Mokokoma Mokhonoana || Graphic designer

Between ethics and daily bread: A creative’s moral dilemma

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:12:40 +0000

The “creatives” umbrella covers a lot more that the following, but in this writing it will primarily refer and apply to graphic designers, art directors, copywriters, and photographers.

Regardless of how one decides to look at it, creatives are in the business of selling. Be it a product, service, idea, message, point of view or belief.

The food chain financial chain is rather straightfoward.

The creative employs their expertise with a objective of, in almost all cases, increasing a company’s bottom line. The company is then an x amount of (enter your currency here) poorer, while the creative’s bank balance realizes an increment of the very same amount of money — basic rule of economics.

In the context of branding, marketing and advertising, businesses are the main sponsors of creatives’ talent, be it as a team (agency) or on a personal capacity.

Entrepreneurs spot needs that are common amongst a large number of people (consumers) and then they work on means to fulfill those needs or as some may call it to fill in ‘the gap.’ That’s how businesses most business were born. And the bottom line is that businesses exist to make profit, by offering a product that’s in need or demand.

Some products are ‘needs’ while others are ‘wants’ painted as needs.

In 1964, a group of creatives gathered together and First thing First 2000 manifesto came to being. Creatives were demanding a more meaningful and socially useful usage of their expertise and imagination, instead of what they’re be hired to sell: cat food, toothpaste, cigarettes, aftershave, sliming diets etc. I totally agree with the concerns, I mean people with very little or no education have changed the world and here we have schooled people used only to sell a can of air freshener.

I’ve also came around writings by fellow colleagues questioning the moral obligations that creatives are (or should) be dealing with.

I’m writings this as both a creative and a so-called consumer, so I’ll try to be as neutral as possible.

Some people view businesses as huge evil monsters and, like with other things, there are those with conversing opinions.

The art of persuasion predominately use psychology and it is the biggest tool used in luring people in to buying things, mostly things they don’t really need, esp. in advertising. With just a few seconds of air play, an ad can leave you feeling like a failure, unattractive, a not-so-cool piece of flesh and a nightmare to the opposite sex.

Think of this type of advertising as peer pressure from ‘peers’ who like you for the depth of your pocket, not who you are.

Now this is where the questioning of morality should come into place.

Is it morally wrong to exploit human desires? The answer to that will depend on your beliefs. And since the subject matter is subjective, do we continue forcing our take down the other person’s throat or do we excuse the morally right or wrong debate and argue based on the law of the land, if we are to conclude the argument fairly?

Is it illegal for advertisers to exploit people’s insecurities and desires?

And let’s be fair enough to acknowledge that even campaigns with a good social cause make use of psychology.

How many times have you donated money simply because someone ensured that you’d feel inhuman should you have not?

As creatives we feel that our expertise should be utilized to create cultural and social projects like: street (and buildings) signs, books, catalogues, instructional manuals, educations aids, films and television features and the likes.

I applaud the creatives behind the First Thing First Manifesto for being wo/men enough to stand up against the hands that feeds them.

But let’s be objective for a second, apart from the street signs, all other projects that the manifesto demand creatives’ expertise to be used on are in one way or another selling something.

Books are not free: someone has to pay for the writers, printers and distributers. Someone will have to sell those books. Catalogues: showcasing what? Instructional manuals: whatever that the manual is intended to help the user operate is unlikely to be free.

You can argue that the instructional manuals are for educational purposes and that the education is free, but even if education was free… education equips people with skills so they can go work for profit seeking corporations — ultimately something needs to be sold to someone.

The human race faces natural disasters, crime, rape, women and child abuse, global warming etc.

Such challenges could be what we as creatives focus our energy on as suggested by the manifesto. As ‘human’ as it sounds, reality is that a living needs to be made.

Again, for one to earn, something must be sold. Skills are designed to enable one to partake in the jungle of economics.

Graphic design is also a commercial art. And in that context, it’s perpetuation is dependent on clients who has something to sell.

The challenge is that the answering to a brief is how most creatives make a living. Emphasis being on answering, and not choosing which briefs to answer to.

