Giving A Moral Quote

    Earlier today I was looking around the web and on one of the forums I frequent I found a very odd post. It wasn't odd, as you hear people asking questions like this all the time. But it was odd in the response that it got.

I have been asked my hourly rate for web site mockups in PSD format only, no coding involved. I'm curious, what is the going rate out there in the land of freelance? I know clients often give us a set budget for the project as a whole. But, if someone is asking you how much you would charge them per hour, how would you figure it out?
What price range would be enough to make the job worth it to you?
Thanks for your input~

      I was expected a common answer, and answer I hear a lot when I see this question. However, this was not the case. Instead, the person was left with a skewed answer, one that I think is quite immoral myself.

First, consider the size of the company that will be benefiting from your work. Then determine how extensive the exposure of your work will be. Now, based on size of company, & exposure/usage, work within this range: $ 50-150/hr. Remember - a national ad commands more than a brochure for a non-profit company. Always stress value and your efficiency/speed over price. Hope this helps!

     This is not an answer for anyone who is looking to run a fair, descent, or moral business, or even trying to make some money on the side. What is this person actually saying? They are telling this person that first off, they themselves are not decent, fair, or moral when it comes to their business dealing. It is an issue of character, something that is in low demand today. 
   Second, they are saying that if you do the same exact work for two different clients, that the one that has more money should be charged more. Many people think this is just fine. "If they have the money to spend, might as well charge them more." This however is how crooked businesses operate. If you're a crooked business, have at it. Although most companies that are repeatable, successful, and have a large returning customer base do not do this. Most. They know that what you charge for one person is what you charge for another. 
      The piece of advice this person offers is to look at how "extensive the exposure of your work will be." Just so we all know, if you are doing website design, you're work can potentially reach the entire world--and that's for anyone, despite the size of the company, the individual, or their wallet. 
    Next, the person does not answer the question, but makes a statement: "a national ad commands more than a brochure for a non-profit company." The question was asked about website design, nothing else. This is true however, in part. A national ad may "command more, " but more of what? More of a clients money apparently. A national ad is no more special that a brochure for a non-profit organization. In fact, if the brochure is made for an international non-profit, it probably commands more (at least in this person's mind) than the national ad, because it will reach internationally (and from their point of view, can probably be charged more).  
    The last piece of advice that this person gives is: "Always stress value and your efficiency/speed over price." Why is this important? Because your clients eyes have bugged out as they look at the bill for this tiny website that they had to pay a thousand dollars for all because they were listed in yahoo's business section as being "very successful" and an employer of 500 people, when in reality they're Joe Blow with the same name, but only 2 employees-both their kids.

    With all this said, it could be quite clear that I do not believe like this person. I believe that the same price should be paid for the same design, even if you are a millionaire. For the same amount of time, effort, speed, etc--the same price should be paid. However, I also believe that if the designer wants to, he or she can cut the cost for certain clients, maybe some he feels needs a design more than he or she needs the money.  I also believe in sowing and reaping, especially when the ground you sow in is good ground.   
    When I do design work for people, the price is not tailored to the individual or their pocket book, it's tailored to the design. If you need a simple logo or banner that takes 5 minutes, the price won't be the same as a banner that took two weeks, several hours a day including several redesigns. I think too often people get ripped off because they don't know something or because "everyone else is doing it," whatever "it"is. And of course I believe that a worker is worth his wage. If someone does a job for you, you need to pay them for what they did, and pay them a fair amount. That's why I don't think how successful you are determines how much you should be charged. And I think character still means something to some people.

Walmart Redesign

   As most of you have probably noticed, Walmart has changed the way they look. They've decided to change the look of their stores outside and in. All new stores are designed differently than they were say, a year or two ago. Of course, I'm sure you've noticed that they changed their logo as well to go along with this change, to be a newer, friendlier store. They decided to drop the "-" in Wal-Mart and just become Walmart.
    One thing that I noticed like a bullet in the face was the redesign of packaging for "Great Value" products, the generic or store brand of several products. There was something about the redesign that I just didn't care for. Of course, there was something I liked. I liked the idea of change, but not just for the sake of change.
                                               
    Here you can see what a bag of sugar looks like. It's a plain white package with an image on it and the text. There's no real color, no trying to grab the customer with a cool package design, just simple white. I do not like this at all. You may feel differently. Walmart apparently does, and they must know more than me. They're making millions, not me.
     But then again, I still have an opinion. Below is an image of the flavor water mix with the before and after packaging. 
                                       
