An Introduction to Graphic Design

Great article.
Not to be snarky, but since the door was opened by the widow at the top of the page, I thought I'd point out that no good graphic designer would allow duplicate list items, as appear in the "Daily Life" list above.
Just being picky.

In the spirit of this essay, we should note that graphic designers often have excellent close-reading (or proofreading) skills. J.M. Neff, being an astute graphic designer, quickly found an error in this post — which has been corrected. We are sorry that future readers will not experience this same error. I do wonder how many other errors our readers will find?

Well, since you asked: there is an extra space in the middle of the word "suggesting" in the next to last sentence of the section Worst: The Walmart Logo…
Good article, though.

Yes, as Jennifer notes, "s uggesting" is not the proper typographic configuration of the word "suggesting." Keep the corrections coming!

Appreciate this story as a resource. However, the link for "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art" is incorrect. It is currently redirecting to "Think with Type" by Lupton. I found one!

2. Cover, Vanity Fair, photo by Annie Leibovitz, March 2008
3. Opening titles for Iron Man, designed by Kyle Cooper, 2008

Both listings are reversed in the graphic. Regardless, it's a great article.

Why refer to the UPS logo as both a pictogram and a pictograph, then define neither?

Why not explain why the Neurath stick figure is good, while the Food Pyramid stick figure is bad?

Carolyn Davidson, designer of the Nike Swoosh, was a student at Portland State University, NOT Oregon State University.

Talk about crowd sourcing: thank you for the ongoing corrections. Kudos to BenP, Ian S, and Brad Crane, and below: TimT, Jamie Mahoney, Deborah and Joe Schwartz. All corrections made.

"She was paid $35 dollars" is redundant.

I have to agree on the NYT online version. Whenever I open it, a feeling of relaxation and familiarity comes over me.

Meggs' History of Graphic Design is now in it's fourth edition.

I would love to see this article as one of a series written about all areas of design. With so many disciplines starting to overlap, converge and emerge, the associated vocabularies and definitions have become extremely murky. It would be interesting to start to dissect the current landscape.

Correction...
Faux-baroque definition: "An attempt" rather than "A attempt."

Perhaps after the edits are completed, this should be posted to Wikipedia to replace the poor definition of graphic design found there.

And the Nike logo was designed in 1971, not 1964.

What does it mean that the world's largest retail has a bad logo? Would Walmart be more successful if it had a better one?

A reminder of graphic design's limited scope.

Or - maybe Walmart's successful (if controversial) strategy of frugality extends to its employment of graphic designers.

a) Who calls logos "pictographs"? I have never, ever heard any professional graphic designer call the UPS logo a pictogram or a pictograph. If this is an introduction to design, call it a logo. Everybody who is not a designer read about the Gap logo last week; everybody called it a logo. @GapPictograph does not make for such a clever fake Twitter account, does it?

b) Nike logo in 1964? This from the site that Spanish-inquisitioned Eskilson's book -- recommended in the article, no less -- for getting its facts wrong? What's next, the IBM logo was designed in 1949?

I've never known anyone to address the fact that the food pyramid in its current iteration makes no sense. The original pyramid was logical in that at the top it showed the food group from which you should eat less. The many servings of recommended grains were represented by the large bottom. Why have a pyramid at all if you just run stripes up to the top? I really can't believe this thing was ever approved.

Continued comments and corrections are encouraged and appreciated. So far we have made nine corrections to this article thanks to reader comments. More are welcome.

Although both Dwayne and Nuncio have questioned our description of the Paul Rand UPS logo as a pictograph or pictogram, I think we will stand by this mixture of terms. It is a logo and named as such. But it is also clearly a [see Wikipedia definition] "pictograph (also called pictogram or pictogramme) ... an ideogram that conveys its meaning through its pictorial resemblance to a physical object." The whole story of this logo is that it looks like a wrapped present with a bow on it, clearly conveying a pictorial resemblance to a physical object.

Short and sweet.

In addition, it is important to
add a shortlist of Design Couples
who have inspired the rest of us.

Shortlist of Design Couples:

Charles and Ray Eames

Lella and Massimo Vignelli

Tibor and Maira Kalman

Paula Scher and Seymour Chwast

Jessica Helfand and William Drenttel

Gael Towey and Stephen Doyle

Zuzana Licko and Rudy Vanderlans

Ellen Lupton and Abbott Miller

Bryony Gomez-Palacio and Armin Vit

Thank you!

I’d just like to see the use of “quotes” and apostrophes rather than "these things". This article seems to go both ways.

