A week or so ago, Forbes caused a little bit of a kerfluffle by calling the entire design community ‘snooty’ in an article called The Creativity of Crowds. For those who weren’t paying attention, that was a feature in the business magazine that touted the benefits of companies that offer design contests. something which they refer to as crowdsourcing, trying to soften the vibe of the term ‘spec’, or speculative, work, which is what designers generally call this practice. The article featured a nice profile of a really cool company – Chicago based Crowdspring – that boasts an awesome community of grannies and janitors and people that love kittens who are creating all sorts of awesome design stuff for small businesses. I’ve generally spoken out against design contests as being exploitative, a poor way to obtain decent design, a cesspool of copyright infringement, bad for business and generally harmful for the design profession, especially when it comes to being accepted as, well, a profession. Now I’m proud to confess, I’ve finally seen the light.
After discussing the issue at great length with other snooty designers and with Crowdspring‘s zany co-founder Ross Kimbarovsky via Twitter, I’ve decided that the acceptance of design contests – sorry, crowdsourcing – is exactly what the design profession needs to shed the ‘snooty’ label that Forbes, the grass roots champion of the undertrodden, so accurately gave it. In fact, I thought I’d spend some time detailing my new position, as well as the awesome benefits of spec work – sorry, crowdsourcing – when it comes to doing what designers do. Namely, designing stuff. So, without further ado, here’s 16 reasons why you should crowdsource your next logo design project:
#1 – You get to choose from unoriginal ideas too. Which is all sorts of awesome.
Designers, all of whom don’t understand that originality in logo design is such a antiquated concept, are always going on about copied work in design contests. Sure, entrants sometimes borrow work from other designers, or other companies, but so what? It’s the final design that’s important. Who cares where it comes from? And if that logo is successful for another company, it’ll work for you too.
Sometimes ‘creatives’ submitting logos to design contests use istock illustrations, photographs and other clip art. Many will tell you that istock artwork is never licensed for logos. Something about copyright or something. Which is kinda true, but have no fear – the people who own these design contest sites know every single piece of stock artwork that’s ever been made. Ever. And the minute an istock image shows up in any design contest, they’ll quickly withdraw it, so you don’t have to worry about trifling matters like copyright law. In fact, they’ll try to do it without you noticing, so that you’re not distracted from the task at hand. Selecting your logo. And when ‘creatives’ submit a logo to your contest that includes a stock image that you could download for a few dollars yourself, it has no bearing on the value you’re getting from holding your contest. Even though you have to pay extra for the clip art. If it was legal. Which it’s not. Never mind that almost half of the concepts that you’re choosing get quietly withdrawn because they might be against somebody’s snooty rules. It’s all about your experience. And working with such an ‘awesome community’.
In a completely unrelated subject – you shouldn’t worry too much about the wordy legal disclaimers on contest sites that tell you they’re not responsible should you buy a logo that’s been copied from somebody else. Or that the people submitting your logos don’t work for, represent or even have any legal relationship with the company that actually took your money. Just standard legal stuff that follows the “covering our ass” principle. And if you do have issues, it’ll be real easy to track down IdesignSTUFF4U in Karachi, Pakistan who’ll promptly fix things up peachy-keen and take responsibility for entering a ripped design. Two years ago. For three hundred bucks. On a contest site belonging to a company that he never worked for.
#2 – There’s nothing wrong with copied logos. You’ll be out of business in three years anyway.
Here’s some fun facts. Some businesses won’t last six months. Almost half of all businesses fail in three years. Spec sites are counting on it. Like all things with design contests, this works in your favor. If there are problems with the logo you finally picked, your company will probably be belly-up anyway, so the last thing you’ll be worrying about is whether your logo is unique or not. In fact, being bankrupt is probably a cool position to be, should those troublesome IP lawyers show up. You won’t have anything else to take. Almost like the contest site owners are doing you a favor by creating a service where copied logos are a real possibility.
Besides, it’s unlikely that the person your logo was pinched from will ever find out – the internet is dreadful for finding out information about other companies. Here’s the best part – you’ll probably not know that your spiffy new logo’s been ripped off either, which works out to your benefit. When you get a cease and desist letter a few years from now, simply tell the nice lawyer that you didn’t know you were infringing on someone else’s trademark or copyright. I’m pretty sure than ignorance of the law is a pretty solid defense, and like most IP lawyers, they’ll be sure to understand. Besides, if you have to change your logo years from now, because the original owner or their lawyer are the unreasonable sort, it won’t cost much to replace all your stationery, brochures, website, mailers, staff-shirts, vehicle wraps, signage, etc. You can simply start again.
#3 – More is always better. And competition is good.
Nobody would love spam e-mail if there wasn’t so much of it. If you weren’t inundated with hundreds of spams a day, you’d feel you weren’t getting the best spam. The one spam that’s right for you. You’d sit at your monitor, wishing that whoever sends spam, would send you just a few more to choose from. Same idea when it comes to crowdsourcing and design contests. More is better. Hundreds of designy goodness. More. More. More. Granted, most of the proposals aren’t very good, some aren’t original, and you usually have to wait until the better designers submit their stuff right before the contest closes. It’s not that they don’t like sharing design ideas and concepts with other ‘creatives’ to copy and use in their submissions. They’re just shy. There’s also the last minute posters, digging the ‘community’ vibe, who take the best ideas from the earlier entrants, and work them into their own unoriginal ideas. Right at the last minute. Designers on contest sites love to assist each other like this, and even have cute terms for it – ‘lurking’ and ‘sniping’. It’s such a beloved activity that every ‘creative’ wants to be known as a ‘contest sniper’ or a ‘lurker’. It this kind of awesome co-operation that insures you get lots and lots of unique designs to choose from. In fact, competiting viscously against each other is one of the basic tenents of crowdsourcing.
