8

EDIT: Trying to make this a little systematic, please go here to suggest and vote on alternatives.


I noticed that the blurb for GD (you can see it here among other places) is a little measly. The problem I have is with the word trying:

Q&A for professional graphic designers and non-designers trying to do their own graphic design

We are not just tryers, we are doers, surely? Any chances of getting this changed? And if so, what would be a better blurb?

4
  • Looks like the blurb comes from the original proposal description, I think it would be a good idea to update it if we can all agree on something
    – JohnB
    Commented Apr 24, 2014 at 19:29
  • Yep, that was my thought exactly. Do you have suggestions?
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 24, 2014 at 19:34
  • I believe its just bad grammar @RandomO'Reilly the "trying" part is towards the non-designers attempting to do something. But I agree a new blurb could be nice.
    – Ryan
    Commented Apr 24, 2014 at 20:08
  • I realise it was all done with good intentions; it just rings a little too amateurish in my ears. I think we can do better, and we can do better for ourselves :)
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 24, 2014 at 20:09

4 Answers 4

6

Ages ago we agreed to widen our scope (1, 2) to graphics and design in the broadest sense, including drawing, art techniques, typography, traditional tools, general design principles, etc.

Maybe this is a good opportunity to make it crystal clear that we don't just do pixel-pushing:

  1. Q&A for design, artworking and typography
  2. Q&A for design, illustration and typography
  3. Q&A for creative design and artworking
  4. Q&A for the graphic arts including design, illustration and typography

I don't think we need to specify professional or amateur as I don't think we have the same level of cultural schism between amateurs and pros that, say, the photography world has. They need something that gets across the idea "We aim at professionals but please don't sneer at the amateurs, they're welcome too" because many pro photographers really go out of their way to distance themselves from amateurs and might assume that a site with pros was pro-only.

I don't think we need that, and it should be pretty obvious from the content that we don't roast beginners or dabblers. I think it's enough to say what we're about rather than who we're for.

Though we could always stick "...professionals and beginners" on any of the above e.g. "Q&A for design, illustration and typography professionals and beginners".


Also ideally we should be tell people something about our scope that they don't already know from the site name.

8
  • Very good points! Never crossed my mind, but what rather than who is splendid. Not sure if we need to add "---professionals and beginners"; besides that sticks in my craw a little: there is a large gap between a beginner and a professional. Maybe "enthusiasts", or some other term that covers beginners -> semi-pros -> professionals?
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 30, 2014 at 12:02
  • Oh, and I also think it should be as short as possible. Take a look at the list of SE-sites, and short is better.
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 30, 2014 at 12:04
  • I like this and considered some of these, the only thing that concerned me was the more you say, the more you excluse. Like what about 3D? Print Making? Photo Manipulation? Animation? Generative Arts? I think your 3rd one could work but would be hesitant to get much more specific then that
    – Ryan
    Commented Apr 30, 2014 at 13:10
  • @ryan I think you're right - the 3rd one sounds like a broad umbrella while the others might sound like a list. I'll bold it to show it's the preferred of these. Commented Apr 30, 2014 at 16:30
  • The word "artworking" sounds very odd to me. Possibly a word used by a specific culture, but as an American artist of 19 years, I've never used or seen the word once. Commented May 6, 2014 at 22:22
  • "artwork" would be preferable. Commented May 6, 2014 at 22:23
  • Maybe it's just a UK term, I don't know. "Artworking" basically means working to a brief to create artwork. It spans from "creative artworkers" who do things like make paintings, drawings etc that will be used as, say, book covers, to "pre-print artworkers" in print shops modifying artwork to fit printer specs etc etc. Basically people who are all about a particular art style, process or toolset but who work to briefs instead of selling to galleries. Commented May 7, 2014 at 10:18
  • I lsolike option 3 and would suggest perhaps a line of 'all levels welcome' I agree with Random on the 'professionals and beginners' I perceive it as restrictive somehow...
    – Jenna
    Commented Jun 12, 2014 at 9:31
1

removing my suggestions because I like 56's better but didnt want to delete for the comments

6
  • 3
    I actually like that we are not just a community of professionals, but one open to all levels. How about "Q&A for professional, enthusiast and amateur graphic designers" or something along those lines?
    – Yisela
    Commented Apr 25, 2014 at 9:39
  • 2
    I was avoiding "graphic designers" in favor of "graphic design" to avoid a title classification
    – Ryan
    Commented Apr 25, 2014 at 10:45
  • 1
    Yeah, "graphic designers' sounds quite professional already. I see what you mean :/
    – Yisela
    Commented Apr 25, 2014 at 10:47
  • Good point, Ryan. I actually like the super-short suggestion you have there. Short and sweet. Does anyone have an idea how to contact whoever in charge, so that this could be altered? @Yisela ?
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 25, 2014 at 12:05
  • 2
    I can get this changed for you guys as long as there's overwhelming consensus. I need to see more than two votes on the proposed solution before I can make the change.
    – hairboat
    Commented Apr 25, 2014 at 15:43
  • 2
    Thanks, @AbbyT.Miller ... overwhelming consensus seems like a tricky thing to achieve here (not because we all disagree, but because we got to get people to come to meta and vote). Figure it might be worth a try a bit after the elections.
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 15:06
0
  1. GD.SE: Q&A for professionals, amateurs, and enthusiasts as related in graphic design.
  2. GD.SE: Q&A for all things graphic design
  3. GD.SE: Q&A as related to using Adobe products. (okay, this one's a joke).
  4. GD.SE: Q&A for individuals of all experience levels interested in graphic design.
  5. GD.SE: Q&A related to graphic design for enthusiasts, amateurs, and professionals of all levels

Just adding a few more options.....

1
  • Hahaha - 3: nice one. Or just GD.SE: the Adobe experts!
    – benteh
    Commented Apr 28, 2014 at 15:04
0

Three top options for a new blurb - Comment Votes

  1. Q&A for design and artistry - user56's preferred choice in a more culture-neutral wording
  2. Q&A for all things design - Scott's most short and concise choice
  3. Q&A for art, design, and critique - A choice in favor of inviting design critiques

The very much needed change discussed here can only move forward with an overwhelming consensus on the best options for a new blurb. I'd like to see the change happen.

If you agree with any of these three options, say so, including your choice #, and the community leadership (as noted by Abbey T. Miller) can put the choices up for an official vote, or move for the change based on the comment votes.

4
  • #3 - Q&A for art, design, and critique Commented May 6, 2014 at 22:48
  • 1
    good initiative, but i think it will be a little too obscure with voting on comments. I think the best thing is to make a brand new question, with only one alternative per answer. That way voting would make more sense, be more visible, and much easier to administer.
    – benteh
    Commented May 6, 2014 at 23:37
  • Good point. You'll do it? @RandomO'Reilly Commented May 6, 2014 at 23:59
  • 1
    already done :)
    – benteh
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 0:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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