the head of a Graphic Design department: “Oh, Come On! It’s only graphic design! It’s not like engineering! A building’s not gonna fall on somebody’s head or something because I missed a few weeks.” They wouldn’t let me back in the department, unless I took a whole extra year. (!) ($!) Clearly, Graphic Design is a very Serious Thing. It was a Big Deal. The choice had become such an issue, such a source of contention that the fun of making art was nearly gone forever.

There was nowhere to go but Painting, where no one was minding the store anyway and I had time for a few Graphic Design electives. Thank God for the late Michael Glass. He was the teacher responsible for my own acceptance of the possibility of a lighthearted and tolerant world, where illustration and design and painting could live in Peace and Harmony Together. I brought drawing into my design work, and type into my drawings, and I’ve done that ever since, with happy results. It’s a tough sell, but what gets through can be something complete, something my own, and not a little picture in a block of somebody’s badly-designed text.

Did anyone call Paul Rand an illustrator? Just check out his “El Producto” ads. Cassandre? What about Herbert Leupin, Bruno Munari or Milton Glaser? Some more respected names in our field include Paul Colin, the Stenberg brothers, Herbert Bayer.

If you’re good, they call you a Graphic Designer, even if you use drawing in nearly every piece. If this were a matter of semantics, it wouldn’t matter, but thousands, perhaps millions of students are registering as Illustration majors. What does this mean?

Reprinted with permission of Communication Arts, ©2002 Coyne & Blanchard, Inc. All rights reserved. Coke and Holiday images by the author Laurie Rosenwald.

  1. link to this comment by Barry Mon Mar 18, 2002

    not a coment but a question from a naive student trying to find a possible road in graphic design.the illustrators i see all around me, there work is highly styled in the sence that i can recognise peoples work. i myself try to grt something out of every style and not limit myself. do these people not get board doing the same tires sketches?

  2. link to this comment by Corwin Dehus Mon Mar 18, 2002

    Fine artist, illustrator, or designer... Aren't they really all the same? People try to stereotype us all into separate categories (at least the art world). The fine artists are the high-minded, yet rarely understandable. The designers... well, they have sold their souls. And aren't the illustrators right in the middle? It seems to me that the fine artists are more so the sales people than the designers are. The only difference being that they are actually selling an intimate part of themselves to the public. So why do they observe the most respect? I have an idea... We're all ARTISTS. Utilize each others opinions and ideas to create the most prolific aesthetic possible. Use any medium you want... Just make sure you are revolutionizing the world we live in for the better.

  3. link to this comment by year_of_the_snake Mon Mar 18, 2002

    I laughed out loud when I read this article, because every word rang true to my own experiences as a graphic design student in the early '90s. What with The End of Print and the so-oft-reproduced-as-to-make-one-hurl Neo-Constructivist illustration style, it's no wonder the art colleges churned out scores of alienated Che Guevara-types like myself.

  4. link to this comment by Anthony Robinson Tue Mar 19, 2002

    Why the hell does it matter?. I have gone through about half a dozen school art departments and nearly a decade of "graphic design" and art jobs and the outside world still calls us creative types "right-brained freaks!" (or left-brain freaks - I can never remember which side) We argue about whether designers are artists or illustrators are artists but never whether half-baked rap screamers are musical "artists". We are talented, creative beings who can express ideas (our own or those of our employer/client) in extraodinary ways, thus, we all are visual artists! (unless your expressions are never extraordinary) In my book, if anyone cares, all visually creative people are artists. If collectors of artwork can hold a Toulouse-Lautrec poster, a Normal Rockwell Illustration and a Jackson Pollack original in similarly high regard than each of those past, creative minds should be considered "artists" (and I believe they are) Eventhough, at times, they are creating graphic art, Illustration art, or "fine" art, the end product (if done well) will always be art.

  5. link to this comment by Carl Rhodes Wed Mar 27, 2002

    I am a 1998 RISD grad with a BFA in illustration. Illustration for me was an acknowledgement of the real world situations that followed graduation. Ironically, few of my friends from school are actually employed in the field of their major. From painting students doing web design to ID majors working in PR, students steadfast convictions quickly disentigrate. One thing you have to remember, everybody has to earn a living one way or another. Personally, I have shown in fine art galleries, worked at an international ad-agency, and also done freelance illustration work since graduation. I dislike the idea the one style of work is somehow more valid than another and that some work deserves higher praise or financial reward than another, but that's the way it goes. Let's face it, organizing text on a page with some stock photo hardly qualifies as talent compared to the difficult and time-consuming process of making an original painting or illustration. Decicions in the graphic world are often made with budgets and client desires in tow, not some divinely inspired aesthetic.

  6. link to this comment by Rick Landers Thu Mar 28, 2002

    What I am particularly bothered by is one statement. It could possibly be my interpretation of the statement or the inflection that I have applied to the statement during my reading... "Here’s a word I’ll hate forever: “conceptual.” I think it means “un-stupid.”" I doubt that I need to make the comment that the key attribute that separates graphic design from art is concept, not style, or creativity. Any part of graphic design, which includes illustration and photography needs concept, otherwise it is only art and lacks purpose. I think that many of the design schools today are forgetting this key aspect in teaching design students. Weather our strength lies in layout, illustration, or photography we need to remember that our job is communication and that we cannot get away with simply making beautiful art - that is not our job, and will be the failure of our profession if we leave out this key element. As far as the comments regarding fair compensation for illustration, I feel that in many cases it is the fault of the agency who is selling to the client, by underselling illustration, they are setting a standard to which the client becomes used to and expects with every job that ever includes the services of an "illustrator".

  7. link to this comment by Matthew McNerney Fri Mar 29, 2002

    As both a graphic designer and illustrator, I affirm the notion that illustrators somehow fall lower in the design world's caste system than others, but it is not without merit. Glance through any illustration workbook, and look at all the terrible work that is being produced. Illustrators have grown stale and trite, and rarely are they producing new, innovative work. Concept has flew out the window, and few are willing to give any extra effort anymore. To survive in Illustration today, your work has to be unique, smart, and completed by yesterday. No one seems to meet those standards anymore. Rockwell used to crank a piece out a week, sometimes overnight. And it communicated. Furthermore, it frustrates me that fine artists and illustrators who aren't good enough in their own fields think they can design. They take away jobs from talented designers, accept lower pay to get by, and in the process, lower the bar for everyone else. Design is a marriage of technical ability and concept. Neither can survive on their own.

