The signs are everywhere; advertisements for logos, web sites, brochures, marketing materials and other “products” for pennies on the dollar and the promise of completion in some arbitrary amount of time. They wave on banners in shopping malls, strip centers, hole in the wall start-ups and on the web, even in well-respected and well designed venues, through the use of GoogleAds or AdSense, touting their credibility and nesting into the minds of consumers. Whether a vinyl sign with bullet points, or a glossy bobble with obligatory drop-shadow, they advertise logos for $250.00, websites for $275.00, XHTML in 8 hours, 1000 business cards for $100.00 or some other seemingly random price point – what amounts to graphic design “spam”. You’ve probably even seen advertisements like, “How do I become a graphic designer?” by some random technical college.

What the advertisers of these signs don’t realize is that by listing the services and corresponding price and time frame they are creating confusion among would be consumers about what they should reasonably expect for those services, not to mention missing an opportunity to engage in a more thorough evaluation of what those consumers could benefit from, i.e. branding, engaging consumers through multiple avenues, a clear and consistent message among others. In the context of a large design community, with the potential to do a large amount of work for various kinds of businesses and individuals, this practice commoditizes and devalues the graphic design industry at large. But even more importantly, it reduces the intrinsic value of the products we create; the unseen imprint or emotional connection they can and often do create.

Touting education, software and training does not translate into a professional graphic design bargaining chip. Software is cheap, relatively speaking, or pirated. Fonts are readily available, or pirated as well. Access to major industry production platforms does not give one the right to lay claim to being a professional graphic designer either. And while attaining a diploma from a major university specializing in graphic design, like Cranbrook, CalArts or RISD (Rhode Island School of Design) is quite a bit more difficult, not to mention credible, other universities offering the same or similar programs aren’t, i.e.The Art Institute. That is to say, at least they claim to offer the same or similar programs. But how can the general population distinguish the work of a graduate of Cranbrook Academy of Art versus The Art Institute of Houston, for instance? What measure does one use to do so and do they even care? As one of my professors from the University of Houston so poignantly said, “…of the 24 graduates from the program, there might be two of you who will be able to do it well…”. From what I have seen, she was exactly right.

Neither the talent, nor the skill, nor the knowledge of a desktop publisher can match those of a seasoned design professional. The degree to which the results of a design problem solved by a professional designer far surpass those of a desktop publisher is self-evident. Bad decisions on the part of a desktop publisher manifest themselves in a variety of ways; whether it be the abuse of royalty-free photography, a complete disregard for appropriate paper stock or other production materials and methods, or a deficient use of web production standards. Aside from the obvious gap, the lack of mastering typographic skills, the knowledge of appropriate type and it’s articulation being tantamount to producing good graphic design, is where desktop publishing always fails. All this is not to say, however, that desktop publishers do not have the right to produce the “same” deliverables of a professional designer, to the contrary. The corresponding label and price, however, should be more appropriately considered.

I have experienced the marginalization of the industry first hand, through my initial experience in an in-house corporate design department and through listening to industry peers and vendors throughout my career. Starting
salaries for a junior designer with a bachelor’s degree in graphic design is low, even when the demand is high. It literally takes years for a designer starting out in the industry to earn enough to make a good living, much less raise a family. What’s worse is the gap in the salaries between the upper management, principals, partners and creative directors, and the middle and lower management, art directors, senior designers and designers. To some extent, these insufficiencies are attributable to gains realized by less experienced, less qualified desktop publishers, known to charge $50–$75 per hour. One might say these potential gains are irrelevant, but collectively, the sum of them could be transferred to firms employing a few junior designers. The junior designers would gain valuable experience and as a result, the final product would be better. Instead, the design industry suffers.

Design firms aren’t the only ones affected by desktop publishers nipping at their heels. Having worked with a number of printers through the years, I have heard the horror stories first hand of pre-press receiving files inadequate for printing. Either the fonts are missing, the fonts are in the wrong format, the images are missing, the images are in the wrong format, the colors are not assigned properly, there are too many spot colors used, there are no bleeds pulled or all of the above, to name a few. Other problems stem from insufficient software like the use of Microsoft Publisher—BAD Microsoft. A lot of time and energy goes into making sure files will output to plates correctly and when something goes wrong, deadlines are missed, and ultimately, money is lost. I doubt the cost associated with these errors are “eaten” by the printer, but rather transferred across their client base. Professional designers and firms are thus guilty by association.

Other factors contribute to the erosion of professional design. Specifically, the rise of the mega-pixel and the misuse of design templates. As many of the aforementioned points can also be applied to digital photography and prefabricated design. The accessibility and affordability of very good digital photography publishing platforms and their automation systems and the rising tide of royalty free web sites contribute to a virtual sea of mediocrity that professional designers are often forced to wade through. In many ways, it is the sub-genre of desktop photo-journalism and its corresponding overlap that dilutes the solution most. To give one example, istockphoto, owned by Getty Images, now has over 3.5 million images (at the time of this article). Of those millions, how many are actually good and by whose standard? How many would you consider for a major advertising campaign or corporate communications piece? Sure, there are diamonds in the rough, but to what extent is the concept and quality of content compromised in the name of affordability? As a result, talented professional photographers are under utilized, unique opportunities are missed and the cycle of mediocre photography influencing mediocre desktop publishing is perpetuated.

Desktop publishers are errantly characterizing themselves as professional graphic designers. They should be forthright with communications to clients in terms of expectations and amend their business models so that pricing structures fall below that of professional design firms, abstaining from commoditizing design by listing services and delivery time frames. Likewise, entities practicing professional graphic design services should continue to migrate to the strategic level, employing strategists or business analysts where appropriate. Perhaps certification or accreditation, much like architecture and interior design, is warranted. I am not for certain, but the idea is to elevate the practice beyond its current misconceptions. How many times has someone approached you and asked, “Hey, don’t you do graphics (yes, plural) design type advertising desktop publishing stuff?”.

Truthfully, the general population has no idea what we do. The goal is to widen the gap between desktop publishing and professional graphic design to the extent that the results of the products we create are self-evident; educating the public that our professional practice is a discipline that requires talent, skill and education, that it creates awareness for issues, brings order and thereby understanding to information, and ultimately adds value to our lives.