It’s not about the quality of the concepts, but how many you get to discard before you make that final choice come contest close. Everyone knows that having 70 really bad, 10 okay and 3 good designs to choose from is really critical to the success of any logo. This is really important to the site owners too, cause if you don’t get twenty five designs to choose from, you can have your money back. Cool, huh? Just in case you’re a little shy in total entries, the helpful souls that own the site will always prompt their ‘community’ to hit you up with just enough submissions to get you over the 25 design hump. Yay! Then you’re obliged to buy one, even if you don’t like any of them, because you’re over the ’25 designs or money back’ guarantee. But that’s okay, cause you got more. For less. And if getting twenty five designs that you positively hate, before having to settle on one that’s okay, isn’t what design is all about, I don’t know what is.
#4 – You get lots of stuff from designers who aren’t getting paid anything.
Elitist designers keep going on about getting paid for their time. Why should anyone who does what they love get paid? Designers chose to attend college, university and night courses. They chose to spend thousands of hours getting good at design. Look at other fields – doctors, dentists, accountants, book-keepers, mechanics, bricklayers, lawyers, sales clerks, bartenders, waiters, chefs and the french fry cook at McDonald’s. They don’t get paid for doing what they love, so why should designers? Besides, design isn’t really a ‘job’ anyway – more of a glorified hobby. Most people complaining about design contests would design stuff anyway, so why they don’t just shut up and design stuff for free. For design contest companies. To sell to you. Design works something like this – the longer someone works at designing logos and stuff, the better they get. Experienced designers are more likely to submit stuff to design contests, cause they’ve being designing for a long time they must really, really love doing it. And as people on design contests aren’t getting paid, it would makes sense that only people that really love design are entering. And that would be experienced designers. This, by the way, is called mobius strip logic. Which is used a lot to explain why design contests are so cool.
Besides, if you find a logo you like, the winning designer gets paid a prize. Everyone loves prizes. And the rest of the designers who don’t win, and don’t get paid for presenting those dozens of logo concepts to you, are happy that they’re practicing their design skills. Cause they’re getting better and better, and someday, once they’ve entered a couple of hundred design contests, they’ll come close to winning a prize too. And then everyone will be happy. Cause everyone loves nearly winning a prize. Almost as much as winning one.
#5 – Having your logo designed in a public forum is awesome.
Used to be that companies hid their new logos till the right moment. They didn’t want competitors knowing what they were up to or what direction their brand was taking. At least before copyright and trademark protections were in place. Designers had to sign non-disclosure agreements and what not. Old fashioned thinking that, because having your logo designed step-by-step on a public forum is awesome. Not only do you help the crowdsourcing website get lots of pages listed in Google, which helps them sell more design contests, but people can actually find your contest when they search for your company name. How awesome is that? Then your competitors can find out what you’re up to in the branding department, how your ideas developed and that rather than hiring a professional agency to design your logo, you were smart enough to use a design contest with all the positive vibe that goes along with that. Being the helpful sort, you probably won’t mind sharing the design ideas presented to you with half the world either. And if they read that verbal skirmish you had with the designer that posted absolute crap, and he called you a pinhead when you told him so, your competitors and customers are sure to understand you were only trying to help the young designer further their career. Must admit I’m a little confused about having to pay a huge premium in order to hold ‘private’ contests that “veil the submissions, so as not to tip off the competition”. Seems like charging extra to do the things the old-fashioned way, which snooty establishment designers are already doing for less, so I’ll have to get back to you on that.
#6 – Work on your design with anonymous people who might not be designers.
Used to be that you only had the choice or working with experienced designers who knew how to design. Now you can work with people who don’t know how to design stuff as well. That’s cool right? Democratization of design and all that. And look at that – it’s all anonymous too. Here’s how it used to go down – design firms interviewed people to make sure they’re qualified, talented and have the necessary skills to create original ideas for their clients. Freelancers spend years learning their craft, taking courses, some even working for aforementioned design firms, learning about professional aspects of design. Reputations and names where on the line, so designers and firms are always mindful of producing quality work, using skills they’d picked up over the years. Thankfully, design contest sites have eschewed these snooty formalities completely. Anyone with an e-mail account can sign up for the ‘community’ – professional designers, out of work designers, desperate designers, students, grannies, janitors, teenagers, people looking to make a quick buck, people who know nothing about design, mental patients and shut-ins. In a concept that’s brimming over with awesome, this is bonus awesomeness. And rather than having names and company reputations on the line, these ‘community of ‘creatives’ go by cute anonymous handles and usernames, so you don’t know who they really are, or where they’re from. Which is cool, cause nobody really needs to know who’s behind the creation of their logo. Which is probably why all these sites all have wordy legal disclaimers telling you that they’re not responsible for anything their ‘community’ does, produces or submits to your contest, even though they took your money. Which is how designing important stuff should always have been.
#7 – Anyone with design software can design. Anything.
It used to be that people who wanted to be designers needed to know about design. Things like balance and imagery and kerning. They needed to know about aspect ratios and how to draw. How to set things up for print. Not any more. There’s design software that does it all. Anyone can use design software. It’s simply a matter of double clicking on the Adobe icon on their desktop. Sure there’s menus and toolbars and stuff, but those are only put there by the software companies to look smart. There’s probably a ‘make a cool logo’ button somewhere. Shift F8 or soemthing. I do know there’s really cool gradients, blends, drop shadows, bevel and lens flare filters that anyone can use – and we all know that these are the most important features of any logo. And while snooty designers will rant about things like vectors, EPS, AI, CMYK, resolution, overprint, color saturation and other ridiculous notions about file formats, we all know it’s not about the medium, man. It’s about the design. Which is just as well, cause design contest sites, being busy selling other design contests, don’t like to get involved in the file-prep end of your contest. That’s between you and the designer who doesn’t work for, represent, or is legally attached in any way to the company that you paid money to have your logo designed. And there’s no way that can go wrong.
#8 – Sophisticated design software only costs a little bit of money. If any.
Snooty designers will tell you that design software costs lots of money and takes lots of time to master. As we’ve established, designers love to design. So why should you care if it takes them a couple of years, to learn how to use Illustrator or Photoshop correctly? While it used to be true that design firms and designers had to pay for licensed software, nowadays they don’t have to pay if they don’t want to. If they do, they’re just not getting with the program (heh – I made a pun). There’s always free 30-day trials of most popular design software. And if that 30 days isn’t long enough to learn how to use Adobe’s latest, and crank out your logo before the trial (and your design contest) expires, they can always download hacked versions from Warez sites for free. And while they’re downloading free copies of Illustrator, they can also download free hacked fonts and stuff, which they can then use in your nifty new logo. I don’t think Adobe and font developers are too cool with this free downloading stuff, but they’re more interested in creating a new version of their software to really care too much. And if designers get caught using pirated software (a judgemental phrase if I ever heard one) they can simply claim ignorance, cause most people don’t know that using hacked software is against the law.
#9 – Entering your logo contest gives a designer exposure. Which is awesome.
Only the most jaded designer is going to submit logos to your contest in order to win money. Most are quite happy paying off student loans, paying their rent and groceries from the paycheck they get from their other job at the drug store. What they’re really after in design contests is exposure. Lots and lots of exposure. Most designers are thrilled just to enter this or that contest. It’s a bonus if they actually win, which they probably won’t, and their logo gets printed half way around the world. That’s exposure man. Most designers, professional ones anyway, never have anything printed at all. Ever. It’s only through winning design contests do they ever get any of their work used anywhere.
While you’ll probably never tell anyone who designed your logo, or how they can be contacted for additional work, that’s cool too. Simply knowing that they designed your logo is generally enough exposure to keep any designer happy as a clam. And besides, in the highly unlikely event that someone asks who designed your logo, you can simply point them in the direction of the contest site where you got it. Your colleague can then find the thankful designer that designed your logo, and invite them to submit free stuff to their contest. And maybe, out of the other 13,000 designers who might be submitting free stuff, your colleague will pick the same designer as you did. And then yay! More exposure. All in all, a win-win.
Crowdsourcing sites often feature cool profiles of ‘creatives’ that submit stuff to their ‘buyers’. And oh, what exposure that is. You’ll read all sorts of wonderous stuff about members of the ‘community’. How they like puppies and kittens and stuff. Which is cool, cause you can then invite them to submit stuff to your design contest. For free. In fact, I’m sure that anyone featured in one of these high-exposure profiles will now get invited to all sorts of design contests. For free. Cause who wouldn’t want someone who loves furry animals having a shot at designing their logo? Yeah, I know they’ve entered 78 contests, and only won 4, but focus on the goal. It’s not about making a living. It’s all about the exposure. And the love of design. And practicing design. And getting invited to submit more stuff. To more contests. For free. I’m amazed that designers aren’t paying these sites more than the 15% they’re already getting. For the exposure and all. Designers sometimes think they can get their own exposure by setting up their own blogs and websites. What a stupid notion. If it wasn’t for design contest and crowdsourcing sites, no-one would hear of designers. Ever.
#10 – Designing your logo for free helps a designer practice designing stuff. And that’s awesomeness personified.
Even if they’re not getting paid, designers are also submitting work into design contests so that their work can be critiqued by ‘buyers’, a generally accepted way of turning someone who’s not a designer, into someone that is. There’s a rating and comment system that you can use to help designers improve their skills. Used to be that designers went to college, where they studied under other snooty people who knew a lot about design, and learned hoity-toity design theory, design principles and how to act like a professional. Now, people who are learning about design, can get advice about design, from people who know little about design. Which is about ten levels of awesome. If you don’t like the work they submit, remember to tell them so in your contest comment section. Using your helpful advice, maybe they’ll have the honor of coming close to winning a contest in the future. Don’t hold back. I’ve found that leaving a comment like “I would rate it with negative stars if possible – I wonder if you drew that with your foot operating the mouse” works wonders to motivate young impressionable designers. It’s all public too, which is especially nice. If they’ve followed your contradictory instructions to the letter, and you can’t express why you don’t like your own idea, make something up. As long as the ‘creatives’ get some sort of comment, it makes spending hours on your project without pay seem worth while.
Sometimes leaving helpful comments might take too much of your valuable time. No problemo. Site owners have streamlined this process, so you can click on itty-bitty star ratings, and this will keep the ‘creatives’ feeling content and accomplished. Sometimes, telling a ‘creative’ why you didn’t like their work only confuses them. Better that they spend hours trying to figure out why you only gave them 1 out 5 stars for their submission – even though they did exactly what you asked – and once they do, they’ll try harder for their next contest. And the next. And then, sometime in the future, someone holding a contest will actually explain why they thought the designer’s work was dreck. They’ll be even closer to almost winning a contest. And becoming better designers.
Entering dozens of contests without winning anything also helps young designers build extensive portfolios. That way, other contest holders can look at their work and invite them to submit entries into their contests. Without pay. And all the benefits that entails. Contest holders don’t have to deal with crappy designers, and when they receive free stuff, it’s only the best free stuff. Look at that. Turns out that when you hold a design contest, you’re helping the people that will hold future design contests. How can anyone complain?
#11 – A slim chance of getting paid makes people try hard. Not getting paid makes them try even harder.
Some design ‘elitests’ might suggest that after not winning a single design contest – after dozens and dozens of attempts – some designers will start to enter numerous contests at the same time with the same designs, or taking short-cuts like copying other people’s submissions, logos they’ve found on the internet and clip art that shouldn’t really be used as a logo. How could anyone think so little of people that love to design? The only ‘creatives’ that would do this, are people trying to maximize their chances of winning some cash. Out of 13,000 people, who signed up anonymously with a click of the ‘Have Fun, Earn Some Money‘ button on contest sites, what are the chances of finding anyone like that? With the economy doing so well, it’s hard to believe that someone would sign up to enter contests, in the off chance they’ll make a little money. Which is good, cause they won’t. Which is also good, because not getting paid motivates people.
Any businessman worth their salt will tell you that people are more likely to put more effort into something, and spend more time at it, when there’s very little chance of them getting paid. It’s usually found on page three of the ‘How to Effectively Manage People That Work For You‘ manual. Companies have found that cutting people’s pay makes them really loyal, efficient and consienscious. If you want a really effective employee, lay them off completely. Design contest and crowdsourcing sites have turned not paying designers, while using their talents to turn a profit, into a folksy David vs. Goliath business model, so you’re sure to only the best efforts. From the best people. With only the best intentions.
#12 – Not getting paid makes people who aren’t designers into better designers. And you know what that is – Awesome!
Yes it’s true that out of every 25 people that post designs to your contest, 24 don’t make a dime. You may even feel guilty about the designers who don’t get paid even though they submitted dozens of entries, and did exactly what you asked them to do, trying to make you like their work. It might even seem, to the uneducated observer, like this is a pretty crappy way to treat grannies, janitors and desperate out-of-work designers. Perish the thought. Keep in mind that not winning any money after dozens of contests only makes designers try harder. That means, they’ll eventually get better at designing. And they’ll enter more contests that they won’t win. Which will get them even more exposure, helpful stars and comments. So, by not paying designers, you’re actually helping them be better designers. Strange as it seems, paying designers is bad. Makes them lazy.
And if anyone accuses you of exploiting young designers, and getting services for free that used to put food on people’s tables, pay them no heed. When they squawk about spec work and other snooty concepts, tell them to piss off. Why should you pay for all this design work, especially after putting in so much effort with your helpful design comments and clicking on those itty-bitty stars. The designers should probably pay you for your time. And why should design contest sites pay the people that are creating product that they try to sell while claiming (takes deep breath) “non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display and perform the content in connection with the Site, in any media known now or in the future” (exhale). For everything that’s submitted by people they don’t pay, even if the submission doesn’t win. If they did, they’d be just like other companies that pay their employees, supply their hardware & software, give them health benefits and other ridiculous perks that designers just don’t need. Then, people that run contest sites wouldn’t be able to spend all day on Twitter, helpfully telling anyone who uses the phrases graphic, design, logo, website, or new company, all about their wonderful ‘community’ where you can pay hundreds of dollars to view artwork, that’s been submitted for free, by people learning how to design. Can’t have that.
#13 – Design contests are really, really popular with all designers. Except the snooty ones.
Oh yes, Designers love design contests. And spec work. And not getting paid. There are hold-outs, sure. People like professional designers, design students, art teachers, just about every graphic design organization on the planet, freelancers and youngsters who have unreasonable expectations of getting a job in the design field after spending years and thousands of dollars in a design education. But you’d expect that opinion from gatekeepers who are fighting hard to keep the status quo. Everyone else – grannies and janitors and people who love kittens think these crowdsourcing sites are great because they stand very little chance of ever getting paid for their artwork, that they spent a lot of time creating. While signing over irrevocable licenses of that work. To get comments from people who really have no interest in leaving comments. And star ratings from people who don’t know about design. These are the underdogs of graphic design, and the people all other designers need to watch out for. And if, after not winning a single contest, some of these underdogs tell you that entering design contests was a waste of time, or that they’d have been better setting up their own company and trying to earn a living as a professional designer, be wary. These now misguided folks have designed so much stuff for free, they’re starting to think like the establishment, fighting to save the status quo. Their opinion should be summarily dismissed as part of the minority that hates spec work. Cause as we mentioned before, anyone who really cares about design, loves design contests.
#14 – Crowdsourcing sites level the playing field. So level, it’s almost like they used a level.
To some people in exotic lands, the chance of winning $100 is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Why shouldn’t people think the same way in North America? See, we’ve just started and it’s already a level playing ground. And if the person from that exotic land pockets $300 in a design contest, after entering dozens that he didn’t win, he can feed his family for a month. The same economic principles hold true in the USA, Canada and Europe, so why are elitest designers all in a snit? Not terribly interested in a level playing field, are they? Used to be that only grannies, and janitors and people that love kittens could enter design contests and not get paid. Now, professional designers can enter them too. And not get paid either. Wow, a level playing field all around. And as everyone on these sites are anonymous, you’ll never know it you’re working with a professional designer down the street, or some cat from an exotic land to whom $20 a day is a king’s ransom. That’s certainly a level playing field. And just to make sure everything’s really level, the companies than run spec sites try to make sure you don’t know that most of their ‘community’ are from exotic faraway lands. Which I must admit is kinda strange, because getting work outsourced to exotic faraway lands has a really cool vibe, and has helped the overall economy tremendously. But it must have something to do with leveling the playing field.
Keep in mind that many designers couldn’t find a drop of work until they found design contests. That’s why one of these spec sites keep an eye out for people on Twitter who are trying to hire a designer, so that they can advise them not to hire a designer, but outsource their design stuff through contests instead. Which levels the job-searching designer’s playing field too. They can enter design contests while not getting paid. An opportunity that just didn’t exist when they had a chance at steady employment. Things couldn’t get more level.
#15 – Crowdsourcing sites are good for the design industry. And everything related to the design industry. And designers.
Some snooty designers gripe that design contests are bad for the overall design industry. Some might even suggest that spec sites are only interested in obtaining free labor, which they can profit from by selling to ‘buyers’. Poppycock. Paying for design work and people’s time is so yesterday thinking. Non-paying work expands the market too. Before there were design contests, no-one had anything printed, designed or created. Ever. Cause only big agencies designed everything, nobody designed logos for reasonable prices, and businesses couldn’t afford anything. If that’s not enough evidence, any economist will tell you that it’s better for the health of ANY profession, for people who used to make a living at that profession, not to.
Besides, the graphic design industry is only worth a couple of billion dollars, so nobody would miss it if it designers stopped being selfish and started doing if for the love of design, rather than expecting a pay check like everyone else. When designers, who buy computers, design software, design books, cameras, and pay for night courses, go to college, and employ printers, other designers, teachers and stuff, can’t buy anything cause they’re too busy submitting free logos to design contests for the love of it, it’s obviously for the greater good. The people who used to earn a living from these support businesses can take lots of time off, and spend lots of quality time with their family and do something free. For the love of it. And when Adobe releases their next Photoshop and Illustrator Creative Suite for $1300, and it’s available for free from a Warez site, you know what ‘creatives’, who are not making any money, are going to do. The right thing. For the greater good. Cause that’s how we roll.
#16 – Design outsourcing, crowdsourcing and design contests are good for the economy. And the people that run them are funny.
Oh yes. Crowdsourcing is good for the economy. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. It’s obviously good for any economy to turn people that are getting paid into people who are not getting paid. Cause as we all know, people who don’t get paid at all, are more likely to buy things from other people who sell stuff which makes the economy grow. No, that’s not right. Okay, maybe people who aren’t getting paid hold onto whatever money they already have and that helps the economy. No? How about this. They take lower paying second jobs and that helps the economy. Or this one. When companies figure out that they can lay-off their two person design department and get tons of more design stuff – that may, or may not, be legal – for free, that’s good for the economy too. Because a whole bunch of people working for free is better for the economy than kids who recently graduated from college making a paycheck, paying taxes and buying stuff in their community. Alright, have to admit I haven’t quite fleshed this one out, so we’ll take the people who profit from these contest sites at their word. After all, they’re really cool, wear bananas on their heads and wear clown noses to dinner. And people who have banana head days and wear clown noses never, ever lie.
Related posts:
- Again with the design contests
- Design is a ‘snooty’ business: Forbes
- Are logo design contests really that bad?
- More on those fabulous logo design contests…
- The Jon Engle vs. Stockart.com story – an anti-spec work parable?
Tags: business, Contests, crowdsourcing, humor, industry, logo
[...] post by Logo Design Blog – The Logo Factor and software by Elliott Back Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Last Edit: 17 Feb 2009 [...]
So many benefits to “crowdsourcing” including devaluing Design.
Boy, we need more of that.
Everything becomes a commodity, why not creativity and creative thinking?
Another ignorant post from a logo designer. It doesn’t matter what you think about crowdsourcing or logo design contests. Someone starting a business will always consider every option, especially when it is such an easy one. Type in some information, pay $25 bucks, set a prize amount, some creative direction and off you go.
Every logo designer needs to stop thinking like a creative and start thinking like someone that runs a business. They need to establish a process where the client knows how to get the process started, and understands what they will get and the means in which they will get it. They neeed to be warmly welcomed to the process of building a brand, not just designing a logo.
