Plagiarism vs Inspiration

[ArvDesign]

hi guys,
Recently I read an article regarding plagiarism and inspiration. It said that many graphic designers are collectors. We are collecting samples of other's work to create our own project. I find this oppinion very thruthful. Not that I'm ripping everybody around but on my hard drive you can find many samples of extraordinary graphics made by other. For example while going in subway many times I'm taking pictures of ads or if I find an interesting logo/layout composition my camera is always ready. I was wondering should we consider ourselves plagiators or it's just all about inspiration?

[mac.FINN]

Oh I'm definately a plagirist. I've never come up with my own idea, or my own designs. Everything I've ever done has already existed somewhere in the market. Either an exact replica or a composition of a few existing designs. It's been very effective for me. You see clients love it when you say - don't worry you're work won't stand out at all and there's only a very good chance you'll be sued. I have to get back to work now as I'm very busy designing a forum site called the GraphicDesernForum... I'm thinking green.

[G-Man79]

It's not really that fine of a line. If you're stealing, you're stealing. Whether it's an entire composition or just a photo, it's pretty obvious.

If you study a pieces design elements and you use those elements as guides in your own design, that YOU alone created, then it's all good.

I bookmark/tag/Digg/delicious whatever inspiration/resourceful pieces I can get my eyeballs on.

[ArvDesign]

Mac.Finn, I understand your irony, but you must have misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about ripping off exact replica of somebody's else work. I was talking about situation where for examle you see a design of logo and you take a picture of it because combination of 2 colors is very interesting and you didn't thought about it. Or for example you see that on a business card somebody composted address info unusually. All I had in mind was that sometimes it's good to see others work, before starting to design your own (not from composition of a few existing designs)

[ArvDesign]

g-man, that's exactly what I had in mind. Just pieces of design to inspire not to copy exactly the same way.

[Eraser Nubbin]

Ya where do you draw the line... I had a boss once tell me that 85% of the design that you do is pre-hashed, where she came up with that number I don't know but her point kind of makes sense.
They aren't inventing any new colours, shapes or letters so everything that we do do is recycled to some extent. I would think that this is true for any creative medium, music, or writing.

[ArvDesign]

naturally. Many times I found myself ina total black-out state of mind situation while designing. Sometimes the most clear and simple answers are hardest to get. If I'm stuck in a place without any power to design I just browse thru my small archieve of graphics in search for inspiration. If I find something interesting I think how I can use it in my design ( not to copy-paste) but develop, transform and improve. Everything has been said, world just repeats itselves.

[Eraser Nubbin]

The thing that scares me is the constant bombardment of media that we are subjected to. Makes me question whether any of my ideas are fresh or just some cool idea from something I saw ten years ago tucked in the back of my head.

Makes me almost want to become a hermit... although client relations might suffer.

[ArvDesign]

Yeah, we are under constant pressure. It really narrows our creativity. But I still think that combining pieces of various designs into something new and fresh is not lame and there is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Broacher]

Inspiration. And it isn't restricted to other graphic designer's work-- or even graphic design. Virtually anything, real, imagined, abstract or intangible is fodder for inspiration when you have the tools, and power to understand and appreciate the structure of a thing's insides, outsides, and it's smooshy overlap zone into everything else.

Poetry, bad poetry, good coding, music, a sandwich, American politics, Morris dancing, dishwashing, your brain, your butt-- a bug's butt, a super model's butt, a flying buttress--it doesn't matter what we call or label things, it's how we relate, interpret, and connect them all together in synthesis that makes this whole design game the fun game it is. Design comes out of gaining an understanding of things. It's a growth process. We educate ourselves as we go. That's why it's worth all the crap we put up with. (Most of the time!)

[ArvDesign]

Feeling of constant development is I guess most rewarding thing about our profession. Being able to look thru my porfolio and say " since the beginning I improved hell-a-lot" is great. Broacher I like your view on inspiration, although it would be hard to find inspiration in bug's butt for me :)))))))))))))

[Broacher]

Bug butt inspiration is easy. Check out those things sticking out of a cockroach. Cerci, they're called. These are actually directly connected to the legs of the cockroach through a giant nerve bundle (their 'secondary' brain), which is an important (and obviously successful) survival adaptation. When a cockroach "feels" a presence with its extremenly sensitive cerci hairs, its legs start running instantly, even before it's real brain receives the signal. And once a roach starts running, it's fast! And a marvel of enigneering. Don't believe me, check out: http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/february99/features/rightnerve/rightnerve.html

Other things worth knowing about bug butts:
- lightning bugs-- fireflys? Inspiration for the classic tune 'The Glow Worm' of course, but also the research into their photonically generous butts unravelled the secret to bioluminescence and was a very significant and important one for science and medicine (and yeah, glow wands!). The gene for bioluminescence is now as standard a tool as the hammer is to carpenters for treatment, and drug design.