Are all businesses that sell to consumers evil? And isn’t the selling that qualifies an organization as a business? If so, are we as creatives also evil because in someway those businesses are our consumers? Are we less evil because our products are intangible, because we’re less manipulative in attracting our clients to hire us or is it because after work we go home and help those we’re hired to lure consume the advertising?

What is immoral? and whose definition do we judge against? The seller or those sold to?

Is the exploitation of human needs and desires an art to be celebrated or something to be ashamed of?

Is “making a living” and “financial security” dangled to creatives so they unconsciously play puppet to the so-called evil corporations?

Is the “business world” bigger than creatives? And how feasible is the “anti-selling silly things like cat food” ideology?

This reminds me of a line in some movie where a bank robber asked a bank teller “do you want to be a dead hero or live coward?”

Related Writings:

Traditional graphic designers, endangered species of modern day

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 13:01:40 +0000

In the beginning businesswo/men created products and services, but unfortunately, on the seventh day they couldn’t rest.

They had to find means to sell their products.

And at the core of the tools employed to move their products off the shelves, lied the expertise to; attract attention, present content and to persuade, using visuals — the bread-and-butter of a graphic designer.

Amongst other disciplines, design was used and products moved.

As times progressed, the number of businesses competing for the same customers increased, immensely. Prior to that, a company would win a sale purely based on proximity or price. Until these two ‘USP’ lost their effectiveness, as more and more businesses got easily accessible and a lot cheaper.

It then became very hard for companies to preach a valid reason as to why a customer’s sale should fall on their side of the fence. Out of that inevitable business challenge was born a discipline that now rewards those that invest in it, branding.

Branding gives people reasons other than price and proximity, to buy from company x instead of company y and company z.

Graphic design played, and still do, a critical role in moving products off the shelves. Through their expertise, graphic designers created things like logos for products identification, packaging and marketing materials to help sell the products.

Before branding gained momentum as a discipline, graphic designers where only required to focus solely on layout, typography, colour reproduction ect. But things have changed and approaching graphic design with a mindset of yesteryears prove futile.

Today, consumers people’s purchasing and choice of brands are driven by branding not design.

Though, thingss like a product’s packaging can attract a prospect buyer’s attention, it’s rare that the person would buy the product because of the great use and choice of typography and colours on the package.

Graphic design that is solely focused on the beauty of the layout is becoming more and more useless for businesses, esp. those whose competitors have a sound branding strategy in place.

This only means one thing, the creators of such designs pretty pictures’ days are numbered. Not that I’m trying to play prophet, but, in this day and age markets dictates that graphic design be driven by a branding strategy.

Graphic design is not only required to communicate and present content, it is now also expected, through branding know-how, to articulate brands.

Without branding and a brand strategy at the core of a business/plan, graphic design is nothing but meaningless decoration.

The ignorance of branding was shown by the vast number of graphic designers whose criticism on Pick ‘n Pay’s rebranding efforts, was solely focused on the beauty (or lack thereof) of the brand visual identity.

It was hard to come by commentary that mentioned (whether praise or criticism) the marriage between Pick ‘n Pay’s new branding strategy and their attempt to articulate the strategy visually, through design.

In the context of consumer goods, graphic design that isn’t backed with a solid brand strategy is fruitless.

(By the way, rebranding goes way deeper than just redesigning a logo.)

Related Writings:

In defense of the ‘uneducated’ graphic designer

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:01:10 +0000

I was invited to the previous Coffee Room session which was held mid-October, last year.

The subject matter was: “Is formal education important, Is it still relevant?” and as one would expect, there were opposing views amongst the attendees.

Although there is a piece of paper somewhere in my drawer that states that “…this serves as proof that Mokokoma Mokhonoana has successfully completed a course in graphic design at…” which makes me one of the so-called qualified graphic designers, this writing is in defense of designers on the other side of a graphic design qualification.

I decided to study graphic design formally, then, because of the high value that I’ve placed on formal education.

I believe that qualifying as a graphic designer and then working in the real world sort of gave me a better perspective and understanding to fairly judge the importance and relevance of formal education, by looking at what the real world required of me against what formal education fed me.

The best thing to do before we go further into this would be to define education, which I’d simply define as, a process of equipping a leaner with a body of knowledge and/or skills. If you agree, then, formal education would be defined the same, except that you’d need to add who equips the learner with the knowledge, an institution.