So easy too. option + left bracket type word then option + shift + left bracket. Option + shift + right bracket for apostrophe before the s.

William’s arrow hit the apple.
Larson’s auto supply.
James’ gripped the dog collar.

• Nancy Skolos and Tom Wedell!

and

The old UPS identity is a logotype as it combines word and image as one element. The  is a symbol. The IBM logotype is a logotype because the letters are graphically altered into a new kind of abstract image.
I like to call type identities signatures but, maybe there are some other names out there. Sony is a good example of type only. No symbol. No alteration. Microsoft may seem like a signature but wait, it has a little nick in the o and s so, it’s a logotype!
Target has a symbol and a signature (in Helvetica) but is is technically not a logotype as they operate separately even when together.
In the long run, none of these terms matter as brands are more complex then a splotch stuck on a thing. Color, motifs, symbols, typography, the trucks used, uniforms, sound, etc., can all make a brand. (Cue Intel commercial singing employee tune.)

I usually try not to toot my own horn, but I just am probably more proud of the fake PowerPoint I made for this article than almost anything I've ever done. I still laugh every time I see it. Thanks for putting it online Bill & Jessica.

Sorry for being so self-satisfied, everybody. I just wanted to call some attention to my contribution here.

The graphic design world truly is a finicky place (clearly demonstrated by this article and the slew of comments addressing various minuscule concerns). It is often a hard world for a picky graphic designer to exist in. Graphic design is everywhere. Poor graphic design is also everywhere. Newspapers contain a multitude of widows and and poorly-executed hyphenations. It seems as if every spa or oriental restaurant features the type Papyrus. Photographs are terribly skewed...

The general public doesn't adhere to the standards set by graphic designers. Nobody understands our love of font and graphic design icons such as Paul Rand and Milton Glaser. We are oftentimes overlooked.

This is an interesting beginner’s guide to graphic design, and I do agree that this article would be a great addition to the wikipedia page.

While there is countless numbers of great examples of exceptional design, there seems to be just as many terrible examples. One can search “worst logos” and be overwhelmed with the amount of poor logos. Sexual innuendo, misspellings, clip art and poor font choices galore. Giant companies screw up too. I think of Animal Planet, WGN, and Google specifically.

It takes a strong eye to see what works and what falls short. All of the mistakes that make me cringe could be fixed (in my mind) by Helvetica-happy entry-level designers.

I find the author’s appreciation of the various suggestions to be refreshing. The internet is far too full of passive-agressive bickering. I wonder how many mistakes I've made...

"and anything, ever done in Powerpoint"

That comma shouldn't be there.

Also, I agree with the amusing blurb at Tputh.com: "Looks interesting, but the type's too small to read."

I have found this article quite educational, especially as I pore over it a second time looking for typos. :)

For some reason I like the openness to corrections, maybe because it suggests a degree of perfectionism that contrasts with the sloppiness we often take for granted in online writing. Or maybe I just like being nitpicky.

In that spirit (and a couple of these might be out of order):

[Worst: The Wal-Mart logo; PowerPoint; the food pyramid; and the 2012 Olympics] -- These should be listed in the order in which they appear visually: "The food pyramid; the 2012 Olympics; the Wal-Mart logo; PowerPoint".

[With German illustrator, Gerd Arntz,] -- That first comma shouldn't be there.

[atheleticism] -- Misspelled.

[South Carolina beauty Queen Caitlin Upton] -- "Queen" should be "queen".

[candidates names] -- Should be "candidates’ names".

[describes "design thinking" as]
[looks at "design thinking"] -- Thanks to an earlier commenter, I noticed these don't use the "real" quotes used elsewhere in the article.

[To date, McCloud’s book remains the best] -- Redundant. You don't need the "To date".

[cyan, magenta, yellow, and black] -- You use the serial comma here (the one after "yellow") but not elsewhere. I prefer the serial comma, but either way, you should be consistent.

[Design as activism, i.e. design that instigates social change] -- There should be a comma after "i.e."; also after "e.g.", which is used in a few places.

[including numbers, letters, and punctuation. e.g. Helvetica,] -- Again the serial comma. Looks like the period after "punctuation" should be a comma. And there's "e.g.".

[An earlier version of article first appeared in Dwell,] -- I'm guessing that should be "this article".


By the way, I'm often torn between the British and US conventions regarding quotation marks. (British being "like this", and US being "like this.") I've used the British convention here because I think it improves clarity when talking about text itself.