If you’re a good logo designer, show how effective your process is, how you’ve built other brands into established companies, and why a small business owner should pick you. You need to find the competitive edge that logo contests literally cannot provide the client. Until you can prove that every logo contest is tainted and wrong to a small business owner on a budget, stop whining and start working on a new business model.
Chris Wallace’s last blog post..The Last Browser Testing Advice You’ll Ever Need
@Chris – I think most of the graphic designers who don’t care for design contests realize these contests are bad business models all around. How many designs do “creatives” submit and how many do they get paid for? 1%? 2%? None?
Whether I’m producing a video, creating a logo, or building a website, I expect to get paid for more than one percent of my work.
Yeah Chris, that seems reasonable to me. I mean, after reading that whole article which, though rather sarcastically, explained exactly what’s happening in the design industry.
Think like a business owner? I’ve been freelancing for 15 years. I’ve watched my clients walk away for no reason other than they can find some sucker on Craigslist to do it for free. One even had his kid trace one of my designs in Illustrator.
Sorry, I’m not going to sit at my computer for 6 hours and design logos for the hope of winning a contest. This article hit the nail square on the head.
Listen, I’m a designer. I fully agree that design contests are terrible. I’m not telling you to sit at your computer for “6 hours and design logos for the hope of winning a contest.”
I’m saying, modify the way you market yourself to show potential clients why design contests are a bad idea and the likelihood of their business failing is tied to decisions just like who they choose to design their logo. Maybe build statistics of companies that had a logo designed on 99designs and how many of them still exist to this day. I don’t know, I’m just saying, if you feel like “complaining” about these contests, do something productive instead.
Chris Wallace’s last blog post..The Last Browser Testing Advice You’ll Ever Need
[...] … has worked with Hashrocket and I am very happy with our working relationship. Ideally Why you should crowdsource your logo design – thelogofactory.com 02/17/2009 A week or so ago, Forbes caused a little bit of a kerfluffle by [...]
GREAT post. Kind of caught me off guard with the title and opening paragraph, hehe. To Chris Wallace, I do agree that we all should be working on our business models in order to educate our clients and show the benefits of NOT using a spec site, but don’t begrudge a fellow designer his/her right to voice an opinion about something they dislike … on their web site. Thought your words were harsh and belittling, and from another designer … Not saying I don’t agree with you about actually doing something productive, but jeez.
Great read! I think you nailed every point!
[...] and the following articles as well as the ones linked to in the post above: $50 logo experiment, why you should crowdsource your logo and the creativity of [...]
Hi Steve,
I’m not sure if you’ve been keeping track of the discussion over on my blog, but an interesting comment was just posted about CrowdSpring. It refers to the t-shirt contest that Guy Kawasaki previously hosted on the site (which brought CrowdSpring a ton of publicity).
Turns out the contest winner (asher27) was illegally using a student copy of Adobe’s CS software to produce commercial work:
Here’s an excerpt of asher27′s comment on the CrowdSpring forum today:
———-
@HLD – I do wish to purchase the full version by the time I get out of school. Right now I am completely broke, I make less than $100 a week after taxes and union dues (seriously, screw unions. I mean it.). I pay for my own education and all my own bills, my family is totally broke. The money that I have made on here so far – going straight to bills. I don’t see a penny I make – it should of never been like this. $2000 for me right now is highway robbery – I mean, I understand why it is so much, but it is something I cannot afford. Perhaps, illegally working with it for enough time will enable me to work legally with it – I have to start somewhere! Oh, and speaking of… most of my teachers in both schools I have been in said that they use the student edition programs for their side work… what great role models I have. And I am most certain that one of my teachers who drives a very very very nice car can certainly afford to shell out $2000 for a program.
———-
Here’s a link to the forum thread:
http://forums.crowdspring.com/.....4#post6124
I joined crowdSPRING for 20 days and I summed up the experience @ http://www.renderedred.com/the.....iment.html. Take a look.
[...] few weeks ago, we wrote about all the cool reasons small business owners should ahm, crowdsource their logo. We thought it would only be fair if we now addressed designer concerns about entering these [...]
@ivan your experiment is useful and enlightening for designers who might be thinking of crowdsource/spec work.
Hmm, I’m double minded. I’m a professional designer with 12+ years in the industry, and certainly don’t like the idea of anyone being taken advantage of, especially now that I am freelancing. But I’m not ready to decry the crowdsourcing idea yet, though I deliberately steer clear of it myself.
I feel that we are all artists, and that a model of successive over-specialization has left is all poorer. Shouldn’t we be able to grow our own food? Decorate our own gourds? Are the days of the real craftsman gone? This is not a back-to-the-land rant. I would just like to see more art in peoples’ lives and it seems like the only way to encourage it these days is through incentives. Yuck. But if artists can’t stop the runaway train of specialization, who can? We don’t need PhDs, we need life experience. Musicians, dancers, and poets are our brothers and sisters, not businesspersons.
Let the crowds paint their visions. If you truly are an experienced, creative, and talented professional, you will find your way unhindered by the amateurs. Trust that.
Let’s see: act like a businessperson.
More for a grin and giggle I passed the business model for logo contest by some of my bean counter friends. You know the guys that analyzed if a venture is worth the investment. I gave all a copy of the Forbes article but not any information on the objections from this community. I was told later that some had done a bit of on line research and knew of the dust up.