-bombadier beetle: the rocket butted bug. It contains an actual chemical rocket combustion chamber and holds the record for the highest temperature of any living organism. You don't want to study these things TOO closely though. But, NASA scientists have, hoping to glean more secrets of it's complex pulsed rocket mechanism for their work on future ramjet technology.

Which all brings me back to how very helpful it is to intentionally NOT think about the obvious, or 'right' thing when it comes to design. In fact, some very successful designers cultivate and swear by this 'think wrong' approach and philosophy to creative problem solving.

And is it just me that thinks that a bug butt is a good place to start? What about the ovipositor? That's the tube some bugs use to lay eggs in the ground.

Here's a designer who started with that idea: http://www.stepinsidedesign.com/STEPMagazine/Article/28625

Interesting article with insight into what we're talking about here.

[CamarotaDesign]

I pretty much get a lot of ideas from looking at other's work. I build on those and try to make them better. Sometimes inspiration hits and I come up with something without looking at anything, although Im sure there is no way I could have come up with it, if I hadn't looked at a million things already. Like Einstein said. "I've been able to see over the mountain by standing on the shoulder's of giants" ......or something like that. I'd say you are only plagarizing if you're copying other's work, switching a few things around, and failing to grow creatively.

[Broacher]

>>Like Einstein said. "I've been able to see over the mountain by standing on the shoulder's of giants"<<

I believe that was Newton. It's: "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants."

Newton was also seriously cracked in places--and did not suffer from ego under-inflation at all. Wrote more books on religion than physics, actually. Still, gotta love anyone who was accused of spreading antitrinitarianism. (wow, what a word) And heavily 'inspired' by the occult.

[twogun]

g-man, that's exactly what I had in mind. Just pieces of design to inspire not to copy exactly the same way.

for me grahpic design is no different to fashion design, we are all following the trend of the moment, commercially speaking of course.

what fonts styles are in, what colours are in, we all emulate that of the current marketplace to gain acceptance. over here in the UK ther is a real over usage, in my opinion, of LCD typefaces, hopefully that wont last too long but i found myself nearly going down that route today on a new project, just because that was drumme dinto my head yesterday whilst on business in London.....even flared jeans are in over here!!!!

[CamarotaDesign]

>>Like Einstein said. "I've been able to see over the mountain by standing on the shoulder's of giants"<<

I believe that was Newton. It's: "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants."

Newton was also seriously cracked in places--and did not suffer from ego under-inflation at all. Wrote more books on religion than physics, actually. Still, gotta love anyone who was accused of spreading antitrinitarianism. (wow, what a word) And heavily 'inspired' by the occult.

haha, you're right. I covered myself though... the "or something like that" is my disclaimer. =P

Hey your right about newton. The dude was pretty kooky, and alot of modern science is based off his work. What a legacy.

[Jackimalyn]

There's no way around it. We see design everyday. Good, bad. It teaches us what looks good... what we like. These ideas are burned into our minds, from observation. Just from living. I think everyone designs based on their experiences in their life and other things they've seen (among other things.) Whether its a logo we saw, or a cloud formation, a color scheme in a child's illustration... whatever!

None of us "made up" white space or a certain alignment techniques but we all use them, its not plagiarism. Its what we've learned. It becomes yours when you take all these things and put them together in your own design. Create something new out of everything else youve seen.

Do you guys know what Im getting at? I feel like im rambling now trying to explain myself. I suppose I'll get back to work now....

[Broacher]

>>None of us "made up" white space or a certain alignment techniques but we all use them, its not plagiarism. Its what we've learned. It becomes yours when you take all these things and put them together in your own design. Create something new out of everything else youve seen.<<

I think it's all about levels, not techniques--or theories. And more often--acquired instinct and confidence. We all know what can happen when theory gets separated from technique (some call if overly-fine art) or the opposite, when technique loses the connection to theory (logomart, et al). The thing is, both theory and technique co-evolved to a point where we have these fundamentals-- at one level -- which we then use to create our own interpretation of a problem's parameters and solutions. BUT, at no point should we ever lose touch with our instincts and values -- both creative and cultural.

And that's where we can have some very significant trajectories off the whole idea of what are universal design 'fundamentals' or principles. Culture, history, language--these all can have huge impacts on what is being communicated visually-- or not. Like it or not, as communicators, we are pretty firmly rooted in our own temporary viewpoint of the world. But that doesn't preclude that we can't push the principles, or question their 'sacred' underpinnings.

Uh-oh. I think I've caught your rambling now too!

[Jackimalyn]

^^ Agreed. to all of it....

[tZ]

Influence is based on interaction.

No matter what it is its just human nature.

With that said, I belive that to an extent everything we interact with influnces our own work one way or another.

However, that inlfunce is normally so minimal that it goes undetected by others and many times (if not intentional) our selves.

However, I wouldn't consider being influenced plagairism. I may document others work and use concepts within others to build for my own but, I don't think that makes us plagairist- its human nature.

If you truly wanted to have all "origional" work then you would need to confine your limits to that of a box.

So in respect to your origional question no we are not plagairist. We are humans and humans are influenced by what they interact with. Documenting others work creates an interaction and that interaction results in influence.

[Fantômas]

hi guys,
Recently I read an article regarding plagiarism and inspiration. It said that many graphic designers are collectors. We are collecting samples of other's work to create our own project. I find this oppinion very thruthful. Not that I'm ripping everybody around but on my hard drive you can find many samples of extraordinary graphics made by other. For example while going in subway many times I'm taking pictures of ads or if I find an interesting logo/layout composition my camera is always ready. I was wondering should we consider ourselves plagiators or it's just all about inspiration?
I"m just curious, was it the article by MIchael Bierut on designobserver.com? IF so that's agreat article!

[Silence04]

your brain can only create from what it knows. whether you realize it or not, our ideas spawn out of things we have already seen or understand.

to say that many graphic designers are collectors would be false because all humans are collectors by nature.

[jimking]

your brain can only create from what it knows. whether you realize it or not, our ideas spawn out of things we have already seen or understand.

to say that many graphic designers are collectors would be false because all humans are collectors by nature.
Very true. It's what sets us a part from the animals. We collect memories and pass them down to our children. We are collectors of our past and maintain them for thousands of years. Go to a museum and see art created a millennium ago. Go to the library. Look at your photo albums. Go to schools were the masters teach their craft to the students. Collectors are us.

[Ghastly]

your brain can only create from what it knows. whether you realize it or not, our ideas spawn out of things we have already seen or understand.

to say that many graphic designers are collectors would be false because all humans are collectors by nature.

Not sure I agree here. That we can send rockets to the moon is testament to the ideas spawned from the minds of genius's predicated on little that was *understood* beforehand to them or people/writing they were exposed to. (The birth of new concepts) Where do you draw the line between inspiration and those who are inspired by somebody elses inspiration without giving due credit?
Inspiration is the ability to generate and execute a plan that is independent of the work done or documented by others.

A small percentage Of Design makes people collectively stop and think 'wow...that's bloody clever' or 'We've never seen that before...fantastic!'
A larger percentage is the correct/skillful application and adaptation of someone elses brilliance.
An even larger percentage is the modified and diluted re-enactment of what has been shown to work in most circumstances.
The rest is produced by people who want to show their *inner artist* to the world via usage of word and clip art.

[jimking]

The ability to send man to the moon was knowledge handed down in the world's best Universities to its brightest students who put that knowledge to work. Robert Goddard comes to mind. But it was a former Nazi Wernher von Braun who managed the people at NASA to land on the moon. He studied Goddard's work. Below is Bob Goddard and one of his rockets that he developed in the 1930s.

[Ghastly]

Thanks for the reply Jimking, though I wasn't so much thinking of *the act of sending rockets to the moon* itself... more I was thinking about the branches of science and maths that were devised/discovered/constructed in isolation by genius's centuries before and then passed down to generations of students who would then bolt on and develop even more branches until such a stage is reached that other students can discuss and apply this knowledge to build things that do what has never been done before; allowing others to discover better ways of building them.

[urstwile]

It seems highly unlikely to me that ideas come from out of nothing known beforehand. Generally, they're based on observation of certain things and attempts to replicate and/or understand something better, which leads to a theory and proofs of the theory and practical application.

I can't say for sure how fire was first discovered. I'm guessing there was probably a lot of trial and error, but I doubt very much that one day someone said what if I rub two sticks together really fast, what would happen. It was probably based on some other natural phenomenon that was observed and then duplicated somehow.