One more thing. One of your captions says "The Food Pyramid, The 2012 Olympics and the Wal-mart logo". That should be "Wal-Mart". As a historical note, I see from Wikipedia that they are officially Wal-Mart but started branding as Walmart in 2008 (hence the absence of a hyphen in the logo).

Okay, enough obsessive compulsing for now!

As someone with no academic training in graphic design, I'm always astounded by the level of arrogance some graphic designers have in their opinions. In such a subjective topic, I find the elitism slightly off-putting and snobby.

Those of you looking for a guidemight like to consider Drucker & McVarish: Graphic Design History: A Critical Guide that looks at the technological, social, and cultural aspects of GD.

I think you should avoid opinion in an article like this. I'm referring specifically to the 2012 olympics logo. all good design should be a response to a particular brief.

In this instance the logo is attempting to do something that will still be relevent and youthful 5 or 6 years after it was created. It is meant to also show the london olympics to be a different and vibrant place, and convey motion. In all those regards I think it succeeds. Whether you personally 'like' it or not is not a measure of its success.

As for the 65000 people who complained - in the UK we complain about everything, people complain about radio shows they haven't even listened to - just to jusp on a bandwagon - just look at whats happening to the BBC. Its still a tiny fraction of the population. And how many people have suffered sezures from seeing the motion graphics. IT really is stupid to base your design opinions of facts taken from the Daily Mail.

Nice intro, if perhaps a little too US centric, with a little sprinkle of Brits. There is intelligent life outside of the English-speaking world, even and especially in Graphic Design.

I agree with Peter up there. Starting the article with "No good graphic designer would..." and later hopping on the band wagon of "show us the typos" sort of made you seem like a person who tripped on the side walk and then began to half-jog to make it seem like you did it on purpose. Art of any kind IS subjective whether or not you'd like to admit it and I bet there were more than a handful of people (I am not one of them) who actually liked the Olympic logo. If people didn't break the rules and try new (potentially ugly, plain, boring or stupid looking) things then there would be no evolution of design or any other art form...and in the case of the London logo the ability to learn from mistakes. As far as the Walmart logo is concerned, is there a theory out there that in the minds of the masses boring design trumps an ability to read? Who cares if that logo is similar to many others unless you're worried that the majority of potential customers are illiterate...I mean the name of the store IS the logo. Despite what many people think about the institution I highly doubt that anyone on the hunt for a local Walmart is going to be confused about where they are because of the simplicity of the design. Sometimes you have to look at something with the eye of a person who doesn't get offended, overwhelmed or caught up in details or a lack thereof. Especially if you're going to define designers as you do...you can't always design for people who are just like you and that means thinking outside your own personality, preferences and prejudices.

WOW. Tough crowd. I suspect Stephen Eskilson is having a pretty good chuckle right now. Perhaps because it is published on the internet the facts, grammar and punctuation don't matter as much?

re: my comment above - sorry about all the typos, I'm typing surruptitiously at work, and I know you guys are a tough crowd!

Peter Main wrote:

“As someone with no academic training in graphic design, I'm always astounded by the level of arrogance some graphic designers have in their opinions. In such a subjective topic, I find the elitism slightly off-putting and snobby.”

What you see as arrogance is actually not arrogance. Graphic designers often work in the background, our craft unseen and unfamiliar to many. Typography even more so with type designers being the dark wizards of type. Then along came fonts for the computer. Opening up this world but with no context for how it operates. So when people with no training as designers (on the job or academic) see this intense passion, some call it off-putting and snobby.

Often, designers do work that millions of people use every day and don't realize the thing they are reading is so cool or easy to read because a graphic design took the time to care about the details. Graphic design and typography is often all about the details.

In a way, it is kind of like one of those classic car competitions. A lot of what the car owners are dealing with is old and fussy. Few people are familiar with the older parts, models, and technology. But at the same time, the paint job has to be perfect, the interior superb. Every nut, fuse, and belt must be authentic for the year. If the owner does not go for the best car they can clean up or make better or sometimes, build from scratch, they will loose the competition.

Your local car fanatics are not elitist or off-putting or snobby (except perhaps some at the Concours d’Elegance). Maybe because they work with grease and engines and the cars are macho. The spirit of good design is the same. Great car designers, great car restorations, great car re-builds into new interpretations; Are just like a designer redoing a magazine design (iPad design now?), designing a new product packaging design from scratch, or taking a convention of design and using it in an unexpected and sometimes strange way.