Long story short. The overwhelming view, some came to immediately, others took a while, of the group of people that risk their money and the money of their investors is any business plan based on the free labor of other is destined to fail.
The ones that were less quick to down the idea waited to see if there was someway to get in, make a buck and get out. The answer is yes but only if they were willing to deal with the hammer of copyright and trademark infringement. Even with disclaimers the exposure was just too great. Recall one basic practice in a lawsuit prone society is “go for the deep pockets.”
I then asked if the shoe was on the other foot what would their assessment be of the idea of using logo contest for their company. Again the response, and quicker this time, was to avoid all involvement. (See deep pockets above) In part due to the exposure to copyright and trademark infringement. The second was something I had not considered — the possibility of being misidentified as a bad company.
Think: you’re a new venture and perception is all you have going for you for the first few year. Two years back it would not be such a bad deal if your clients mistook your new venture as having the stability of AIG or Bank of America. So a knock off of their trade dress would not be such a bad deal.
Move forward to the 4QT08. Sill want to be confused with AIG/BoA and the rest?
Recall under the business plan for logo contest you have no way of knowing the origin of the design.
Anyone got a clue what WhyMe is saying?
Anyone can bake a cake if they buy the ingredients and follow the recipe. But a cake that looks and tastes amazing, and is memorable etc won’t be made by a beginner, but by an experienced knowledgable cook. Same goes for design.
I hope professional designers aren’t tempted to pitch on these crowd sourcing websites, this should help keep the quality low and hopefully make a clear differentiation between beginner and pro – cheap un-crafted design and correctly priced well-considered/crafted design.
[...] us on Twitter by clicking on @TheLogoFactory. The trouble with design crowdsourcing. Why you should crowdsource your logo. Bookmark and [...]
[...] stand to lose. I don’t need to re-hash the arguments. They’ve been made here and here and here. Indeed, professional design associations universally decry the practice of spec work as being [...]
….. all designers on crowdsourcing sites are bad(there are many great ones) I agree, if I want to participate, my problem….I am not a self taught, fly by nite ‘designer, I am schooled in fine art.
Yes, there is copyrite problems, stockart……but what would these so called designers do if the crowdsouring sites didn’t exist? Just sell clipart to clients?
that should’ve read….’all designers on crowdsourcing sites ARE NOT bad…
(just really bad a typing:()
[...] I agree, which probably explains why his article isn’t quite as snarky as our similarly-named Why You Should Crowdsource Your Logo feature from a few months back. Or it’s companion piece How To Win a Logo Design Contest. [...]
[...] you are still not convinced, read this article for 16 more reasons why to NOT use design contests or read some of SpecWatch ’s examples of design contests gone [...]
I hear you brother. This reminds me of istockphoto that now pays photographers maybe 20 cents per download of their photo. It is like you make pennies whereas before you got paid big bucks from stock agencies. I work design for SEO and big biz – they want to get their photos for very little money or free.
The worst part of this article is that it assumes that just because a client goes to a design firm instead of “crowdsourcing”, that the designer is actually going to make a unique logo.
I can almost guarantee you that there are many designers out there, working for firms or freelance, that are using clip-art and stolen logos that they sell to clients for hundreds of dollars.
So, on that side of it, I think the client has just as much of a chance to get ripped off as he does going to a spec site.
In fact, I could almost guarantee you that most designers are copy-cats. You can see this based on the design trends that come and go. Look at the web 2.0 trend. Everyone’s site looks the same these days! Hell, even this site, the very site that is talking shit about copy-catting, looks like EVERY other blog on the face of the planet! Go ahead, scroll up and take a look!
Now… As for designers getting ripped off. In my opinion, the designers posting designs know what they are getting into. They know that there will be tons of other submissions, and that their chances of winning are slim. I see a lot of people “warning” them about those sites, but in reality, it isn’t going to stop anyone who already wanted to do it anyway.
Some people just like the competition. I mean hell, if you are going to talk shit about this, then talk shit about every competitive athlete out there. They spend YEARS training for one competition that they know full well they might not win. Talk about a waste!
And lets also take a look at sites like Worth1000, where people actually have to PAY to enter a contest! And they don’t win shit, except the ability to submit more designs! And that place is humming with designers.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with these kinds of sites, and I think that the people who are demonizing them are almost as bad as the crazy man on the street proselytizing the end of the world.
Just my 2 pennies.
Godless, thanks for commenting. Just a couple of things though. As the writer of the article, I don’t ‘assume’ anything of the sort. I’ve written about getting knocked off by other online logo companies (see here, here and here for that). Hell, I’ve even written about getting knocked off on ebay logo auctions so I don’t labor under any ‘assumptions’ at all.
I’ve also written about a time when we got knocked off by a very big advertising agency, for a very large (relatively speaking) advertising campaign. You can read about it here. So what’s the difference between design contests and firms like this? When it came to the advertising agency, when contacted about the misappropriation of our IP rights, a quick licensing agreement was hammered out and a rather hefty sum paid out. The ad firm didn’t want their rep tarnished (part of the agreement was that we removed their client’s name from the article). The company negotiated use of our work for six months, after which they agreed to stop using the artwork. We were pitched a few design gigs (well paying ones at that) presumably to keep us happy and more importantly, quiet about the entire affair. Now, take a logo contest. There are rips entered every single day. We’ve been fighting a cat & mouse game with several logo contest sites for years. Most of the time, IP violation reports are ignored. If they are heeded, the designs are removed from the contest gallery, but left on the site (where you can still find them if you know the URL, or through a keyword Google image search). It was only after I started writing about instances of our wok being abused, did our work start getting removed pronto.