Typically, an established professional graphic designer will tell you that the greatest part of their knowledge was acquired post-school.

For argument’s sake, let’s say an experienced graphic designer’s expertise is split into a 30/70 ratio, school and post-school, respectively.

The Irony and vagueness of Education

Now let’s base our focus on the thirty-percent, the process of being educated, since the skills, knowledge and experience that one acquires in the real world is not a privilege that’s only limited to the formally educated.

This thirty-percent is what makes the educated, the educated. Other than that, it’s either one has the expertise or not.

Now let’s bear in mind that, syllabuses differs from institution to institution and further more, learners are not required to get a hundred-percent to pass their studies, the thirty-percent of the expertise ratio.

In some institutions, a forty-percent is enough for a learner to pass. What about the other sixty-percent of theory and practicals that the leaner isn’t clued up on?

A leaner who obtained ninety-percent from an exam and the one who was only able to get forty-percent are equal according to the piece of paper offered by the institution. Are the two learners really equal, expertise-wise, while the other acquired more than double the marks of the other?

I think we are way too obsessed with where and how knowledge is acquired that we fail to concentrate on what’s really important, the knowledge. The skill is the differentiator between the skilled and the unskilled, not where the skills were obtained.

For one to be worthy of the label ‘educated’ does it really matter how the skills are acquired or do we label based on the presence or absence of such skills?

I asked a question using an analogy that went something like:

“Let’s take the phone on the table for example, has how so-and-so obtained the phone affect what the phone is or what it is capable of?”

“Does something become less of itself simply because it was acquired in another manner than the conventional?”

Let’s compare buying a kettle with getting education formally, and stealing with acquiring the expertise of a graphic designer outside an educational institution.

Does the manner in which one gets the kettle affect what the kettle is or what it can do?

While the credentials of the institution will put employers and clients at ease, recognizing (or deciding not to) an unschooled graphic designer will not affect what they know and can do.

Don’t get me wrong, not all informally educated graphic designers are good at what they do, but then again, not all formally educated are good at what they studied.

Truth be told, I’ve seen graphic designer whose work I admire though they make part of the uneducated clan. While on the other side, I know people with 4,5,6 years of studying graphic design under their belt failing to produce work that justifies their half-a-decade of being taught the discipline.

The Conclusion

Education is important, but it doesn’t guarantee greatness when coming to the creative industry. It can teach one the history of their craft, which is very important, it can also teach one the theories of the craft, white space, contrast, colour, typography etc. and even idea generating techniques but through my interactions with some creatives,

I came to the conclusion that conceptual thinkers, though in need of nurturing, are born not made.

I’d like to believe that I’m not that bad as a visual communicator and I wouldn’t for a second credit the institution that I studied at for my current capabilities as a visual communicator. In fact the few things I remember that I learned there was that photoshop is used to edit, correct and manipulate photographs, names of a few artists and art techniques like minimalism, modernism, pointillism and the likes — and that’s not because I have a very short memory span, there’s just nothing to remember.

The things that deserve credit for what I am today are: curiosity, constant learning, sleepless nights, deep love for the discipline, and the real world.

I think we are blinded by a tiny illusion, an eleven letter word sold by educational institutions, credibility.

Related Writings:

Consumers’ familiarity with the old, the barrier to a logo redesign

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:38:24 +0000

At times, at the root of a logo is an identity that is meant to capture what the company is about and sometimes what it aspires to be.

With the passage of time, companies change, be it in size, management, philosophy, offerings et cetera and in most cases a brand visual identity redesign is required to ensure that the logo is in sync with the current state of the company.

That brings the one word that terrifies most businesses to mind, change. The fear of the unknown kills a lot of great could-have-been redesigns.

Henry Ford II hired Paul Rand to rethink and modernize the familiar scripted oval Ford logo but eventually he decided not to change the logo.

Above is the logo that Paul Rand proposed as a redesign of the one that, though modified a bit, is still used till this day.

The first thing that one notices is that the proposed logo took its ‘looks’ from the logo it was meant to succeed.

I think Paul Rand was successful in making a ’smooth’ transition between the then current and his proposed logo whilst sticking to the brief.

Not that a logo must illustrate what the company does, but, Paul Rand’s proposed logo design brilliantly captured ‘motion’ and ‘wheels’ amongst other things.

Apparently, one of the reasons Henry Ford II decided to stick to the old logo was that, what was good enough for his grandfather was good enough for him.

Fair argument? I think so, not.

I’d estimate an equal number of comments of people that are for versus those that are against Paul Rand’s proposed logo redesign that I’ve seen online, which sort of reminds one as to how subjective design is.

Just like with other (re)brands, a logo redesign seldom gets a thumbs up from everybody.

Was the proposed logo a victim of the familiarity factor enjoyed by the current logo or is the older logo simply the best design solution of the two?

Related Writings:

Introducing Pixeluxe Font Family by Jan Erasmus

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:18:55 +0000

I have just received an email from Jan Erasmus introducing one of his latest creations, a new font family. I have shared Jan’s work, Laibela font family, before on this journal.

And I’ve just realized that Jan actually first made contact with me in June of 2008, almost a year before I discussed sharing the Laibela font family with readers of this journal, when he suggested I list his company, Cybergraphics on skout.

He told me that he found skout neat and useful, but the one thing missing was a South African Font Foundry to develop custom fonts for the local market.

Jan also worked on one of my favourite font, which was custom-made for Nandos.

Quoted below is the email from Jan Erasmus:

Pixel fonts are once again out in full force. They have taken over airports, railway stations, cell phones as well as every small digital devise that uses text to convey information.

Due to their current importance, I decided to have a look at the pixel font and take it to the next level.

Conceptually it was based on some of the most clichéd symbols that designers use according to Google. Each pixel in a character was replaced with a symbol. Thereby imbedding specific meaning into the font.

The symbols also bloated the data. In the case of the cap ‘A’ in ‘Death’ font, it has 95 times more data than Helvetica cap ‘A’. That is why I could only output this family as PostScript Type 1 fonts that works on screen and prints.

Attempting to output it as TrueType which doubles the curve nodes, did not work.

Visit Cybergraphics to have a look at the pixeluxe family and other great fonts by Jan Erasmus.

Related Writings:

A graphic designer’s value is dependent on clients’ design literacy

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 22:19:25 +0000

I empathize with clients in search of a graphic designer for their very first time.

It goes without saying that the prospect would have had never worked with a graphic designer before and they’d be in need of, say, a logo designed for their business.

All that most prospects would know by then is generally these two points; they need someone to design a logo for them and that development of of logos is said to be part of a graphic designer’s job description, and that’s about it.

The relationship between a client and a graphic designer should be a mutually beneficial partnership, the client gets their visual communications challenge solved and the graphic designer would have found someone to sponsor their expertise, thus, they’ve been able to put food on the table.

Drum roll …now enters my scrutiny.

Regardless of how great a designer is, their greatness is futile unless it is acknowledged by those that the designer exist to serve, the clients.

I’d like to believe clients have no problem in acknowledging greatness where it exist, especially if that greatness can be employed to solve their business’s visual communication challenges.

A pill that is capable shedding off a few kilos, is only as valuable as an overweight person’s take on it.

I’m certain (well, almost) that we all agree that a condom is a very valuable ’tool’ or rather a rubber sheath that covers the tool, which ever way you prefer to look at it, but unless a sexually active person is aware of impotence of a condom, the condom is then useless, it will just have the potential to be useful.

Ok, enough analogies for the day.

Though it is not the acknowledging that gives something value, as the value would have been there already, a valuable thing that is not acknowledged fail to realize its purpose or full potential.

A typical client’s knowledge on graphic design is minimal yet in almost all cases they’re responsible for the hunting and hiring of a graphic designer.

So in a way, as a designer, you spend years studying and working on your craft to be judged by someone who is probably thinking design for the first time ever in their lives.

…with that very little design knowledge, a knowledgeable designer’s worth is predetermined.

Fortunately, for medical doctors the opposite occurs. When a disease or condition surfaces the patient gives the doctor carte blanche as to how to cure them. Again, I suspect this could be that the thought of death is more terrifying than the thought of a design project failing.

Inevitably, this lead to situations where a graphic designer’s advice or proposed design solution carrying almost no weight.

