Paul Nini (picture from Ohio State University)
Tonight we studied two topics, "Ethics in Graphic Design" and "Artistic Copyright". Patrick gave us copies of articles about both these areas for us to read and digest; we had an intriguing discussion about them.
This article, by Paul Nini (Associate Professor in the Department of Design at Ohio State University), argues that designers need to consider "all potential audiences and users" of their work.
We were confused if this referred simply to the client that commissioned the work and the intended audience or if it referred to any person that might view the work. We all agreed that any work would be interpreted in different ways by each viewer and, therefore, it would be very difficult to avoid upsetting some audiences. Additionally, some works would, by nature of their content and marketing requirements, actually be required to challenge current thinking and provoke comment; particularly as a means of making the design, product or service stand apart from their rivals in the marketplace. Therefore, would trying to appeal to all audiences be beneficial to the clients needs?With regards to graphic design, we fully agreed with the quote from Milton Glaser that "If you don't know who you are talking to, you can't talk to anyone". But this would appear to be contradictory to Nini's claims that all audiences must be considered.
However, his claims do have greater merit when considering other forms of design such as product design, architecture and clothing. Concerns such as accessibility and safety must, in these areas of design, cater to all potential audiences in order to satisfy health and safety issues.
Not really much disagreement about the need for copyright legislation to protect designers. We were intrigued by what amount of alteration to an existing design would constitute infringement of copyright law. How much change would be tolerated?
No comments:
Post a Comment