We all take prior knowledge, some of the exceptional take that prior knowledge and run further with it, but it certainly isn't done in isolation. At least that's my opinion.

[jimking]

I couldn't have said it better. I was using the rocking thing as an example of knowledge passed down.

[Ghastly]

not *all* ideas come from nothing, many are predicated on what comes before but there are certain concepts, abstract in their nature that are developed through the need to satiate an individual's curiosity...to make sense of what he/she does not understand yet. New concepts are then rigorously constructed, and tested until such point that they can be explained in terms that others can understand and make use of for their own breakthroughs

[urstwile]

Which kind of underscores the point that humans are collectors. :)

There's a really good book called The Discoverers that talks about how certain really impactful things were discovered, for example, how the need to accurately track time led to the clock and modern calendar, how the invention of the compass came about and the impact it had on being able to get back to where you'd been, stuff like that.

It's a great read too, and bolsters a lot of what's been posted in this thread regarding the observation of things around us leading to discovery.

[urstwile]

Ghastly, I still think that curiosity about something counts as something that comes before. If for example, fire didn't exist, would we have invented it?

[Ghastly]

Hehe...you don't present a bad argument on that point urstwile :cool: and I'll cede ground to an extent...I still maintain that certain *solutions to a problem* can be developed independently of solutions found by others which may then give rise to ones ability to construct something much bigger, practical and newer than what has been seen before...the original point was something along the lines of do we all just take what other people have done and use them for our own ends? I disagree with this suggestion.

[urstwile]

Actually, I'm not disputing that. What I'm actually trying to say is that generally speaking, nothing comes out of nowhere (except maybe zits :D ), there is inspiration for it somewhere, whether it be from another person, or a phenomenon in nature, etc.

Broacher's post on this thread about bug butts is a perfect example of nature's influence and inspiration to science.

[SurfPark]

I don't know. I think plagiarizing isn't the right word for it. When you look in the fields of science, you'll learn that scientists build entire careers upon the work of people before them. In fashion, trends reoccur every 20 years. In literature, film, music, and art, all work is inspired (or copied..whatever you want to call it) enough so that we have generes. If everyone was so independent, then why would we have terms like "sci-fi," "retro," or "classic" wouldn't even exist. Plagirizing has been sugar coated and turned into terms such as inspired, piggybacked, and borrowed.

[Ghastly]

Well not *everyone is so independent* ;) , secondly I am prepared to say that though our work is probably in some way related to what we have experienced elsewhere, this experience for some only forms the foundation for their work...that which follows via their creativity & logic can be completely groundbreaking.
Plagiarists take the fruits of this labour and use it for their own ends.

[nicholaspaul]

Design has to follow certain conventions because you are dealing with the human reaction. Other people have discovered what works and learning from them is not plagiarism, it's simply 'not reinventing the wheel'.
I believe it is possible to be inspired by others without copying. In the early days, The Beatles didn't think they were anything different, just tagging along with what went before, which is what all good art does.

[jimking]

Design has to follow certain conventions because you are dealing with the human reaction. Other people have discovered what works and learning from them is not plagiarism, it's simply 'not reinventing the wheel'.
I believe it is possible to be inspired by others without copying. In the early days, The Beatles didn't think they were anything different, just tagging along with what went before, which is what all good art does.
Lennon was a genius at taking other musicians music and use it as a template. He would then recreate the song into something completely different. Paul did this too. George did it and failed and got sued. (My Sweet Lord)

[Broacher]

Musical inspiration and 'rip-off' are a favourite area of discussion when it come to arguing the distinctioin between inspiration and plagiarism.

Inspiration is a human term, derived from our innate social circuitry. Plagiarism, on the other hand, is a very legal term, derived from our innate sense of justice at one level, and greed at another.

Kinda like pirate vs. privateer in the ol' days of sail.

China, the fastest growing economy in the world, virtually runs on pirated software. Or, entrpreneurial versions, depending on your outlook. But even the law gets murky at the level of national economies. The British opium trade, the slave trade, the 'appropriation' of so many 'under-developed' nations natural resources. Even staying within the realm of intellectual property law, what did Charles Dickens think of American publishers making millions reprinting his books without any author royalites?

It's tough not to be a cynic about intellectual rights protection for the creator whenever the property value gets above a certain level, and the lawyer sharks start smelling blood.

Look at what's happening in software with the recent patent protection fever -- a lot of people are wondering where all that's going to lead, as far as real innovation goes.

Ever wonder where humankind would be today if the patent attorney arrived before the discovery of fire, or the wheel?