I’ve recently had to let go of a client’s project because I had an opposing take on the design solution that the client demanded, I could’ve easily kept quite, did as I was ordered, cared less so long as I get paid — but profit isn’t the primary reason I’m a graphic designer.

Actually, I don’t even see myself as a business person. I’m just someone who doesn’t offer their expertise for free.

While it is sad to see a prospect disappear because, either, they don’t want to invest the amount of money that you quoted for their project or simply because they can’t afford you, nothing is more disturbing than a client that afforded what you charged but they refuse to let your expertise take the front seat.

I’ve observed a few reasons for such situations, it is usually clients who feel that their authority needs to be felt because they parted ways with their hard earned money, some cases it’s nothing but a client who fails to let go of their personal preferances to choose what is best for their business.

A business and its owner(s) are not one, therefore, a client’s obsession with the colour pink shouldn’t dictate that everything designed for their company should drown in pink.

When a designer quotes for a project, that includes their entire thinking capabilities and skills, so why should only a tiny part of their expertise be used, especially if more is actually needed by the project at hand?

I have had my fair share of ideal clients, that’s businesses and individuals that allow a graphic designer’s expertise and experience to be of use, while they also contribute to the design solution. That’s the best clients to work with.

And then you find clients that make you feel like just the guy who knows his way around a design software.

You’d expect the fact that you’re more knowledgeable in your expertise than the client would work in your favour but I doesn’t.

Instead your value is gauged by the client’s minimal knowledge on the subject.

Are the skills of designers that do only client work still of use if clients see them skills as nonessential?

Related Writings:

A Guide to the Business of Creativity [free eBook download]

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:41:19 +0000

As I promised, I’d love to share a book that covers the issues that I discussed in the prior post. I strongly believe that this book will be an invaluable read not just to graphic designers but anybody in the creative industry.

The book is authored by David Parrish and it’s titled T-shirts and Suits, A guide to the business of creativity. I must admit the name sounds a bit ridiculous at first but there’s a logical reason behind the title — T-shirts being a symbolism of creativity while suits symbolizes the business side (of creativity).

The author covers issues like creating financial security, intellectual property, management and leadership, marketing to name a few that are crucial to creating and sustaining a profiable creative business.

I think this is a must read for all creatives, my favourite section being, the part that we as creatives seem to overlook — creating financial security through protection and usage of intellectual property. This is a stream of income that will still flow even when you’re asleep, as it is not dependent on continuous labour.

Download Free eBook [1.9mb, pdf] or Buy a hardcopy of the book.

Further more, David Parrish runs a blog that contains new information, ideas and examples for creative people who want to make their businesses and organisations even more successful.

Please do me one favour, share this with any creatives that you know — knowledge grows when it is shared.

The more knowledgeable creatives are, the better for the creative industry and clients that we serve, so do share.

Related Writings:

The incompleteness of a completed graphic design qualification

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:38:07 +0000

In hindsight, the two things that I found missing from what we were taught while studying Graphic Design are, the business side of creativity and branding.

The Creative Business, selling of thoughts

Almost anybody can perform fairly as a businessperson, you buy something at x amount and sell it at x + markup. Simple. Regardless of how low the profit might be, one hardly run at a loss since they are pretty much aware of how much it cost them to acquire and sell whatever it is that they’re selling.

In a graphic designer’s world, actually this applies to the creatives industry in general, what we are selling is expertise that is billable in a form of time that a project demands from one, since our product is intangible.

After completing your studies not only are you faced with the challenge of effectively applying the ‘just acquired’ theoritical knowledge and skills in the ‘real world’ — sooner or later one starts to experience their lack of the much needed business side of creativity.

This lack of running a sustainable business selling creative expertise is the reason the creatives’ educators produce a very distrubing ratio of employees:employers.

At some stage of their carrers creatives inevatibly contemplate running their own graphic design business. But the majority seldom manage just to keep their business going, through having a healthy cash flow.

The only time your typical creative mentions the word flow, they’d be referring to the flow of ideas — the so called creative juices. Juices that makes others but themselves richer, one brief at a time.

As business unsavvy creatives, like most are, we are just nothing but producers who can’t profit from their own produce.