  8. link to this comment by Rexford Barnacle Sun Mar 31, 2002

    Years ago when i began my studies as an Illustrator it was suggested to me by a colleague that most graphic designers were "aspiring illustrators that can't draw." I've since come to befriend a great many graphic designers (Mr. McNernie among them), all of whom are excellent draftsmen who have forever shattered this stereotype, and i've also occasioned to have my work referred to as the "illustration of a frustrated graphic designer." These experiences have served to further illuminate the pervasive blurring of the line between the two disciplines which seems to grow foggier by the hour. We work in an age where greater numbers of illustrators are experimenting with type and stark, graphic imagery, while there simultaneously exists a burgeoning movement in the design community towards a more traditional, hand based method of designing. So i suppose rather than react with some sort of indignant, self-righteous indictment of the design community over these narrow-minded pot-shots at illustration, i'm simply saddened that this argument is even given creedence by so esteemed an organization. The days when Norman Rockwell and his ilk ruled illustration are (sadly?) over; it's truly dissappointing that the graphic design world seems oblivious to its gloriously vanishing autonomy.

  9. link to this comment by Angelo Lagdameo Wed Apr 03, 2002

    I'm a recent graduate from MICA. If I learned anything from my school, I learned that there are two kinds of designers: the ones who design, and the ones who talk too much. An awesome designer, illustrator, or fine artist does the work. They're out there to problem solve. They work from a core (aka concept). They'll use whatever resources they have--type setting, color theory, economy, whatever--to deliver it. They are so clear in what they do, most of their work is done instinctually. Wanna be designers, illustrators and fine artist simply don't get it. That's why they consider brilliant-but-human, dead-but-remembered designers to be "gods". They over articulate because they don't know how to speak about art. They have to categorize because they have to 'feel' like they're understanding. They have to be acknowledged as some job title to be something. So the here's the point. It's not about designer vs illustrator. It's about maturity vs adolescence.

  10. link to this comment by Aaron Cooper Fri Apr 05, 2002

    There are a great many "designers" (notice how I did not say "many great designers") who do not realize that "design" is derived from a "designer's" natural ability to see beauty in nature, natural proportion, proportional beauty and, thus, beautiful "design". Education (both in formal educational settings and within the workplace) can do no more than "expose" the student and allow him or her to turn those innate abilities into capabilities. “They're out there to problem solve.” :: Angelo Lagdameo : 2002 Well said Angelo.

  11. link to this comment by Frank Keppler Sun Apr 07, 2002

    If, technically speaking, illustrators render a subject, and designers arrange elements to convey a message, I would say that illustration has been misinterpreted, and has obviously been damaged somewhat. Obviously, illustrators make design decisions, and obviously, graphic designers have to illustrate at times. Due to the latest trends, many super-talented illustrators sit and wait for a call, while young computer-saavy "designers" (maybe i'd even include myself in that category) can remain more consistently busy, and perhaps even look more intelligent to today's typical customers. I think a lot about how the "art studios" of the 70's and 80's have dwindled, and how illustrator "reps" have potentially caused this trend. Even design studios fail to promote their illustrative talents, which means they aren't necessarily hiring illustrators, either. Reps have painted illustrators into a corner, and unlike photographers, don't necessarily hold the same cards in the marketing scheme of todays budgets and needs. Illustrators have gone freelance, they have entered source books, found reps, and basically resigned themselves to working out of their own homes, with their own materials. Personally, although the idea might sound liberating, I believe this has hurt commercial illustration. Perhaps you could say that illustrators left due to the computer trend, and a lack of work at major studios, who began to see a de-emphasis in the need for particular styles. Any way you look at it, I believe that illustration is close to being at a low, and I think you are going to see a re-surgence of hand-done, non-computerized looking projects in the very near future. As a graphic designer (on the computer), I often feel the need for more tangible, organic illustration in my own work, and I have felt that way for a long time. I find myself purposely making mistakes in my computer-driven art to take the edges off. I have also collaborated with illustrators who render better than I, so that we could end up with a project which was best for the client, or market. So, even though I am definitely NOT an illustrator, I think that art directors and clients who have taken short cuts by eliminating illustrators, building corporate in-house computer-driven design staffs, and basically reduced illustrators to the "concepting" stage of most projects, are going to have to deal with a marketplace that may just begin to swing back toward illustration. Does anyone agree or disagree?

  12. link to this comment by ethan estes Tue Apr 09, 2002

    "It’s having a degree in Illustration that makes no sense to me Illustration is just drawing with intelligence to someone else’s
    specifications."

    These kinds of quotes drive me nuts-the idea that an illustrator can't express themselves in their work while pleasing the client is absolute nonsense. The idea that graphic designers aren't at times just pushing pictures and text around with intelligence at the request of the client is just as warped. Clients will always have an effect on any visual artist that is payed to do work for them. While i was at RISD in illustration i learned that the point is to communicate an idea-not draw people. If drawings of people solve the problem great if not great too. I use my problem-solving skills everyday in all my activities-illustration, web sites, animations, cbt's, but i always keep my head up and my eyes open. I see so many illustrators in other fields because they can adapt their skills and they have other interests. Those skills get honed in college. I think that in many ways an illustration degree prepares you more for the real world than than a graphic design does (what's a graphic designer to do when the power goes out and they can't get to quark). In the real world your tools and environments will change and you will need to adapt.

  13. link to this comment by robbie Fri Apr 12, 2002

    I entered college many years ago in the english department because I loved literature, music, movies, theatre, art...everything creative. I am a creature of vision and self expression. Realizing becoming an english teacher wasn't the way to go, I took a drawing class as an elective. I was immediately informed of my exceptional talent as an artist and persuaded to enter the fine arts department. Not being the "artist type" by any means but having incredible passion, vision and talent, I tried every type of art and design offered at the time...illustration, painting, drawing, photography, mechanical design, interior design, and finally graphic design. I was good in all of them but settled on graphic design as a good way to make a living (didn't want to be a "starving artist", the passion was in the interpretation not the presentation.) That has all changed now, because of the onset of the computer and electronic graphic design. Anyone who is computer savvy can claim to be a grahic designer because the computer does all the work, that bothers me. My most impressive pieces are the original paintings and illustrations I created by physically mixing color, using texture and imagery...none of which had one letter of text on them. Don't get me wrong, I love working with type and imagery to create a message, but there is alot to be said for illustrators and artists who can communicate with no words at all.

  14. link to this comment by Word of the Wise Thu Apr 18, 2002

    My viewpoint on all of this Grafic Design vs Illustration. Is Illustratior and an Artist have the same soul for Art as many other past Masters like Leonardo, Picasso,Rembrant..etc
    Art is a part of the nature, nature gave them this talent to create. Some develop their art talent early some develop it later. Artist and an Illustrator are both children of the Mother Earth.
    Artist and Illustrators are Masters of their world.
    It is their world that they want to create in their eyes and what they see. Artists dont listen to other people and dont want other people to tell them what to paint and what not to paint. It is this power of expression that allows them to get famous and suceed in this tough world of art. Grafic Designer's are moore the Computer oriented. But the power of design can change everything. Design is everywhere. The clothes you wear, the cars you drive, The houses you live in, the furniture you have the machines we build.....etc Design is like the child who is constantly changing and reinventing the world today.

  15. link to this comment by anonymous thought Tue Apr 30, 2002

    Graphic Design & Illustration are like two different worlds. Illustration I find, is pure creation from mind to paper or any other medium that will hold imagination. Graphic Design, is all computer related design, in the real world. Pushing text from one place to another , moving pictures here and there...I find myself doing that ALOT. - There is a big difference between the two... Why dont we then compare Graphic Design to Painting and then name is a poor relation? Etc..etc..and so on. It's all art. But there's no comparison.

  16. link to this comment by Joe Iacono (Graphic Designer) Thu May 02, 2002

    Ok the concept is very simple. Graphic designers are like engineers of communication. Visual communication is the key to our profession! Interpretation is the defining factor of this topic. "Do we have Illustration to promote thinking, or do we illustrate to just show ideas" Ideas have many definition's, all giving each person there own interpretation. This we can safely call ART, not graphic design. Graphic design is problem solving, and yes most is done on the computer, however, graphic design has a plan, procedure, process, production and presentation. 5 P's! We work with problems with communication in mosly print media but also in environmental multimedia, now given to us by the 21'st century. Educated thinkers is what I like to call us who study graphic design. Its merley an artist who can show they have actually researced the givens, and coming up with a solution based of of the research. We are educated problem solvers who use all kinds of media and present it to give a message of understanding. Art can be Non-objective, however graphic design is more objective like Engineering. This is why it is important. However few and far beyond do we find creative people who solve problems using their fields of studied media. If you can illustrate an idea and communicate it to a viewer with understanding, we did our job. If you just create images with no "thinking" or objective, your just making art, and everybody has millions of interpretations. Graphic design has a plan before it starts. Think about what your doing, and what your trying to say!

  17. link to this comment by Joe Iacono Thu May 02, 2002

    "The client gives you what the want, its up to the designer, to sell them what they need". If they knew what they needed, they would be doing their own work. We are taught, how to solve the problems to give the best possible solutions to the liking of the client, and present it in such a fashion that everyone agrees it works!

  18. link to this comment by Elkin Valencia Thu May 02, 2002

    As a double major Artist - Graphic Design and Fine Art I soon realized the difference b/w both worlds. As a graphic designer you are hired by your client to do work for their business. As a Fine Artist; it's more personal and it's about what makes you tick and how you want to express your self to the world. I find myself fighting with both worlds as a Graphic Designers. Elkin Valencia

  19. link to this comment by Jim Fri May 03, 2002

    Design, Illustration, Fine Art, we are all the same!
    We are all visually oriented people that choose to communicate through the medium of Graphics.
    On my job as an illustrator, I do all three from time to time when the client calls for it.
    We can't separate the three so easily, alot of design is just a hair away from being called illustration and vice versa.
    If we were expressing ourselves with music we could be Jazz, Rock and Roll, and Classical.
    As a Professional illustrator, I love all three!
    Text, shapes, paper, Fine books, drawings, and paintings all fascinate me. I love to see how a "Graphic Designer" has solved the problem in a clever way using a perfect economy of style and beauty. I love beautifully designed and illustrated books, Graphic Novels, the Classics. Unfortunately, Most you have to search for in Antique bookstores. I love fine Art also, stunningly beautiful Oil paintings and Watercolors.
    We all play a vital role, we are all in the same army of visual artists. If one of us hurts, we all suffer for it!
    It is past time for change in the way we do things and how we market our trade. We need a huge consortium to refine and define our role as visual Artist types.

  20. link to this comment by jenny Fri May 03, 2002

    I can not believe these comments. As "designers" are we not trained to edit our own work? Why then can't we edit our own comments. Before we decide to stand on a virtual soapbox, can we please spell check. Thanks.

  21. link to this comment by lola Tue May 07, 2002

    Please Jenny, do not be so tight assed to begin trying to find the problems within an artist free written speech. Art is art, ,, writing is art. Dont put rules upon everything that you see or hear.

    I have done many kinds of art - among the most rewarding - directing theatre. Trying creating out of living breathing things! Feels great, and oh sooo rewarding.

  22. link to this comment by angelbarnesnoble2 Mon Jun 03, 2002

    I could still recall my grandmothers art work...
    I was only 5yrs old then, when she started to make
    me feel the beauty of design. Since then I somehow
    just have this natural essence and never left it...
    though it never crossed my mind that oneday I'll
    fall in love ( head over hills) in designing...and start
    a new dream...saying goodbye to all what I have in
    hand.

    In 1983 and 1986 I entered a Beauty Contest, and
    from my makeup to all the outfits were of my own
    design. My judges were so impressed. out of the
    25 Beauty Contestant I won the Beauty Titles for
    both years. But that still didn't make me wakeup to
    acknowledge the natural gift that my grandmother
    who is now 98years and she still weaves her own
    designs.

    I came to realise how my natural talent can be of
    some help to my daily income...so I just took an
    online course to somehow give me some updates
    of what are in todays world of design doing.My 3rd
    lesson just stole my heart, I somehow found a new
    pathway of loving designing. I took 2days off work
    to create a new design, and I've got what I wanted
    and I finally just realised that designing is the gift
    that God had given to us naturally. But the choice
    is our own. It is a process...there is a starting point
    and a finishing line to each art & design.

    I have done flower arrangements, free painting,
    pencil etc., What I am working on now is what I
    want to exhibit next year in one of Japan's Art and
    Craft Exhibition.

  23. link to this comment by Kathryn Mon Jun 10, 2002

    It is too bad that the writer of this article feels that a degree in Illustration is so useless. It does not speak well of the schools this person attended. Or perhaps they don't realize just how much they owe to the instruction they recieved. I have been a graphic design major and an illustration major and I am positive that without the instruction from excellent teachers, my skills as a designer and illustrator could never be where they are today. Some gifted people can succeed without teachers, but it is very rare. On another point, hasn't anyone noticed how illustration has become one of the largest art industries in the world? this article seems to forget that illustration is not limited to drawings and paintings that go in a magazine or book. Just as graphic design has evolved into the age of computers, so has illustration. What about animation, computer games, texture and background artists? Computer-generated illustrations are booming, and require talented draftsmen who know the human figure. I have noticed lately that many t.v. commercials have begun to use animation instead of live action. I believe that this will become more and more common. I challenge the writer to be more observant. Artists are supposed to be visual, aren't we?

