the gorbott

alyce, i appreciate your thoughts and in many respects i agree with you. let me preface this by saying that my intent on starting this thread wasn't because i wasn't sure of my standing on the subject. i was more interested in learning the thoughts of others and to hopefully create some thoughts in the minds of some who haven't spent much time thinking about this topic. i agree that a distinguishing factor of art is where it is viewed. but in contemporary art even that idea is being blurred. i recently participated in a project that turned an entire abandon building into a work of art. the entire outside and inside were painted and covered with installation/video/audio/and performance art. it was open to the public for 5 nights and brought over 7,000 people out into the street to view it. on the same idea, the artist Bansky recently sold a wall on a side of a building for a healthy sum of money. so the idea that art is restricted to galleries, museums and private collections has become somewhat antique.
anyway, i'd like to hear some other peoples thoughts

__________________
HTTP://THEGORBOTT.BLOGSPOT.COM

alyCe

of course, for that matters I know a museum in Norway (grafill) that exhibits graphic design and commercial illustration, so yeah there are no rules in this world whatsoever. It's what makes it so great after all

__________________
everyone runs, nobody hides

georigin

I would say Design has a purpose to communicate, to solve a problem etc. Hence a mobile phone is designed ergonomically or the iPod's interface is designed to be easily navigable . Design also has principles, it has to adhere to certain rules to solve a problem.

Art on the other hand strives to invoke an emotion, a thought.

Both are ideally aesthetic. Design uses art to solve the problem.
So its safe to say designers are also artists since they create the art.
Designers not only do have to be good at visual aesthetics but also have to be good at solving problems, communicating ideas etc.

__________________
MY PORTFOLIO : : : : : : : : IXMOD : : : : : : : :

Michael

I have learned over the years and during this debate to separate two mediums. In my view Graphic Design and Graphic Art are in truth two separate entities. I'm sure the individuals who does magazine layouts for print uses typography and the like. Now with the Graphic Artist they may in fact open up Photoshop grab their Wacom pen and began to airbrush. I don't consider myself to be a Graphic Artist, but a Graphic Designer. Graphic Designers create communication vehicles and Graphic Artist create art work. We as Graphic Designers are artist aesthetically in every way, our work however is derived to create action to invoke, not only to inspire, but to sell and merchandise. The argument here is between Graphic Art and Fine Art not Graphic Design I believe. Of course this is only myn opinion on the subject.

Distill

I ran across this video today, and it reminded me of the great discussion going on on this thread. Hope this sparks some more opinions/ideas!

(If you have some time, peruse some of the other vids on the site for a bit--there's lots of very interesting topics)

__________________
Brand Consultant, Designer, Copywriter . . . All-around Good Guy
my blog | my site

cityofangels

Great discussion here!

After reading all of your very insightful opinions I thought i'd add my 2 cents.

I generally think, as many of you have already said, that the difference between the 2 is the reason behind it. Graphic design on the whole is trying to communicate something for someone other than the author. However, fine art is an expression of the artists feelings.

Obviously there is work out there that blurs these boundaries and I'm sure that everyone is looking to create that sort of work.