The other problem is that we are so obssesed with perfection in all that we do, which sort of have its pros, though they benefit most those that profit from our thinking — them employers.

You find a lot of people who created wealth from creative businesses while they have no expertise in the field that they trade in, except ofcourse for the business side of it. And I’m not blaming the people that saw an opportunity to milk our expertise to secure a financial future for their kids — I blame the educators.

Graphic Design is there to help companies sell, be it a product or idea… so why aren’t graphic designers required to understand the art of selling (business acumen) before they are declared qualified?

It’s about time graphic designers are taught to look beyond the beauty and their work and consider how to profit from their labour.

Thorough Branding Knowledge

Branding is like the new buzzword when coming to words said with little, no, to wrong undersatnding.

But like it or not, branding is the most important tool to sell in today’s information overloaded era. Branding is by definition about creating and maintaining a perception in the minds of the so called consumers.

This however is one of a crucial decipline that most graphic designers likes to not like, and one wonders why prospects clients go for the cheapestest designer when in need of their expertise — graphic designers fail to differentiate themselves through employment of effective branding.

Ask yourself one question, if you’re a creative, why should a client choose you over creative b, c, d, e, f, g, h, g, h, i, etc.?

Only until a graphic designer has that knowledge then we can start shifting from being ordered to do things that the client thinks they need to suggesting doing what’s really needed and in line with the client’s brand aspirations.

The marriage of Business skills and Branding

While both in a way benefits both the graphic designer and their clients this last bit focuses on how excelling in the two benefits the graphic designer.

When a graphic designer lacks the business acumen and an understanding of branding — they are like two bowls of unbranded (unpackaged) rice (from different companies), they have no choice but to compete on nothing but price since consumers are not given valid reasons why the should choose them over (designer or) company xyz.

The reality is that some ‘not too bad’ products are winning hearts and wallets of consumers, not because they’re great products, but because they’ve invested in expertise of great branding experts. Thus, their products and/or service are effectively differentiated.

While I strongly believe a great product and/or service is a conerstone of a great brand, it is in no way a gurantee of success — a good differentiation strategy is the start.

What’s the use in educators maturing creatives to enable them to create masterpieces of which they don’t know how to profit from?

*I’ve recently read a book that covers the business side of the creatives’ bread+butter, I’ll discuss that in my next post and will share the link to download the (complete+free) ebook.

Related Writings:

Logo design for Bothakga Design Studio

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:30:37 +0000

I was recently commissioned to design a logo and online presence for Bothakga Design Studio, a company that does, well, graphic design. I had an idea of how I’m going to approach the logo design, in regards to the concept, while the client was briefing me so I don’t really have any rough sketches or other concepts to share.

I worked on the execution of the idea that I had and I then presented just the one proposed design solution to the client — the client got back to me within 30 minutes saying that he’s very happy with the proposed logo design.

So that means that I’ll just share the creative rationale behind the logo in this post, since there’s no ‘other’ concepts to discuss and share. Which could have been more beneficial to you as I would have covered reasons why this+that didn’t work on this+that logo design concept, but here it goes:

Creative rationale:

Yes a brief serves as an outline of the client project’s objectives, rules and restrictions — but creatives do experience some sense of freedom, that lies in front of them in a form of a blank page.

From the brief and the researching phase we take that blank page and we then jot ideas that come to mind with a pencil.

We in a way use the pen(cil) to bring an idea from our minds to being.

At the core of a graphic designer’s ammunition used to communicate lies visuals and characters (letters, words, numbers etc.) and since this logo is for a graphic design company I thought, “What better way than to develop a logo by illustrating both?”

The concept that I had allowed the identity to illustrate both, but one thing I liked the most was the fact that I will only use characters and let the negative space formed by the characters form a visual , pen(cil) in this case.

So I opted for a way to present the cliched pencil in a fresh and more meaningful manner.

I modified the first “A” from the company name to create the top/tip of a pen(cil) using negative space.

To ensure a ‘complete’ pen(cil) I used the closing square bracket as the other end of the pencil.

The logo manages to illustrate without any dependance on colour, apart from the clients mentioning that they didn’t have any colour preferences, I believe it’s a good practice not to rely (entirely) on colour as some (or all) meaning will be lost when the logo is forced to be produced in black+white or one colour by the media it is applied on.

