While the beta is at a very early stage, there are a lot of questions which seems to come under the heading of 'anything about graphics' rather than what I understand as graphic design.

It occurs to me that the Area 51 definition rather depends on one's understanding of 'graphic design'.

Should we define it - and if so, how?


3 Answers 3


Not necessarily.

I think the site definition is best formed from several on-topic definition questions, from which we can start to form some sort of consensus about What should our FAQ contain?

Also, I think it is better to focus on defining this site rather than judging: "this is graphic design" and "that doesn't belong to graphic design".


After seing the status and number of questions in these first days ... Broaden the topic a bit and relax it might be needed for surpassing beta. Dunno, maybe I am wrong. This as well might imply to have also a more relaxed closing criteria. Not meaning to leave the site in the wild, though...


To be aware of more discussions and opinions about this, a bit to collect several questions related to this, would be convenient to read:

Is 3D on-topic?

Should this SE site include Technical Questions (IE Photoshop, etc)

Or if questions about Blender or 3D in general are ok to be closed, etc.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .