Its time for question of the week #3! I’m going to post a short little audio clip asking you a question. Feel free to chime in and let me know what you think! I’d love to get a discussion going on in the comments!
This weeks question:
Share This Article
Other Popular Posts:
14 Responses to “Question of the Week #3 Art & Design”
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Question of the Week #3 Art & Design : Design Newz
May 8th, 2009 at 6:12 pm[...] Question of the Week #3 Art & Design [...]
Niki says:
I think there is alot of overlap between art & design because they are both based on the same principals (design principles) But I think the difference is the intent it is created with and who its created for.
What do you guys think?
May 8th, 2009 at 6:27 am
Lotenna Enwonwu says:
When a design evokes then it is art. Design is a sub nav option for art. Because it is initially someone else’s vision, or inspiration, it doesn’t matter because once an “artist/designer” creates it, it is their own and depending on how far they expand the vision it can be very much art. For example a tattoo artist. When you go get a tattoo you might have an idea as to what you want, like a dragon. And there are a million interpretations of a dragon. So you let the artist know what you want. They then do the research and draw it the way they see it in their mind, of course with you being the green-lighter in the process. So you are the inspiration but it was their vision and creation, still being art but with parameters.
May 8th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Brad Nunnally says:
Art is about expression. It is centered around the artist how they view the world. An artists work is what defines them through their style and medium.
Design is about function and behavior. It is centered around the people the will be interacting with an object/interface. A designers work can be varied and is defined by other people.
They share many of the same principles on how you create something, but who and what is the audience of the creation is what separates them.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:40 am
Steph Adamo says:
There’s a whole movement in art that purposely expresses nothing, so we can only define art by the creator’s intention. If you call something “art,” it is.
However, i think there’s a big divisor between art and design, in that design has an ulterior function in culture. Design usually sells something. It may turn out lovely, but that doesn’t make it art.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Leigh Taylor says:
Art communicates, design narrates
May 8th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Nikki says:
Brad mentioned that Art is about expression and Design is about function, but this is where I see it overlapping. Design is about function, but it wouldn’t be good design without expression. And Art can have its functions as well; art making statements needs to have clear meaning or else it loses what it was going for. It needs to have function.
The difference is that Design is generally used for commerce, advertising, or it’s all about showing off something else (content). Art is all about itself in that way. Can Design be Art? Yes. Can Art be Design? Maybe.
To play off what Steph said, I agree. You call something art and it is. But does that work for design? Not as much.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Jamal Ahmad says:
An Interview with Simon Waterfall in Net magazine I read a while back comes to mind. Quote “We’re not artists, we’re designers. We work for other people and we have to understand the brands and the constraints”
It sort of hits the nail on the head, Artist have no restrictions & work for no one, designers do.
May 8th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Matt Wondra says:
As a first-year design student this is a question I’ve been thinking about a lot. It seems impossible to set up simple guidelines that feel right. The more I consider distinguishing art and design, the less valuable I find that to be. It’s an interesting thought experiment, but inevitably leads us to realize more how inseparable the two are.
That said, here are some of my thoughts:
Design always has a specific message in mind for a specific audience. Its goal is to speak that message with 100% accuracy.
Art has a message but the audience isn’t always clear. Expressivity is held superior to accurate communication.
Design understands the way its audience thinks and uses that knowledge to make the communication clear.
Art enjoys the range of interpretation it gets from people with different worldviews.
Design is bought because it speaks to the masses.
Art is bought because it speaks to one.
Design can objectively succeed or fail.
Art decides itself whether it has succeeded.
In the end, some things are pretty cut-and-dried. An annual report is design. An abstract painting is art. It’s those in-between places that get blurry.
In my opinion: let’s leave it that way.
May 8th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
John Onorato says:
Most creative works are a blend of art and design — there is art in the way something is designed (Apple’s iPod packaging, f’rinstance) and there is design in art (such as in Threadless tshirts).
However, there is also ‘pure art’ and ‘pure design.’ The former is typified by fine art; these are things that have little function other than to beautify a place. Most sculpture falls here, as well as most 2-d art such as oils or watercolors.
An example of pure design might be a text-only classified newspaper ad for which only one or two fonts can be used. There is certainly art in typography and such things, but these happen only when the options are opened up somewhat.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Laura-Jane says:
Cool to hear your voice, Niki.
My first thought is that the difference is the motivation.
May 10th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Joseph S. says:
I think “design” is more of problem-solving, and the problem will always be different… and I’m trying to think in a broader sense then just visual art/design. I think that design is always a part of art, even when you go all Dada and decide to intentionally not be designed… it’s a design decision.
“Art” is a little harder for me to put a finger on, because there can be art in everything, on the micro and macro of anything human-created… I think you can have a big evil-corp media campaign, and the whole thing might not be “art”, but parts may be “art”… Are there design pieces that aren’t “art”? Is it safe to say that the Photoshop UI is art? Or MS Word? It has been “designed”, surely… If it isn’t art as a whole… are the icons “art”? What if I took the paint bucket icon and did a pop-art color arrangement ala Warhol’s Monroe? Is it then “Art”?
I know one thing… being an “artist” is not necessary to be a inspiring “designer”, but it can help in some disciplines… but if yourself an “artist”, but can’t separate “art” and “design” you will surely fail in any client-based professional career, because you are paid to solve their problem, not your own… if you create “art” in that process then that is great, as long as it solves their problem…
May 11th, 2009 at 10:41 am
GreenStar says:
I agree with you – I do think that they overlap.
But I also look at it like this: Design (to me) is the structure and use of what the ART is created for. Yes, you’re creating art when you create a website/flyer/biz-card/ect but I consider it a “design” when you’re studying the intent of it. Art is more free of limits and guidelines where a great Design will reflect all of the information in proper form.
Just my two pennies
May 17th, 2009 at 6:18 am
Sayz says:
Art – you’re not limited by the surrounding and environment, and not some kinds of requirement and defined goal. And it doesn’t care if the audience understand or not.
Design – structured and change depends on the audience, more generalized and like it said… more problem solving…
May 17th, 2009 at 6:24 am