  24. link to this comment by todd Tue Jun 11, 2002

    This article is full of sour grapes and inexperience. Yes, we've all seen crappy design trends, but hey, if you don't like what is going on in the design world then CHANGE IT. The illustrators who work for me are worth their weight in gold. Every single day I am amazed at their creative talent. As a Creative Driector I also dabble in illustration. I'd love to do it full time. I also admire great photographers and designers. I feel lucky that I've worked with so many talented people over the past 20 years. Don't be so uptight about it all. Love your art. Love your design. Love your illustrations. Forget anything you don't love. That's the only way you'll make it in the dog-eat-dog world of design. You gotta love it and stick with it!

  25. link to this comment by Lina Chen Wed Jun 19, 2002

    I graduated last year with a BFA in Illustration, and i do feel like it's almost useless. I was the only one in my graduating class to work only in digital and I had a lot of people looking down on me for it. Now i find myself employed as graphic designer of watches (a job i got for my computer skills). I can't say this is exactly where i want my career to be heading, but I know I am probably doing better than almost all of my former classmates. I've recently been thinking about becoming a real graphic design, go back to school and learn Flash or packaging design. I havent given up completely on being an illustrator, but it's a long road. I know my former school is now frantically trying to incorporate more computer classes into the illustration major. Some of my fellow graduates can't help but feel like they've wasted 4 years in a major that didn't prepare them for the real world.

  26. link to this comment by Rebecca Wyke Thu Sep 22, 2005

    I am a freshman at RSAD and am currently an Illustration major. It rather upsets me that it seems that the designers and illustrations who are frustrated with defining and "ranking" various art fields, are actually resigned to those stereotypes. I decided on Illustration as a compromise between graphic design and fine art. There are many individuals who are already tremendously technically adept and have discovered their calling and individual style early. For others, such as myself, art may have been a passion but was dominated by other passions as well. With only one semester of drawing and painting, my portfolio was lacking in variety but strong and "full of potential". I want to learn about all variations of visual arts, study all media, really explore the pure expression of art... but the practical side cannot be ignored. One must make a living in this world. Does this have to suck all of the joy of creating out of artistry? My strength leans towards graphic design, webdesign but that does not mean I must resign myself to a 17 inch monitor for the rest of my life. I may not be experienced yet or have any right to say this, but the best graphic designers are artists first, and artists and designers. These labels of "illustrator", "designer" should be the last thing on any creative person's mind. Their is craftiness, technical proficiney. but without passion behind it, even just passion dealing with a client's needs, any art form is lacking what makes it just that.

  27. link to this comment by foonbenjamin Mon Feb 27, 2006

    dear all, after reading all the comments on the writer's view, i would like to share my point of view & experience. you see back in my days (1980) in an art school/college, there are just 2 main stream or rather major to choose from, that is either fine art or commercial art.(the latter being quote unquote " illustration"). anyone who isn't artisticly talented wouldn't dare dreamed of joining. getting a job in the industry back then wasn't a problem cos everything is preety much skill based. I graduated in 1983 majoring in commercial art, have been in the industry for 17 years starting at the bottob rank : FA Artist(its now DTP due to the digital revolution) there wasn't even the term "graphic design" back then...in my country that is..by the way i am a Malaysian chinese. Those days as in rank it was first a FA Artist then Visualiser, then you moved on to being a junior art director then art director and then finally if you can cut it out there: a creative director. as an art director you are either a art based or copy based art director. but as it would be..times changes, now there is dtps, graphic designer, illustrator, storyboardist, animators, webdesigners(multimedia field) etc. I started out as a FA(finish/final artwork) Artist and was a visualiser, storyboardist then finally an Art Director before I retired from the industry and joined the academics. From the 17 years I have learn so much and i would say that i was probably the 1st batch to learn to use the computer in the early 90s. Coming from an Art background illustration is still my passion at heart, and yes i do agree that illustration has somehow faded away but never gone i must say because as long as you are in the creative field, there is always illustration in any form in any work be it classical or vector. All i can say is as long as the passion is there and if you move & evolved with the time...illustration will never die. just take a look at art work done by someone who can draw and compare it with someone who doesn't, the aesthetic value is always there. I must agree that computer has changed illustration but with the artistic skill that we are blessed with..isn't it an advantage if we combine it with graphics and even have it done it in computer? I am at the moment teaching illustration in an University and at 42 years old, i am currently taking my degree in graphic design at the same time, I am loving it cos i have my past experience & my drawing abilities to rely on, using the computer to create vektor wasn't a problem cos i've learn it during the 90s. coming from an advertising background(as an art director) and to major graphic design only now is a new venture for me cos i've never done any graphic work back then because i have graphic designers to do it for me. So to dear Rebecca, to major illustration is a blessing because you have that extra edge, learning graphics will eventually be there if not now....any knowledge is an added bonus in your bargaining power when it comes to salary. Multitasking/multi talent has taken a new turn, just ride with it and you will be fine. and to Laurie Rosenwald do take a deep breath and when you let go off that breath, lets all hope that the frustration that you have comes out with it. I believe everyone has the talent if they have the passion and patient and bitterness would only destroy that passion in you. Lastly to all graphic designers do forgive me if in anyway did i offend you especially to those who doesn't have the artistic background please let me say the vektor art/graphics done by your generation that i've come across is really beautiful.

  28. link to this comment by Juniper Sun Apr 09, 2006

    I'm from England and I am hoping to study Illustration somewhere in England...I'm not sure how our courses differ from American ones, but they must be pretty similar.

    What sort of things do you think I should already know about the industry e.g. big names in the field, historical stuff, etc.

    Also, what were your reasons for studying Illustration/GD/FA?

    Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks ^_^

  29. link to this comment by Jasi Wed May 24, 2006

    I do have one question: What is the major difference between Graphic Design and Illustration? I was accepted in a four year Graphic Design major last year. After the annual review in school that we had few weeks back, I was told that in order to continue in Graphic Design I would have to repeat one class for the whole year, BUT if I wish to continue as a Illustrator I can just continue with school and graduate. So what does that mean? I mean, if people and other designers say that there is no difference between these two, why I am better as an Illustrator than Designer? I would like to know if there is a catch and why is Illustration considered less “good” than Graphic Design? Can somebody please answer that to me? My future is on stake now, where I have to decide if I am going to repeat the whole year or simply continue as a Illustrator.
    Thank you in advance.

  30. link to this comment by Carla Thu Jun 29, 2006

    I hate graphic design

  31. link to this comment by iNDY Thu Oct 12, 2006

    Perhaps this is too subjective a conversation to participate in, so I'll be quite brief.

