I recently created a new proposal on Area 51 for an Stack Exchange site called Design Review, which is meant to be an equivelent of SE's Code Review site. I put a lot of thought into the range of questions that could be asked on the site. A lot of it would not necessary be limited to graphic design, but all design, which would include somebody's final rendering of a 3D design, their layout of formal letters or resumes, and even a question such as 'how to make a night-time scene dark but visible in a drawing' or 'how to make my artwork look more scary/fast/quiet/1980s'. In a sense I think I conveyed my proposal as a Q&A site on Visual Communication.

Then I had a bit more thought about what the Graphic Design site is about and perhaps when this site was initially conceived, the intent was to be like my proposal. Also, such critique questions are generally valid here, as has been discussed before.

However, with so many questions regarding the software used to make these designs, which I believe do have their place on this site, it is easy to forget that questions regarding the design process are okay. Which is why I use the word fundamental in my question title. Also with most users like myself coming from Stack Overflow and that design is a fairly subjective topic, that having a technical question may seem like a requirement.

2 Answers 2


I think the specific enough to be answerable, general enough to apply to more than one case approach is what we should aim for here:

  • "Please Review My Design" is not a question with a simple, single best answer.
  • "Can I justify using Comic Sans in this kids' flyer?" is a question that can feature a specific design as an example, and answering the question can cover both the general case as well as commenting on the example given.
  • +1 Nail on the head! I've been trying to express that distinction for ages and that sums it up better than I've ever managed. Someone could google "comic sans kids flyer" and get useful information relevant to their case, even though it's not their design under crit. There might be several people making valid points - and the most valid factual points will float to the top, just like how any question can have multiple correct answers that solve the problem, some of which meet the criteria more fully than others. The accepted answer is the one that solves the original poster's problem. Dec 5, 2012 at 22:57

I find these questions very interesting, but I think their main problem is that they don't exactly fit with the Q&A format, and you usually end up with a long list of reasonable suggestions but no final answer.

The challenge would be to make these questions broad enough to be useful for a larger audience. The UX stack is quite good in this sense, because its questions/answers are generally well formatted to be a reference for other people with similar problems. They usually only focus on a particular issue.

I would be happy to see more questions like "How to make a night-time scene dark but visible in a drawing". They are fundamental for me in the sense that we are lacking some passion to overcome the "how to" questions. Unfortunately, wiki-style or opinion-based ones (and I think "How to make my artwork look more scary" would fall in this category) would result in unanswered or non-constructive questions.

You must log in to answer this question.

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