People who teach beginning graphic design courses often talk of seeing students “get it” after a semester or two. I have seen students with stronger views than yours. They hate design, they hated the design professor but completely change and at graduation come up to me and tell me what jerks they were and how they love typography and design now. Some of them are now art directors in New York at world famous firms, lead designers at agencies around the world, graduate students, and design professors.

* ["experience" is a widow (also called an orphan), a word or fragment appearing alone at the end in of a paragraph.

"...at the end in of a paragraph."

With German illustrator, Gerd Arntz, Neurath created a hieroglyphic vocabulary of easily understood symbols that have has been assimilated internationally.

"...symbols that have has been..."

I have been mesmerized by the fake PowerPoint image since I first read this article. Thanks, Teddy, for taking the well-deserved credit. Any plans to publish it as a poster? Key rings? Mugs?

Thanks for the article!

I have not read it yet, but I did notice that Rick Poynor's last name is misspelled in the credits for the five images at the beginning of the post.

Avoiding widows and orphans in printed work is one thing, but the way things are seen online is not solely dependent on a website's designers or coders... Browser settings can be changed by the user, and that includes typeface and type size.

I can't help but jump on the corrections bandwagon! This sentence, which appeared in the description of Lupton's type book is unclear:

"This chooses typefaces to work with all day long, this book should be required reading for anyone with access to a personal computer."

And thank you, Mike, for defending our tendency to come across as arrogant when talking about our work. Many of my beginning students think I am overcritical, but they come around to join the discussion by the time they graduate. It's just that we spend a lot of time studying and obsessing over details that most folks don't notice (hierarchy, etc.) but ultimately benefit from.

'* ["experience" is a widow (also called an orphan)'

A widow is one thing and an orphan is another. I guess 'The Elements of Typographic Style' by Bringhurst should also be on the book list, it's no good knowing your history (3 books on graphic design history?!) if you think an orphan is the same as a widow.

'No good graphic designer would have let this go to press in print or online it's an obvious mistake.'

In book design it would be allowed to go to press, widows with 5 or more letters, usually, are allowed.

One more thing, why is Milton Glaser the grandfather of graphic design? At least call him the grandfather of American graphic design, I live in London, and over here Alan Fletcher is the grandfather.

Holy shit I need to get a life.

I enjoyed reading this article, it made me get an in depth look at what graphic designers do.

AIGA is not "The largest professional design association in the U.S."

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has more than 80,000 members. http://www.aia.org/press/AIAS077761

AIGA and its members and supporters need to be clear when making claims using "largest" and "professional."

AIA is larger. And "professional" as associated with AIGA is at best questionable, if not a downright lie.

AIGA might have professional interests in play but there has never been a standard measure of "professional" within graphic design. Whereas AIA membership requires proof of license, degree, etc. in order to be considered for membership.

"AIGA is the largest graphic design association in the U.S." is a fair statement. Be specific (graphic) about the design discipline and drop "professional." The only standard for inclusion in AIGA is the ability to pay the annual membership fee.

American Society of Interior Designers has 36,000 members.

http://www.asid.org/about/

I also wondered about Milton Glaser as the Godfather. Considering Jessica was co-author and knew Paul Rand I found that surprising. Perhaps one needs to be alive to be considered?

4. While there are numerous graduate programs in graphic design in the US, only three give PhDs: North Carolina State University, Carnegie Mellon University and Illinois Institute of Technology.

This is incorrect. There are at least four: NCSU, CMU, IIT, and the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. All four programs offer a PhD in graphic design. I believe there might be another one or two out there, as well.

If there is one thing you can gather from reading this article and it's comments is PASSION. Graphic Designers are bloody passionate and opinionated. I'm pretty sure I'm going to get in trouble for using all caps now :( sorry.

"3. Before he became famous for his TV comedy work, the late Phil Hartman worked as a graphic designer. He created the logo for Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young."

Almost. CSN. Not Y.

Thank you for a very enjoyable and informative article.

Am I the only passionate and opinionated graphic designer who HATES it, absolutely HATES it when someone refers to me as "the one who does graphics"? Is that like Debbie Does Dallas--Gina Does Graphics? Is it so difficult, in these days of my-daughter-can-do-that-on-her-iMac, for all those others to remember that We Are Graphic Designers?

Thanks, I feel better now. And, by the way, "There are 40,000 students in four year and graduate design programs in the US;" should be rendered "There are 40,000 students in four-year and graduate-design programs in the US;"...

"je" mentioned widows and orphans, referring to the text above:
"... ["experience" is a widow (also called an orphan) ..."

I have never heard these terms used interchangeably either. I teach typography and I use Bringhurst's definitions:

"Isolated lines created when paragraphs begin on the last line of a page are known as orphans. They have no past, but they do have a future, and they need not trouble the typographer."

I differentiate between word widows like "experience" above, and line widows – "the stub-ends left when paragraphs end on the first line of a page ... They have a past but not a future..."

See Bringhurst pp 43-44.

Dear Designers, Here is a fabulous piece summarizing the history and current directions in graphic design. Some great milestones, links and ideas here for your research.

Bon weekend, Julia

Great article, but in the spirit of the web ... could we fix the errors and keep the focus on the article itself ... instead of all the anomalies? Each medium has it's pros and cons and widows and orphans on the web run rampant. Sometimes the form does follow the function (lots of info ... little space). I'm just say`n.

S. Onite: while you are correct that the AIA is larger, I think this is more of an issue of the use of the word “design”.

Over the past twenty to thirty years, design has come to mean much more than a professional designator: A graphic designer or an architectural designer (although, I bet most architects would rather be called architects!).

Indeed, the call lately of the need for “design” to segment in education and in practice (much like medicine did centuries ago), is one I agree with. With that inevitable future (present?) in mind, AIGA is the largest “design” organization and the AIA is the largest “architectural” organization.

Here’s a link connecting to another perspective on that issue: http://tumblr.com/xtnlfpehb

Great article - but I'm really sick of everyone hating on the London 2012 logo, which bears no similarity to such horrors as the new neutered-sprite Food Pyramid and every PowerPoint ever.

The London 2012 logo is bold, memorable, well-executed, and (gasp!) fun. It in no way lacks formal distinctiveness! So what if a bunch of people were shocked by it – that's a natural reaction to something shaking up the status quo a bit. I struggle to remember what any other recent Olympics identity looked like, but this one has become an icon. It's pretty much the antithesis of the Walmart logo. Thank god clients occasionally let designs like this one through, otherwise we'd all be stuck nicely setting Myriad Pro for all of eternity.

The whole debacle reminds me of the premiere performance of Stravinsky's Rites of Spring, which at the time was so extreme it started a riot. Less than thirty years later the piece was part of a Disney film.

Anyway, if you piss a bunch of people off, there's always a chance you're doing something right.

very educational and formative. :)
I like the poster of Russian Constructivist film very much.
At this time, graphic design catch more attention than usual. I have my work designed by a company called BPOVIA. And they are good.

I question including Shephard Fairey. His tracing of the Manny Garcia photo for that poster is not that original. Also, his other t-shirts and posters using directly copied images from Chinese, Cuban and other Central American artists where he simply removes the political message and adds Andre The Giant's face is at best appropriation. Of course, when the estates of these artists asks him to share the profit from these images, he usually stops producing them but gives no recognition.

I love NY design is my favorite...Graphic design is not just a profession, but a way to show attitude, everyone can be graphic designer.

This is a brilliant primer, so thank you William Drenttel and Jessica Helfand. But Erik Spiekermann is right to say it’s a bit too US/English speaker centric, and I say that as a Brit.
I know this is a deeply unpopular view amongst my peers, but I like the 2012 logo. Actually - I think it's genius! It's not smooth or slick or well balanced or pretty, and I suspect that's the point. It can appear in any colour or pattern that takes your fancy, it's as recognisable as any symbol I can remember and best of all, it's not a 'running' figure festooned with stars.
I'm not always a fan of the work of Wolff Olins but the initial public shock at seeing this odd little thing has long since worn off. People are now at least comfortable with it, even if true love has yet to blossom.
It’s a little depressing to find out that designers are so easily subject to the ‘shock of the new’, but as one earlier post points out, as people and as a profession we aren’t always that special. We should sleep on things a little more, because often the truly new takes a bit longer to get used to - for all of us.

Long-time listener first-time caller. I love your show. And because I have nothing of true value to add I'll join the typos party late: extra space between graphic and designers.

"2. The average yearly income of graphic designers was $45,340 in 2007, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics."

Also, Iron Man titles were both designed and directed by Danny Yount, not Kyle Cooper.

great article.

I'm a jane-come-lately to this most interesting discussion!

As a design educator, I'd like to propose a revision to the definitions of typeface and font (two of the most often misused terms in design today).

Typeface: a unique visual design for characters, usually including letters, numbers, punctuation and other marks. Stylistic variations of a typeface are grouped as a Type Family.

Font: the physical thing that images or creates the typeface for print or screen. This could be a job case of metal sorts for letterpress printing, a film strip for a phototypesetter or a digital file for computers.