    We could consider the fact that 'Fine Art' has become so accustomed to being 'ism'ed that it has become the norm for any art critic to has his pop at creating a new genre: Neopostrealistexpressionisedconceptualism of whatever! You catch my drift.

    To my mind there is no easy division in the visual arts. There is no X or Y axis, no black through to white along various shades of grey. Yet labeling can be useful. So we simply pretend that we can imagine an X axis where realism gradates to abstractionism, where Y gives us a clear idea of where the work lies on the scale of creator pleasing or client pleasing. We also require other axis though, such as proportion of image using object based form, to proportion using geometric/typographic form. And so on, and so forth.

    What is surely most important is: how well does this piece fulfill its objective? What has the creator of this piece said that hasn't been heard before? How will the ideas presented here influence their audience? How does this work make me feel...?

    The same questions can be applied to literature, music, dance, film, architecture. They are the foundations that human creativity manifests upon. The distinctions of the media are not as important as the conveyance of the message.

    So, specifically, in conclusion I would suggest that anyone with years of experience within the educational or commercial field of any creative area should have developed a reverence and respect for the mythology of the areas that they do not work in - simply because they know how much time and hard work they have had to put into keeping their creativity fresh, relevant, and interesting.

    Which makes me wonder about the number of individuals who have posted simplistic comments about how their chosen field is 'better' that the others. My simple retort: subjective.

    Wagner had a great concept which he was enthralled with for years: the 'total piece of art.' He envisaged music, dance, painting, lighting, poetry, singing, acting all being used on stage to communicate a narrative. He wrote for such an idea, but never saw it come to fruition in a way that pleased him. Today we have movies that include those elements and more, in a way that the genius of Wagner could never have conceived.

    We are blessed to live in a time of creative digital revolution. There will be a hefty price tag, as 'the creative individual' becomes more and more pressured to know X or Y technology, to be able to multitask across a large number of areas.

    The comparisons that the author of the article has made were irrelevant at the time in 2002 when it was published, at least to anyone with a copy of Photoshop.

    May I congratulate Carla above me for encapsulating all that I have just said in a much more direct way: Carla hates Graphic Design. That's fair enough. As long as it's not in the same way that a (UK analogy) Chelsea supporter hates Arsenal (to US readers, that’s a sporting reference regarding two teams geographically close, both very successful and important, but with a large amount of de facto rivalry).

    To those looking at these pages for guidance upon what to STUDY, my personal feelings are the following:

    Graphic Design: With slight chance of career to follow. Market saturated.
    Illustration: With occasional freelance work and career in some other area, like fast food. Market saturated.
    Fine Art: Residing in large city, some chance of career. Residing anywhere else, career in some other area. Market saturated.

    Having done an Illustration degree four years ago, I would discourage anyone from doing one if there motivation for doing said degree is to gain a career from it. I have a friend who never had any Illustration education who supports himself from the freelance work he does. If you want to not have to get a job for three years, this degree is for you. And with UK retirement up to 68, and to anyone who is under 30 there likelihood of it being 70+ by the time you get to that age, then why the hell not have a three year retirement at an age that you can actually enjoy yourself!?!

    If you want to be a Graphic Designer, make sure you live in a large city, or will do after graduation. Work your ass off.

    If you want tot be a Fine Artist, well, I know much less about this area, though I wish I had pursued it myself, but simply: Wait until you are old enough to have a great portfolio that you have built up in your own time. Then do the degree at a highly recognized University, move to a capital city, then self promote every time you feel like eating or sleeping. You may get work before you die of exhaustion.

    My point is, no matter what are you want to study it, be honest with yourself about your motivations. Most people who study an art or humanity based degree don't end up much richer for their time and hard work, so be prepared for a tough time, set yourself clear objectives as early as possible (which companies would you like to work for? Email their Creative Director your work on a regular basis, would he send you a copy of a recent commission that he gave out? Produce your own response to that commission for him to see, etc.) and be relentless.

    Anyone with thoughts on these points can catch me at indy.harrison@yahoo.co.uk . Thanks for your time.

  32. link to this comment by SS wu Mon May 07, 2007

    I have extra 4 years professional art experience in high school, then I went to collage and grad school majored in Graphic design(communciation Desgin). Now, I am still have big love of illustraion, especially for chinldrn's book.I was looking for job can related to it, but was so disappoint, no one need a illustrator, and I was told by some other illustrator" you even can't make a living, no child still love a book". I am still do illustrations, not for profit, just it is the only thing make me feel I am still alive. I am wondering, if I really can find a job I can feel happy?

  33. link to this comment by SG Fri May 11, 2007

    I work as a graphic designer since 10 years in Poland. Graphic design today is a show-off thing, the real power will stay allways in a good drawing classic, old russian art school- like. That's real skill. Graphic design is just reading, understanding and than using the knowledge of some smart books. Plus some expierience - and you got it - you are a "graphic designer" There is no real skill in it.( exept the typographers, who create big font families for sale.)
    And, by the way, I hate the word "creative" in my job - everything is a copy of a copy of a copy.

  34. link to this comment by thomas Thu Aug 16, 2007

    im 15 years old and im wondering whther to take illustration aas a subject in college or not.....i definitely dont want to do graphic design....im sidling between fine art and illustration./...i love to draw, i love to "illustrate" an idea or concept into paper ....i dont particularly love to paint....i like workin with pen and ink or through sketchin......and i do more illustrativ type of drawings then mordern art type.....other then book illustrating could someone please explain what are the different types of careers u can do in illustration.....as its a more commercial form of art then "fine art"....im considering it......could some on e please enswe my question???????thank you

  35. link to this comment by mukhrit Fri Aug 17, 2007

    An artist is the one who works for himself
    A designer is the one who works for the people. thats how we all are taught to differentiate betweeen the two streams, or rather the two so close, interdependent, interlinked, symbiotic fields of Art and Design.
    I feel all this has created a false persona of design, specially graphic design and thats why the so called teachers like to differentiate the two.
    There s no need. whats actually is required is the realisation, understanding and acceptance of the fact that though Art and Design are different, they cant be seperated.

  36. link to this comment by thomas Sat Aug 18, 2007

    yea.....but what about illustration and fine art?

  37. link to this comment by Prof Sat Sep 01, 2007

    To Thomas. Illustration is art of the narrative, commissioned-usually by others-to address the graphic needs of a publication. Fine art simply regards what the artist wishes to represent, narration is not an expectation of this approach. These days, imagery isn't even an expectation.