    If you look at the two different packages, you'll again see the blank white package that they are now using and the colorful packaging they just moved way from. Neither of these are great packaging in my opinion, but the first one is way better. When I first saw the new packaging two things came to mind; One good, one bad. The good: Walmart is and has been trying to grow a brand-"Great Value." This is indeed a way to do it. No matter what you buy at Walmart nowadays, if it is the Great Value brand, it will look the same--white packaging, similar colors, and a picture of the product. There's that similarity between everything that make syou think "Walmart," "Great Value" when you buy something of that brand. No matter what you're looking for, if it's Great Value, you'll know it by the packaging. That's the good part. It's a great part, and probably one of teh reasons why they went this way. However, they could have done better to go with another color than plain old white.
   The other thing that popped into my mind: If you're trying to get away from being associated with "the generic brand" this is not the way to go. The packaging just looks generic. For an international retailing store, you think they could have done better. When I see anything from Great Value, I may think Great Value, but I also think generic. When I go to other stores that may have generic or off-brand products, I see a lot better design put into the packaging. There's more than the white box with some text and a picture. There's a swoosh or a bar, or something besides white.
     Needless to say, there is going to be good and bad with what you make, design, produce, etc. People may love it, they may hate it. There may be good points and bad. But there will always be some underlying thought that someone may get when they look at it, read it, have it shoved in front of them. That's one thing we have to remember when designing, producing, and letting our creativity run free.

What Does Your Website Look Like In Shiretoko 3.1?

This one goes out to any one who has ever thought about tinkering with web design....or who actually does it without the tinkering part. We just updated one of our websites at work (www.afintl.org) and I was stunned to see that the whole thing was messed up in the newest version of Safari. I use Firefox at work, so everything looked great. But when my boss looked at it, the same could not be said.
  I thus went to work trying to figure out what was wrong, how it looked on Internet Explorer, and so forth and ran across a useful website. Browsershots.org actually takes screenshots of what your website looks like in several different browsers--including ones that most people have never heard of. The good-you can easily see what your site looks like on browsers you may not have installed or can install, or have never heard of, but someone out there may use. The bad-it takes a long time to get those screenshots. I waited for nearly 30 minutes to get screenshots from about 4-5 different browsers. Honestly you probably only need screen shots of a few different browsers, but you have the option of a ton of them. You can even see different versions of them.
   Now there is probably a different site that will do this better and faster, but this is just the first I ran across. Enjoy.

The SiteGrinder Review

About a year ago I wrote a review for PSD Photoshop magazine on a little plug-in called Sitegrinder. It was actually the pro version of version 2. Since that time I’ve been able to use it more and more and so I thought I’d update that review a bit for the fine folks that read this.

            Sitegrinder 2 is actually the plug-in I use to make my websites. What it does is take your photoshop file and transform it into html, the coding language of the internet. It’s a pretty ingenious plug-in. You start off by making your website and adding hints to your layers like “-button” or “-links.” These hints are placed right on the names of your layers. You use a little unused feature in photoshop called “layer comps” to make individual pages. I had never used, even heard of layer comps until Sitegrinder came along. They basically let you change the appearance of a photoshop file without actually changing the file. Thus you can keep all your same basic elements like your header, navigation bar, side bar, etc and just add your individual content on each page.  After you get done naming your layers and your comps, you just push the Sitegrinder button and then the fun begins.

            You’ll get a nice menu of choices ranging from connecting your buttons to connecting your external media, such as videos or picture galleries (sitegrinder is great for making online portfolios). It’ll even let you know about errors so you can fix them before publishing. Then you hit the build and minutes later—you have a fully functioning website ready to upload into cyberspace.

            Now for the downfalls of Sitegrinder. I didn’t cover much in my original review because I hadn’t used it that much. The time it takes from pushing the sitegrinder button to actually getting the Sitegrinder menu can be a while. It takes a bit to load all that file. Of course this is determined by your file size. Once that menu loads and your errors come up, you have no way of keeping them visible so you can go through your document and fix them one by one. So grab your pencil and paper for that. So basically, you have to let the SG menu load, see your errors, exit that, and the load the menu again to see if you actually got them all. That takes a bit. And sometimes you may have all the errors fixed, but your page is still not going to look like you thought it would.

            A lot of the issue with SG, like any other program, is that you have to learn it, the hints, the ways of doing things, etc. After you get all that down, you’re good to go.

            The last two things-one good, one bad. The support: SG has the best support of any program I’ve ever bought. They have a huge knowledge base and on top of that a forums where people who actually made the plug-in are on answering questions. I had a huge problems months ago that popped up out of nowhere with the final html document leaving off text or images. The guys there had no clue what was going on, but they exhaustively kept in contact with me over a week and a half helping me find the answer. The support is top notch.

            The worst part: Once the page is made, it’s not easily editable. SG is a website creator, not a CMS where you can edit, arrange, and add things easily. To do that, you have to go back to your photoshop file and fix the actual layer comp and files, and build it out again. However you can just built a single page and don’t have to do the whole site. However, if you’re just changing a type, it’ll take you 5-10 minutes. I myself have downloaded Nvu, an open source CMS that as far as I’ve found, works perfectly for just editing your already made sites(I’ve heard CushyCSS is good as well). Of course I’m sure it’s great at building them to. But those two programs/plug-ins working together can easily have you doing from photoshop graphic designer to photoshop web designer in a bout a week or less. 

