How to judge creative? Calling Art Directors, Creative Directors and Senior Designers

[Barron Lau]

I have a question that I would like to pose to everyone. Today I was reviewing a new client campaign with my Art Director, and recently he has been requesting high end printing using 5 or 6 colours, matt laminate finishing with spot UV's and even looking into a new 4D printing technique. Now, we are an all competition studio meaning every piece we take on within the agency is entered into design competition, and he feels that we need all these special high end printing techniques in order to win design competition. I see where he is coming from, the execution of the design is definately an important part but what seems to happen if we start consistently using these high end techniques is that the competition soon becomes more about who has the larger budget to afford the printing rather than who has the most creative talent.

So the question is, should printing techniques be judged when judging a creative piece?

Barron Lau
CEO & Creative Director
www.pressure.org (http://www.pressure.org)

[EC]

Sure. If you have the means, I highly recommend it. </ferris bueller>

But if you can pull off killer creative with handcuffs, that's even better imo.

[Ovaltine]

The printing is part of the creativity, because depending on how the UV, varnish, and other additional plates are designed the result can be visually awesome, or really bad.

A former employer sent my entire art department to a lecture about varnishes, given by one of our printers. I've been itching to use varnishes ever since. Unfortunately, subtlty is not in my employer's lexicon.

[urstwile]

I think the question is less about the printing techniques used as opposed to whether higher-end printing techniques improve the design. Like Ovaltine, I've seen some amazing stuff done with varnish plates, extra hits of color, etc., but if it's just a gratuitous use of fancy techniques, to me it's not worth considering.

Those techniques though, when used artfully and when the budget allows, can definitely be considered a part of the creative arsenal. Just not necessarily one that necessarily needs to be used all the time.

At least that's my two cents.

[crowdedstudios]

I think the power and clarity of the message should be judged more than what was used to make it. After all it is visual communication, right? If you need all of the bells and whistles to create your vision and it meets the expectations of the client as well as reaches the masses, great!

cheers, crowdedstudios

crowdedstudios.org

[Barron Lau]

Yeah, that's sort of what I told my art director. Let's treat all these special printing techniques as just gimmicks. So at first remove them all. Then work on soley the creative and make it award winning, then after add in the "gimmicks" and we'll have a winner for sure.

[amitrampal]

It all depends on the way you are presenting it. If you have to submit the copy digitally, I would suggest concentrate more on the design than print. But if the submission is through print, one has to think about that aspect as well.

[urstwile]

I've seen some magnificent uses of things like varnishes, blind embosses, die cuts, etc. And amitrampal, yes, you're right, those effects won't really be captured when submissions are in digital format. When we have occasions like that, where special printing techniques are used, we photograph the work digitally.

Generally I see these kinds of techniques used at print trade shows, where the paper company is paying big bucks to have talented designers showcase their papers in unusual ways. Or wonderful uses of matte varnish with rich black as a contrast, stuff like that. There's lot of stuff that can be done, and in my opinion, could be considered as part of the design.

But to rely on them solely for wow factor in a competition, it's definitely a budget issue. I still think those techniques can be considered part of the design arsenal, but maybe they need to be considered to be a special part of the design arsenal, and only of course if they're within a budget that the client can afford. As a true test in a competition, perhaps there should be a special category for that type of thing, so that the bar wasn't always set where this type of thing was required.

[PrintDriver]

I don't think you should be designing with one eye focusing on the competitions you are entering. You should have both eyes on what your client needs to get his message across. If having a high end piece does that, then and only then do you use the extras. Don't be wasting your clients' money unecessarily.

[Silence04]

So the question is, should printing techniques be judged when judging a creative piece?

Yes, by all means! however, it all starts with a good design foundation. If the initial design and concept are not there, adding special printing techniques to the piece won't make it a better design.

Specialty printing should be used to accent the entire concept, to almost boost the "wow" factor. But that certainly does not mean every piece created should have special printing techniques, they need to be chosen wisely and appropriately for the situation otherwise it's a waste of effort, time and money.

complex and specialty printing alone won't win you a design competition, but it may win you a printing competition.

[Alan G]

My answers would be "Yes" and "No". If the fancy technique forwards the message and is appropriate to client, and makes the piece more likely to be read/seen/believed, then "Yes, definitely". Otherwise it's "No, absolutely".

"The medium is the message" is a little simplistic and nowadays a cliche, but it is a good reminder that all the visual and tactile elements of a piece are a message in themselves that can complement, distract from, add to or destroy the main message. Competitions should be the last concern when designing for a client.

"A kick-butt design that double the client's market share" would be a worthwhile goal. "A kick-butt design that will win a competition" relegates the client, whose money is being spent, to some kind of afterthought. Way too many Cleo awards have gone to "great" (and expensive) creative that did exactly nothing for the client.