    At fifteen, I'd suggest you do what you really wish to do. If it is illustration that flies your kite, you'll soon know. Likewise for pursuing fine art content. Today's illustrators (the most successful anyhow) spend more time on developing their own content to illustrate. The day of the successful free-lancer gaining commissions consistently over a career are almost gone.

    Good luck on your choice.

  38. link to this comment by david holzman Sun Sep 02, 2007

    The word - narrative - being synonymous with illustration took a big hit about 50 -60 years ago.
    Fine art is done for the sake of exploration as is pure science. When a fine artist describes their work as illustration it probably is.

  39. link to this comment by Naude Fri Sep 14, 2007

    I think you have no idea, graphic design is the void in which all crap artist dwell.

  40. link to this comment by Anil Rana Wed Sep 19, 2007

    i like graphical desgining. because this is very attractive and creative desgining.and very powerful.so i think graphics better than illustration .

  41. link to this comment by Colleen Thu Sep 20, 2007

    I graduated last year with a BA in graphic design. My own teachers told me I would have a hard time finding a graphic design job ( in my area) because I incorporate a lot of my own hand drawings into my work. I've created my own typefaces by hand that have been successful for the design i wanted to acheieve. those who interview me say i'm highly creative, but too talented for their agency because i have my own style. I'm working on getting my Masters but I feel that some agencies would rather have someone without their own style who is quick on the the computer just to generate designs that the client wants. another thing is that i feel graphic design, illustration, painting, and photography are INDEED the same thing. It is visual communication ONLY separated by materials. If you make a circle. whether it's drawn, made in illustrator or photoshop, painted, drawn on paper and scanned in or photographed, or even using a typeface letter "O" to make the circle. When do we call it illustration or graphic design, etc etc.

  42. link to this comment by thomas Fri Oct 12, 2007

    thanks prof. im still not very sure,,...is illustration a succesful career oppurtunity....cuz many ppl giv the idea that illustration is like an odd job of sorts...and you dont get much respect for it (well not as much as being)...is this actually true? or can an illustrator be just as succesful and respected as an artist?

  43. link to this comment by siti Fri Oct 12, 2007

    my name is ct.Im from malaysia n i think graphic n ilustration is diffrent.i love to ilustrate more rather than doing it in d computer.since ilustrate represent something that u cant express by words but feel it inside u.its somethins thats pure ,beautiful n creative.only d person who ilustrate knows what d meaning of it.

  44. link to this comment by Dwight Fri Oct 12, 2007

    Illustration is OFTEN a visual creation based on internal inspiration. Graphic Design is OFTEN a visual interpretation of external impetus.

    There are always exceptions to a definition!

    The two categories are not independent!

  45. link to this comment by David Mon Oct 15, 2007

    This is perhaps a silly question, but how do I download the pdf to read the rest of the article? I don't see a link anywhere.

  46. link to this comment by Ren Rieskamp Tue Oct 16, 2007

    I briefly wondered the same... it's under "Related Images" at the top in the grey bar to the right. The images "Coke" and "Holiday" ought to be right next to it.

  47. link to this comment by Jon Tue Feb 05, 2008

    Well, I'm a fool for coming to this realisation so late. I am currently at an art school going for a BA in graphic design. I have been trying to convince myself that I am a graphic designer and will have a great career in it. I have been doing this for the past two years. A lot has to do with the fact that I have no will in disagreeing with my freinds and teacher's all who wish me to stay in graphic design. I don't want to be involved with trying to brand or sell, I am into narrative and story. Don't get me wrong, I think GD is an extremely important career and it is now essential to hire designers to help brand a product, for no matterhow good a product is, branding and advertising is the only way to get it in the mind of the consumer. The need for designers continues to be high while other job placings are slipping away and going oversees. Indeed, the best person to brand a product to the American consumer-is another American who is instep with the trends and cultures. So as far as shipping jobs oversees, graphic design is a job that will probably stay in America. These last points of almost total job secerity, really are the only things that hold me to stay put with my BAGD program. But this does not mean fulfilment to me. Fulfilment is to do what you beleive in or something that gives a sense of accomplishment. I think I would be happier as a teacher with a low payscale comunicating and teaching ideas and getting kids to listen, rather than a designer with a $50+ paygrade. I am 30 and unfortanately a senior and I should have realized this long ago. I think I knew long ago but was affraid due to the fact that so much is promised in design career. I am considering either switching to illustration or annimation, or going to another school. I am also considering employment in film. All of these are probably a lot harder to find careers in, but what is the point of doing something you loath simply for job secerity.

  48. link to this comment by Kenneth Gerleve Wed Apr 23, 2008

    I came upon this discussion after doing a Google search on promotion for illustrators. I found it quite disturbing—especially the apparent lack of typographic conventions by so-called graphic designers. Paragraph breaks or word spacing, anyone? How about checking your spelling and grammar?

    I have a Fine Arts background—specifically a BFA in the Studio Arts (painting, sculpture, printmaking), and have done extensive work in New Media as well. Professionally, I have worked as a Graphic Designer, Web Designer and Illustrator. It is my 'jack-of-all-trades' ability to cross the traditional boundaries between art and design that have enabled me to work in today's market place. Think of Leonardo Da Vinci or Albrecht Dürer—two perfect examples of Illustrator/Designers—who are today considered Masters of Fine Art.

    I know there are plenty of crap Graphic Designers out there and anyone with remedial drawing skills can call themselves an Illustrator if they can get their work published. I worked for just such a woman who masqueraded as a graphic designer when in actual fact the closest she had ever come to graphic design was ordering brochures and other promotional items from print vendors. Strangely enough, her name was Carla.

    I have a love-hate relationship with Art and Design, because I don't fit in any niche easily. I love both for their possibilities and hate them both for their imposed limitations.

    Graphic Design is hard and thankless work because the client has no clue how painful it is to take their mundane ideas and turn them into anything visually interesting (and I have had more than one armchair designer tell me how to do my job). But when Graphic Design is successful, it can be aesthetically pleasing and can aid in communication of complex ideas.

    Illustration is often denigrated to a supporting role—unless it's for a children's picture book—and often is replaced by photography or clip art. But Illustration can often communicate ideas visually when words fail to do the job. Furthermore, who hasn't purchased a book solely for its illustrations? And who, except for a Graphic Designer, would buy a book solely for its layout or typography?

    Fine Art is a fickle beast. Modern Art is often conceptual, pretentious and self-important. Artists, these days, make art for themselves and other artists, not for mass consumption—that is, if they make actual objects at all. Most Art Schools today are not in the business of teaching aesthetics or actual techniques to students. Instead, it is the conceptual nature of the work that matters most. Craft is subordinate to Content. This certainly was not the case for most art instruction before the rise of Conceptual Art in the 60's and 70's. But, every once and a while, an Artist comes along who challenges the norms, and delivers content that isn't only an exercise in self-indulgence, but a powerful vehicle for communication of ideas through the manipulation of physical materials, the environment or the five senses.

    Perhaps dissatisfaction with the bickering between Artists, Designers and Illustrators led me to where I am today. Like many creative young people, I have a DIY ethic when it comes to my work—I am reclaiming traditional craft and technique, while remaining technologically savvy. I am Brave and I am Bold. I am a Book Artist.

    What does this mean?

    It means I write my own content; I design and lay out books (on computers); I illustrate them (using a combination of hand and computer illustration); I letterpress or offset print them on handmade paper—sometimes with handset type; and I hand bind them into physical objects using traditional craft or modern commercial techniques.

    And, if the work calls for it, I can incorporate Photography, Sound, Video and Animation into my work, as well as Sculpture, Fiber Arts, or Installation work. I, and other Book Artists like me, am Darwin's answer to evolution in our collective field(s). I can adapt and survive because I don't align myself with one camp or the other.

    So for all of you Artists, Designers and Illustrators who are interested in keeping rigid categories in place because it makes you feel secure to be trapped in a box, I only wish you the best of luck in remaining relevant in the future.

    For the rest of you who came to Art, Illustration and/or Design because you wanted to use your chosen media to communicate ideas—whether your own or someone else's—and refuse to be pinned to a specimen board—I am glad to be in your company.

  49. link to this comment by Prof Fri May 09, 2008

    Interesting post Kenneth, though I have a few reservations. You state that you're a graphic arts polymath and spend your days creating the whole graphic widget. Simultaneously, you're editor, illustrator, proofreader, graphic designer and content provider. Good for you--I say.

    Yet for most non-book artists or polymaths for that matter, a career definition provides a useful framework by which individuals interested in expressing themselves--visually--can fit in to the construct.

    Restricting myself to the subject of illustration, which is the topic of this thread, I stand by my earlier post regarding the profession. To qualify my remarks I will say, I am active as an illustrator, garnered major awards, developed my own content and been published many thousands of times. This affords the perspective of experience when it comes to this topic. Defining what it is an illustrator does, is anything but limiting. On the contrary, it is by these very definitions that artistic experimentation and freedom can be defined. How can an artist break boundaries, when they don’t even know what they are?

    The term illustration derives from the Latin word-- illustrare--meaning to illuminate or bring luster to. In contemporary terms, this means that an illustrative visual could be as modest as a spot drawing breaking up an Op-Ed page to a graphic opus accompanying a work of classic literature. The thing is, due to the proliferation of technology, many graphic designers are eschewing the commissioning of illustrators and creating the imagery themselves or going straight to stock.

    So what's a talented illustrator to do?

    Rifting off your notions of professional flexibly, it seems clear that the illustrator must move from the reactive or traditional role of the illustrator, who waits for art directors to call upon their skills, to that of a content creator. Perhaps some will take up the mantle of book artist. I know a few illustrators who have. Others have moved into new media, picture books and film.

    I'm not too disheartened, I find this to be an exciting time, despite the general misgivings I hear from others in the field.

    I’m glad for your enthusiasm. For those whose first inspiration was a printed illustration found in some old book, thinking, they too, could do that, some of your observations are—frankly--limited by your own narrow production within illustrative spectrum. After all, by what you’ve revealed, your sole collaborator is yourself, straight down to the binding of the final product. Honest work, I’ll agree, but there is little outside give and take in that process. All becomes centered about the artist, whose graphics must ultimately be viewed by an audience. A good illustrator is very aware of this audience/artist relationship, with his or her drawings, creating the actors, costuming them, building sets, and generally controlling all the narrative needed to glean that aforementioned luster that can make a page come alive. Even for content creators, collaboration must still be an important component of the process. If you turn those tables, with any given graphic work, strictly focused on the artist’s obsessions and aesthetic pursuits, it would then be incumbent upon that audience to make the effort to stretch their understanding to accommodate those affectations. Collaboration is rarely necessary in these circumstances or, for that matter, typically welcome. This is one of the fundamental differences between illustration and fine art.

    I could go on interminably about illustration, it’s rich history, remarkable practitioners and unclear future, but that would be better suited to a tome than a post on these forums.

    Finally, I agree, people who think it important to enough to post should take care in crafting the words they wish to communicate with. However, considering this particular forum has no way to edit a post, I’d slacken that criticism a bit. Overall, I'd rank it higher than most.

  50. link to this comment by Prof Fri May 09, 2008

    To Thomas,

    Artist/Illustrator, which has the greater respect or chances at career? Good question and one that cannot really get a satisfying answer.

    Fine artists have it as tough as any one might. Only a small fraction of those who claim this title support themselves doing it. Say, a percent or two. As for respect, I cannot say, as that all depends on personal perspective as it relates to artists. The best generalization I could put forward is that most people don't understand the arts at all and therefore mischarectorize practitioners, even if they like them.

    Illustrators are kind of in the same boat. Most don't get what it is an illustrator does and, more or less, equate them to fine artists.

    Fine artists sometimes disparage illustrators as sell-outs. Illustrators often don't get contemporary fine artists, seeing most of what passes for modern art as fashionable navel gazing.


    The best and brightest of both of these branches of visual arts generally get each other and accept an admire the differences. These people are the exception.

    Thomas, if you're interested in being a illustrator or artist, you must do research. Go the Society of Illustrators. Try to meet an illustrator, go to exhibits of illustration and fine art too. Educate yourself, then decide. Asking a question is a good first step, but it is only that, a first step. Dig deeper, you'll soon be able to make up your mind.

  51. link to this comment by Ron Kelman Thu Jun 05, 2008

    I've never viewed illustrators as being lesser than graphic designers.
    I put people like Mark Ryden, Jeff Soto, Tim Biskup, Gary Baseman into the category of illustrator's and they seem incredibly successful, not just financially— but they seem happy in what they spend their time doing. They make their own books, design their own products, travel around the world doing exhibitions— who are these people who think Illustrators are graphic design's poor relation— I'm a graphic designer and I envy illustrators.

  52. link to this comment by Inkymole Wed Jul 09, 2008

    I am a full-time, professional, very busy illustrator. It is a very different craft from design, photography, typography, but one that has to be aware of, have knowledge of, and work alongside, all of those things.

    So go ahead, envy me if you must (as mentioned by the last poster) - I travel, support my family, employ my partner, choose my own (very long) hours and love every second of what I do - but I'd rather you understood the ongoing and friendly role I play within those of my designer and photographer colleagues. The central ideas to any creative being are unanimous - communication, clarity, aesthetics and purpose.