What's Yuor Msseage?

In graphic design, like any form of written communication, it's always important to check, recheck, and double check everything that can be mis-communicated (if that's even a word). The point is that you want to make sure that what you want communicated is what is being communicated. In one of my mass communication classes in college we went through the different interpretations that communication can have. From what I actually remember, it resembles something as follows:
1.) What is intended on being communicated.
2.) What is communicated.
3.) What is received of the communication.
4.) What is perceived of the communication that is received.
5.) The response.
Of course you can go into more detail with that and make more, but from my memory, that is the majority of them. Basically, you want to make sure that what you want said, is being said. Now, where did this come from, the whole idea of communicating and mis-communicating?
Yesterday I came to work and next door to us is a gas station.As I was walking to the front door of the office I noticed a truck fueling up. Actually I noticed the trailer being pulled behind the truck. It wasn't very flashy, just words trying to communicate a message-"I'm a contractor, please hire me."
However, that is not the only message it communicated. Look at the photo below. I know it's hard to see (taken with my camera phone). But try squinting and read as much as possible (kind of like an eye exam).

Now how often do you spell "coming" with two m's? In case you can't read it, it says beneath the top lines "Comming To A Town Near You." Whoever put the text on the side of this trailer needs to be taken back to elementary school. Mr. Long was clearly trying to convey a message, unfortunatley conveyed another: I'm illiterate. While Mr. Long may be a fine contractor, an educated man, and the best at what he does, that is not what people get when they read his trailer. They see an uneducated fool.
His message is lost in his folley. There is a an old carpentry saying: measure twice, cut once. The point is clear-wiuth something irriversable, make sure it's done right because there is no changing it. Of course in design, it can be reversed before it goes to the printer, the publisher, etc. But then again, why do something twice when you only have to do it once?
Taking the time to check, and recheck if needed your design work to make sure it conveys the message you want it to is important. I have seen shirts that were mass produced and went out to stores with clear errors in them, many people missed it, and thus, the message communicated was not the intended one.
It all basically boils down to this: how important is the message you are conveying? I think for everything we do it should be done in excellence. We send off messages each day, in our daily lives about ouselves, our character, what kidn of person we are, etc. Of copurse it changes by how we act, even by who we hang out with (a totally different issue there). But in design, something so permanent, it's always important to check to make sure that the message we want communicated is the one being communicated to the best of our ability.

-krist

note: I intentionally didn't spell check this one. Figured the irony of it would pass some people's heads, so I might need to say something.

Is College Worth It?

For the would be graphic designer, is college really worth it? I've wondered that myself for some time after graduating with a masters in electronic media communication with my life now focused more so on graphic design that video editing. I look back and wonder, is the $28,000 I spent on my education really worth it?
After graduating from college with an Associates and Bachelor's, I decided to go to Bible School and thus, had to move nearly a thousand miles from home and look for a new job. Just a few months out of college I couldn't find a good job with my two degrees, but I could find a job as a graphic designer.
Thus, I had a $28,000 degree that I couldn't get a job with, but a few years of doodling on paper that got my foot in the door as a graphic designer. So I wondered, was my $28,000 dollars well spent? And in like manner, If I had switched a few classes over and gotten my degree in graphic design instead of media production, would that have been worth it?
Now for an art college or graphic designer school, I just don't know. But for what I did, a Bachelors in graphic design-a resounding 'NO'! I enjoyed my time in college-college life itself and the experience was something itself. However, the price I paid (and am paying) for the education I got was nowhere near worth it.
I started out as a graphic designer with a history of drawing, painting, and loving art. That's what I grew up loving to do. But at 25 I got a job as a graphic designer with no clue what Photoshop was. Like anyone wanting to keep my job, I worked with Photoshop every chance I got on the job. Sure, my designs were really bad, but they got better. I even got myself a copy of Photoshop to use at home.
Any resource I could get my hands on to help me gain more knowledge on how to be a better design--I got. That meant going to the library and reading up on what I needed to know. That meant going to the bookstore I seeing what they had, including Photoshop magazines. And most importantly, I searched the web.
The internet is filled with knowledge on all sorts of things-including Photoshop. I got on there and found all sorts of tutorials and learned from them. I found designs and picked them apart trying to figure out how they did that, including joining forums and asking other aspiring designers for help. I did what a lot of people used to do (and some still do).
Just because I was out of college didn't mean my education was over. I applied myself to something I really wanted to know-graphic design, and learned as much about it as I could. And looking back, if I knew this is what I would be doing, I might have just skipped out on college, grabbed me a few thousand dollars worth of books, software, magazines, and a computer, and spent a lot less money, a lot less time, and gotten to where I am now.
So before you throw a lot of money into a formal education (which I'm not against at all), ponder the thought of "could I do this on my own and learn the same thing?" For a lot of us, that answer might just be 'yes.'