One more important thing I’m happy with is that this logo isn’t ‘trendy’ thus is unlikely to looked dated as we see more tomorrows.

I’m still working on the company’s online presence, business cards, letterheads of which I’ll add to this post once completed.

*As always all comments are welcomed, critics appreciated more.

Update:

Here’s a mockup of the stationery.

Related Writings:

Interview by matric student: Chané Dreyer

Mokokoma Mokhonoana — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:56:20 +0000

Chané Dreyer is a matriculant aspiring on studying Graphic Design at Inscape Design College, in Cape Town. Applicants were required to interview a qualified graphic designer as part of their application.

Because of my not-so-bad ranking on Google I was lucky enough for my website to have appeared amongst Chané’s web searches and I thought I should share the questions asked and how I answered.

Why did you choose Graphic Design as a career?

It sort of happened as a plan c, I applied for a diploma in copywriting but was rejected.

And I immediately remembered hearing friends during our matric exams talk about Graphic Design, I then decide to register for GD — though I had absolutely no idea what it entailed.

But in hindsight I feel blessed things turned out this way.

I don’t even want to image how life would have turned out should I have not been a Graphic Designer — Hell, sounds more like it.

What training did you undergo?

I did a two year Graphic Design diploma at a ’some’ college.

What do you like most about your job as a Graphic Designer?

Graphic Design is one of the most powerful disciplines, a lot can be achieved through visual communications.

It can give people an order without saying a word.

Make you choose brand x over brand y based on nothing but the packaging.

Design can evoke emotion, thus lead to either action or inaction.

What do you dislike about being a Graphic Designer?

Though it’s understandable, the lack of design literacy from the clients’ side while they’re usually given the responsibility to reject or accept the final design solution — a decision mostly based on nothing but personal preferences or tastes.

You can’t expect a Doctor to let the patient decide on how they cure their condition — the Doctor is supposed to recommend the best treatment and medication.

And yes, a different medication can be recommended should the patient’s budget be below the expected cost of the medication.

Describe a typical day on the job.

I’m self-employed so fortunately for me, no piece of paper dictates where spend the first 8 hours of my day.

I don’t have a typical day expect the fact that I design daily.

The challenge for employers and creatives is that creativity knows no working hours, most creatives I’ve met actually find themselves way, way more productive in the evening. So isn’t it best to have someone do something at their best mental peak?

What are your future goals?

Help contribute to making the world a better place, in any possible way I can. It could be a simple do as inspiring + motivating a few souls, who I hope in return will do the same for a few souls, and so on…

Mentor as many graphic designers, as my schedule and remaining days on earth permits, as possible — knowledge grows when it’s shared.

And try my bit to give non design savvy clients basic knowledge by writing and sharing the little that I know on Design Literacy Journal.

Though I have dozens of posts saved as drafts, I’m battling with topics to cover as it is very hard to remember what if feels like NOT to know what you know — I believe knowledge once acquired feels like common sense.

What advice would you give to someone starting out in Graphic Design as
career?

You can never know enough — Read, read, read. (design + general stuff)
Excellence is never a destination, but a journey.

Do it for the love of it. Doing something just because “…it pays the bills” is so 80s!

Sleep less, sleeping is overrated.

Drink good coffee, most people call me insane — but there’s something spiritual about coffee.

Pray everytime before you work — i do.

Is there a future for Graphic Designers?

For as long as Judgment Day is not here, there will always be a need for visual communicators.

What is Graphic Design?

The art of communicating a message and/or a presentation of information, using visuals.

What “things” do you design?

I have the skills to design ‘everything’ but I prefer ‘things’ that demand conceptual thinking.

A designer with nothing but just an eye for creating great layout is all good but easily replaceable! When hiring I’d prioritize a conceptual thinker.

Ask yourself one question, have you ever heard of an ‘idea template’ ?

No. But there are millions of layout templates all over the net!

Is graphic Design the same as Computer Graphics?

No, computers are just a means and more efficient way to transform an idea into a digital format.

*Assuming our definitions of the latter are in sync.

Your question is equivalent to “Is music and a microphone the same?”

Graphic design is a discipline while computers are used as tools to execute graphic design solutions.

Related Writings: