Alberta PCs ditch 'Wild Rose Country' slogan on new licence plates

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I think you are confusing "things that are ethical" with "things that don't serve you well".

Fine I concede, designers should work for free. Thank you.

[Bill Bumface]

Every time the design competition thing comes up, I like having a look at the under construction St. Partrick's Island bridge and the Peace bridge.

The Peace bridge is a fantastic result, something people make a destination of, and appears in a lot of pictures of Calgary now.

The St. Patrick's Island bridge, which had no limited height constraints, and the extra parameter of having an island stopover in the middle, opening the door for some really creative stuff. Instead, we had a design competition, and got something nice, but fairly conservative and boring. And for roughly the same price. I don't see a future of people flocking to that bridge.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Every time the design competition thing comes up, I like having a look at the under construction St. Partrick's Island bridge and the Peace bridge.

The Peace bridge is a fantastic result, something people make a destination of, and appears in a lot of pictures of Calgary now.

The St. Patrick's Island bridge, which had no limited height constraints, and the extra parameter of having an island stopover in the middle, opening the door for some really creative stuff. Instead, we had a design competition, and got something nice, but fairly conservative and boring. And for roughly the same price. I don't see a future of people flocking to that bridge.

Really?

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Really?

I know I've purposely walked over to the bridge to take pictures a few times. I always see tourists hanging around there as well.

[Resolute 14]

Counterpoint: We paid money to alleged design professionals for that stupid blue ring.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

Fine I concede, designers should work for free. Thank you.

While I can see that established designers would have no reason to work for free, you have to admit (and maybe you already have and I just missed it) that contests like this are good opportunities for students, post-grad designers, and freelance designers to get a bit of recognition, experience, and practice. Some of whom can produce work at the same quality as a professional.

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

While I can see that established designers would have no reason to work for free, you have to admit (and maybe you already have and I just missed it) that contests like this are good opportunities for students, post-grad designers, and freelance designers to get a bit of recognition, experience, and practice. Some of whom can produce work at the same quality as a professional.

I'll give you that, an aspiring designer looking to get their foot in the door of the industry shouldn't be chastised for participating in such a contest. And yes, it could be the big break they need to really get rolling.

However I'd also argue that "here's the project, give us your best!" isn't conductive to learning proper design practice/process. If you're gonna work for free to build your portfolio great, but you'd be better served working 1-1 with a client and getting to know their specific business needs/challenges.

Anyways I've really railed on this enough.
New plates suck.
Design contest suck.
I need a coffee.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Every time the design competition thing comes up, I like having a look at the under construction St. Partrick's Island bridge and the Peace bridge.

The Peace bridge is a fantastic result, something people make a destination of, and appears in a lot of pictures of Calgary now.

The St. Patrick's Island bridge, which had no limited height constraints, and the extra parameter of having an island stopover in the middle, opening the door for some really creative stuff. Instead, we had a design competition, and got something nice, but fairly conservative and boring. And for roughly the same price. I don't see a future of people flocking to that bridge.

I just want them to finish the damn thing to make my bike commute better.

[Hack&Lube]

It's not exactly zero cost. We're all paying hundreds of dollars for what amounts to a $10 stickered license plate with special 3M coating and a keyboard monkey adding your name to a database field.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Let's take a very local example for the amateur versus professional debate.

I submit our own "Resident Videologist" Mr "AC".

Anthony has provided us with jaw dropping and at times tear invoking videos that more often than not surpass anything we see from the pros.

And he has been doing that here since his mid-teens, without any formal training to my knowledge.

His work is FAR more detailed and elaborate than some simple license plate.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I think you are confusing "things that are ethical" with "things that don't serve you well".

It's a free country, if someone wants to hold a contest that results in free labour they can do so. In fact, Restricting that in any way is anti-competitive and probably illegal.

Actually design competitions for building design is very restricted by the AAA. It is actually illegal to not follow the restrictions in Alberta and every other Province. I imagine that graphic designers just don't have the same protections as a self regulated profession, which is unfortunate. The link below shows how architectural design competitions are regulated in Alberta.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=ca

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Do you honestly think that given the population of Alberta that there would not be an equal, if not greater amount of quality submissions than that? And again, at no cost to the taxpayer.

Quantity does not equal quality. A single Monet will always be worth more than 1000 mediocre paintings.

And again, at no cost to the taxpayer.

Why do you expect the creative community to work for free? Do you expect your accountant to work for free? Does your lawyer work on spec?

With your way, basically 1 out of 200 people gets paid while the rest wasted their time. Would you be ok with that type of setup at your place of work? I sure hope you're at the top .5% of your field, otherwise you're just a waste of space.

The funny thing is that a lot of people like yourself seem to think that the Creative community is still stuck in the 60s, where we all have drum circles and paint our feelings. When in reality we are just as integrated into the economy as any other industry, and there is serious $ to be made off of these skills.

The truth is that Design can be an extremely powerful (and lucrative) tool in a company's arsenal. If you look at leading company in its segment, you'll find that most of them have a very strong basis in good design. Do you think Apple would get where they are without good design? What do you think separates a company like Target from Kmart...lower prices? Ikea, IBM, Audi, GE, Hyundai/Kia...all these companies put a strong focus on design. Do you think these companies got to where they are by holding condescending design contests for their logos?

You and Jaydorn seem to be implying protectionism. We already have way too much of that, and it isn't beneficial to the average Joe.

The average Joe benefits more from good design than they do from mediocre design.

As far as protectionism, I'm concerned about protecting the integrity of the my industry, and ensuring it gets the respect it deserves, so that my students don't have to keep moving away from Alberta, and instead can work their talents here instead.

I would tell my students to screw the contest and work on something that will give them professional opportunity, and compensate them for what their worth (which at the start of their career isn't much, but it sure beats $0). There's some serious money to be made in this business...you don't need to waste it on silly things that devalue the industry.

Anthony has provided us with jaw dropping and at times tear invoking videos that more often than not surpass anything we see from the pros.

AC is a very talented guy. If he's spending the majority of his time on free projects for people who make money off his work, than honestly he's wasting his talent and his earning potential. Those kinds of skills can be quite valuable in the marketplace.

I am pretty sure a few toddlers are adept enough with a computer to come up with an acceptable license plate design.

So you're one of those guys who thinks that design is just about having the right software, huh? If that's the case, I think the distance where you stand and where I stand will never be covered.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

I guess we just don't share the same view, in my opinion design contest are unethical. But I have a vested (and very biased) interest in maintaining the value for designers time.

Isn't this just a contest, with clearly set out rules, that you are free to choose to enter if you wish? If you go in a singing competition, and you don't win, are you supposed to get paid? Instead of an open contest, what if Alberta had selected three firms, and asked each of them to put together their best work, and they'd pick one to get paid. If you weren't selected, you are doing work for free as well.

None of these are immoral, lacking credibility, disobeying professional conduct, cheating people out of time/money, and/or set under false pretenses. Everything is disclosed and if you want to enter, you can. If you (general you, not specific you) are as talented as you think you are, then you don't have to do contest work, and can get paid for everything you do. A contest might allow an up and comer to showcase their skills, and it might produce an excellent final product that wouldn't have been thought of otherwise.

[Frequitude]

It blows my mind that anyone would pick #2 over #1.

[Dion]

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

None of these are immoral, lacking credibility, disobeying professional conduct, cheating people out of time/money, and/or set under false pretenses. Everything is disclosed and if you want to enter, you can. If you (general you, not specific you) are as talented as you think you are, then you don't have to do contest work, and can get paid for everything you do. A contest might allow an up and comer to showcase their skills, and it might produce an excellent final product that wouldn't have been thought of otherwise.

On a basic level, you're right, nobody is being forced to enter. But you have to realize that as a whole, the design industry is too many times being asked to work for this magical carrot that rarely materializes in the end.

A lot of students and juniors will jump on this. And on many levels I can understand why...they want to prove their worth. But this will be the first of many in the cycle of "this will be great for your portfolio!" or "there will be more work after this" that they will face that inevitably goes nowhere. Every designer out there has a book's worth of stories of being screwed, whether it be out of money and credit.

If 200 designers enter a contest, and only 1 person is successful and gets paid... how exactly is this good for the design industry? Would any other industry be ok with this?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Every time the design competition thing comes up, I like having a look at the under construction St. Partrick's Island bridge and the Peace bridge.

The Peace bridge is a fantastic result, something people make a destination of, and appears in a lot of pictures of Calgary now.

The St. Patrick's Island bridge, which had no limited height constraints, and the extra parameter of having an island stopover in the middle, opening the door for some really creative stuff. Instead, we had a design competition, and got something nice, but fairly conservative and boring. And for roughly the same price. I don't see a future of people flocking to that bridge.

The St Patricks span is larger so the cost for the same product was always going to be higher so the St. P bridge is a cheaper option.

Also looking at the competition there were several bridges in it that were comparable in stature (in my opinion) to the peace bridge that were not chosen. Also reputalbe firms participated in the peace bridge contest so not getting a good design wasn't neccessarily a result of the contest. It wasnt just kids with crayons drawing a bridge.

I think the King Eddie Hotel / Cantos Music center was an example of a good way to contract out a design. Pay several firms to provide an initial concept and then select the design. This gets you better results than sole source (Peace bridge isnt that great compared to other signiture bridges) and doesn't rely on people doing work for free and should get you a lower cost as people are competing for the contract.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Table 5

On a basic level, you're right, nobody is being forced to enter. But you have to realize that as a whole, the design industry is too many times being asked to work for this magical carrot that rarely materializes in the end.

A lot of students and juniors will jump on this. And on many levels I can understand why...they want to prove their worth. But this will be the first of many in the cycle of "this will be great for your portfolio!" or "there will be more work after this" that they will face that inevitably goes nowhere. Every designer out there has a book's worth of stories of being screwed, whether it be out of money and credit.

If 200 designers enter a contest, and only 1 person is successful and gets paid... how exactly is this good for the design industry? Would any other industry be ok with this?

Lots of other industries do bid work for free. In this case the difference between a the finished product and the bid is likely limited so it isn't quite comparable. But it is quite common for engineering firms to spend 1%-5% of the expected value of a contract in pursuit of the contract which unless they win there is no recapturing of that bid money.

This is significantly different then a contest though.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Table 5

On a basic level, you're right, nobody is being forced to enter. But you have to realize that as a whole, the design industry is too many times being asked to work for this magical carrot that rarely materializes in the end.

A lot of students and juniors will jump on this. And on many levels I can understand why...they want to prove their worth. But this will be the first of many in the cycle of "this will be great for your portfolio!" or "there will be more work after this" that they will face that inevitably goes nowhere. Every designer out there has a book's worth of stories of being screwed, whether it be out of money and credit.

If 200 designers enter a contest, and only 1 person is successful and gets paid... how exactly is this good for the design industry? Would any other industry be ok with this?

Is this a function of supply and demand? Are there so many designers, artists, actors, singers, etc. that the most efficient and cost effective way to get through it all is to hold contests and auditions? It's tough to blame a client on setting it up as a contest when there are so many people willing to work for it. It's basically the opposite of a union, who won't do any work unless it's specifically written out.

It seems like this is a known risk on entering the industry. Actors know they have to audition. Designers know they will be doing some work for free. It's not really different than other professions. Articling CA and law students know they are going to be working extremely long hours, making very little wages, while the partners make large earnings. We know what we are getting into, and go about it because the rewards out weigh the risks. It's not even that dissimilar to athletes doing tryouts to make teams. It's not identical, but not that far off.

I'm not saying you shouldn't want to be paid; I wouldn't do my job if I wasn't paid. I am saying I don't see how you call this unethical. You can call it cheap, greedy, etc., but unethical is the wrong word. Unethical would be having the contest, declaring all the ideas crap, and then modifying your favourite just a bit. When the designer complains, you tell them to sue you, knowing they don't have the funds to do it.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by GGG

Lots of other industries do bid work for free. In this case the difference between a the finished product and the bid is likely limited so it isn't quite comparable.

That's the thing. The work is in many cases 100% complete by the time its submitted. That's not a sustainable business model for anyone.

Originally Posted by squiggs96

I'm not saying you shouldn't want to be paid; I wouldn't do my job if I wasn't paid. I am saying I don't see how you call this unethical. You can call it cheap, greedy, etc., but unethical is the wrong word. Unethical would be having the contest, declaring all the ideas crap, and then modifying your favourite just a bit. When the designer complains, you tell them to sue you, knowing they don't have the funds to do it.

I personally never called it unethical. I think the onus is more on the designers to stop doing this type of work that is self-damaging in the long term. Though greedy, I don't necessarily blame the organizations who are holding the contest, because people will always prefer paying less for more. However, they shouldn't be surprised if all they get is mediocrity.

Unethical would be having the contest, declaring all the ideas crap, and then modifying your favourite just a bit. When the designer complains, you tell them to sue you, knowing they don't have the funds to do it.

This happens all the time.

Or they hire you, and then fire you halfway once you've shown them your initial ideas (where the value is), but havent taken things to final so they don't have to pay you completely. Magically the work always comes out a few months later barely changed.