    If you have those, the individual discipline is irrelevant.

  53. link to this comment by brittany Mon Aug 18, 2008

    This article was very encouraging.

    I have been struggling with encorporating my drawings and illustrations into my work at my current job. The trouble is they are looking for a more corporate look even though they are a non-profit. It is a constant struggle to fight for my concepts, but when I win them over it is very rewarding.

    Perseverance!

  54. link to this comment by JD Thu Oct 16, 2008

    Why do we all have to live in boxes?! Not all illustrators are wannabe fine artists, not all graphic designers are computer tech-heads. Step out of the box! I graduated with a GD diploma in '74 but it was my drawing ability that got me a job, even though that was mainly paste-up...computers were still a long way off. But I understood layout & type and still do. With the advent of technology though, I feel that those fundamentals are being eroded by fashion and style, with the result being a global or generic look. What I'm trying to say is that a designer with a firm illustration background can offer a more individual style than one who relies solely on available (stock) resources .OK, a really creative designer can create stunning design from any source, be it all digital, or with elements of illustration, photography or whatever. But an equally gifted illustrator could do likewise,given a similar design background, with possibly greater result. We all need to get out of our boxes: as illustrators, we need to diversify and get a bit more tech-savvy; as GDs we may need to step away from the monitor occasionally and pick up a pencil. By blurring the lines that divide us and expanding our view of the visual communications process, we will probably all become known by the term we tried to avoid in the first place..."commercial artists"! We may all be more successful for it.
    PS: guys, if yore gone to post as a grafic dessiner, dont' rely on spelchek cos it dont no the differnce betwin there and their!

  55. link to this comment by JLD Thu Oct 23, 2008

    I am a graphic designer with 10 years experience working in a canadian corporate consulting firm and every time I hear the term "out of the box" it makes me want to cringe. People with no design knowledge are asking me to create something "out of the box" and I believe that they have no concept of what it means. When I create something it usually is "out of the box" or at least "out of my head" - so what are they looking for - something that doesn't exist. Like someone asked me to create a black hole for a cover design - I asked them to describe to me what it looks like. Guess what their response was - I dunno - right, and I am suppose to know. Can't people just trust our judgement and let us design and cut the "jargon" talk. I am sure if I went up to them and asked them to do whatever they do "out of the box" - they would say, what are you talking about - my sentiments exactly.

  56. link to this comment by laurie rosenwald Fri Oct 24, 2008

    i am thrilled that people are disturbed, angry, annoyed, enlightened or elated six years later!

    -laurie rosenwald

    read more controversial articles at
    rosenworld.com

  57. link to this comment by david holzman Wed Dec 24, 2008

    "Out of the box" means something the client "thinks" they have never seen, ie, a "different way" of saying the same thing since everything has been said before. This is a cynical explanation or the truth. Ask yourself next time you design something or do an illustration if you have seen this before.
    The important part of the process is to think "your" way and produce good honest work... hopefully advance the field whether it is GD or illustration.
    Few have been able to do this. Those that have are what we call genius.
    Follow their process.

    dh

  58. link to this comment by laurie rosenwald Wed Dec 24, 2008

    one of the comments above made it clear that the writer couldn't have read my essay. it's obvious to me they read only the title, if they really think that i think illustration is "less than" graphic dfesign. i do, however, opine that others in the applied arts often feel this way. this is expressed in most illustrators earning significantly less than designers and photographers, and in other, subtler ways. this could be remedied in part by combining the design and illustration departments in schools. i've done many (most) jobs, especially editorial, that pay the exact same as they did in 1977, when my rent for a 1000 square foot soho loft was 200 dollars a month. i love being an illustrator, and want more respect for my profession. my new book is "all the wrong people have self-esteem" and i want to be one of them! maybe i should pick up a camera.

  59. link to this comment by web design manchester Fri Jan 02, 2009

    It looks like you had a tough time skipping between illustration and graphic design in teh good old 70's. I think the goal posts have changed somewhat in the recent times in relation to graphic design. I am from the graphic design camp as many of the new generation are.

  60. link to this comment by Josh Thu Mar 05, 2009

    Design = visual communication.

    Illustration = visual communication.

    Ta-da!

  61. link to this comment by Uprinting Online Printing Thu Mar 05, 2009

    There's no argument on that. Illustration is nothing compared to Graphic Designs.

    Illustration is a visual representation of a story or something like that while graphic design is more focused on visual communication and presentation at the same time. That's the BIG difference these two.

  62. link to this comment by Jen M. Thu Mar 12, 2009

    :::Design = visual communication.

    Illustration = visual communication.:::

    Dear Josh, thank you for having the one most brilliant and succinct comments here!

    Or to put it another way, Design = graphic design, commercial photography, illustration, industrial design, architecture, product design, interactive design, web design, etc, etc, etc...

    All are design. It is just a matter of medium, end user, and context.

  63. link to this comment by Kelson Mon Mar 16, 2009

    it's funny how people like to trash what others do, isn't it?

    i think that no matter what path you choose to take in the visual art world, never stop learning and pushing yourself, and always respect what other people do.

  64. link to this comment by Kevin Thu Apr 16, 2009

    I'm in the Graphic Design and Illustration program over at the College of DuPage and I can tell you right now I've got no CLUE as to where I'm going. I'm learning web design right now, and I've already went through a plethora of drawing and illustration courses. Heck, even gone over some advertising design. Is it strange to be learning all these things and not know where the heck I really want to end up in the industry?

  65. link to this comment by Nicholas White Tue Oct 27, 2009

    I'm in my final year at Anglia Ruskin, UK. Before starting my BA Hons I always was keen to pick up a paint brush, pencil, pen etcetc! However I'm afraid I'm losing the Fine artist, Illustrator within me. My Grahic Design degree has been very much computer based! Which i dont agree with! I do love all aspect's of Graphic design, working with type and image! But it's sad to see so many of us jumping straight on to a computer, and not actually starting where all designers should start... at the drawing board!
    As for Illustators, I think a revival is apon us (2009), however it will never be as strong as it was before the 'computer'! To many people are following the 'convience' and 'fast moving' routes of design! What I mean is that it is faster and more of a convience to jump straight on to a computer to get the work done 'asap'!

    Any questions... nicholas_white@hotmail.co.uk

  66. link to this comment by Eric Torres Fri Oct 30, 2009

    Wow, such great comments here.

    All I would like to say is I believe that Illustration, Design, Type, Photography and Fine Art, ALL have equal power to motivate, inspire and generate an emotional response in the mind of the viewer. As a creative professional, one must know when to use each of these tools to communicate an idea.

Add a Comment

AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.
Read our policy on commenting.