In terms of our work getting knocked-off, we have no recourse (the anonymity of design contests makes it almost impossible to track down the infringing party). ALL design contest sites have legal waivers (how legit they are remains to be seen) that specifically deny ALL responsibility IF a knocked-off design gets entered, or worse, wins a contest. Design firms don’t have similar waivers in their contracts because they don’t anticipate it happening, while design contest sites KNOW it is a very real possibility. When a design firm (or in the example above, ad agency) foists a knocked-off design on their client by “accident” (the ad agency claimed that the artwork was supplied by a freelancer and that they had no idea), there are very real repercussions – financial, legal and to the integrity of their reputation. It’s very costly for a design firm to knock-off a design. It happens all the time on design contests without any ramifications whatsoever.
I don’t see what amateur sport has to do with anything. Apples and Oranges. One is a sport, and one well, isn’t. And design contest sites don’t present themselves as amateur anything. They present themselves as a professional alternative, and a superior one at that, to working with a professional designer or firm. I can tell you sixteen ways to Sunday why that isn’t true, but this comment’s getting a little long in the tooth as it is (and besides, I’ve written about that subject on many occasions elsewhere).
Am I a “crazy old man proselytizing the end of the world”. Perhaps on the crazy. Getting closer to the old. As far the “end of the world” we’ll have to see how all this so-called ‘crowdsourcing’ rubbish plays out in the next couple of years.
[...] Trovate qui un’altro articolo che riporta un’altra lista di motivi per cui il free pitching e’ controproducente. [...]
[...] Why you should crowdsource your logo – The Logo Factory [...]
One especially “good” website where you can waste a lot of time is Logo Tournament. Instead of hiring objective staff, the so-called “administrators” do a good job of protecting the sucker volunteers who run the website for them. The volunteers are other designers who will look for any reason they can and spend endless chunks of their so-called “lives” looking for evidence that a designer used stock art or traced an image. They don’t get paid for this, they do it for fun. It also doesn’t hurt them if they get better designers bounced off the site so they can move up themselves in the rankings. Feel free to give that site a try if you like backbiting, sniping, being lectured about “ethics” and having your time and efforts wasted.
I’m confused. What’s the problem? If you don’t like design contests, don’t enter them! Problem solved!
Nobody is forcing you to enter these contests.
The World Trade Center had a contest for who could design the next WTC. I’m sure many architects were grumbling like you are.
You’d probably complain about the X-Prize too. Rocket scientists “working for free” you would cry. It’s their choice. Let people do what they want.
@ Francis – thanks for the comment. Not sure why you’re confused about the article (and apparently a little angry about it). See, paying people for their work is a pretty basic concept in civilized societies. Don’t suppose your own book cover design contest would have anything to do with your point-of-view? Though that is very admirable – arguing for the right of people to work. Without pay. For you.
Liked this bit too:
Peachy.
See, here’s the thing – you want to have lots of book cover design concepts to choose from but don’t want to pay people to create them. You figure a design contest is one way you can accomplish that and while you attempt to present this as some sort of benefit to participants, only one will get paid for their work (minus any stock image fees) and everyone else will get jack (8 autographed copies of your book and a link from your site notwithstanding). It is a classic example of “short-changing people in trade” and why many view design contests as unprofessional, damaging to the trade, cynical and exploitative. Naturally, people who hold design contests don’t like to be looked at through that prism, hence their vigorous defense for the rights of others to work for free.
@ Francis – The level of the WTC design contest straw man you propose is a bit more than your run of the mill crowdsource contest. Being invited (not everyone on the “A” list gets an invitation) has a significant PR value that firms fight to just to considered for the invite list. Still and all expenses are often paid to those that participate. Regardless the contestant’s IPR *is* protected.
The firms that do enter the level of WTC design projects get paid by 99.999% of the clients that seek their professional assistance.
As to the X-Prize: The engineers are paid by the companies that are developing the technology. (As to how I know I’m one of them). And win or lose that technology remains with the company that paid for the development. The prize is intended to spur the race much like a horse race. You don’t win you keep your horse, you win you keep your horse AND the prized money.
Far too many (as in 100%) of the crowdsource design contest are very similar to bank robberies. I don’t chose to rob banks but I’m not about to stand by and remain silent while someone else conducts a bank robbery.
WhyMeLord,
I used the WTC contest because we all know it. They may have been paid by their other clients, but that doesn’t get around the fact that they labored for hundreds (thousands?) of man hours for free for the WTC contest and walked away with nothing but the prestige of having made it to the final rounds (you seem to believe there was enough prestige just to be invited to participate).
The same logic holds for my little contest or any other little contest. The main difference is the number of zeros behind the prize value. In my case, someone may spend 1 hr of their time for a chance to win $1000. In the WTC, they labor 10,000 manhours to win $10m (or whatever the ratio is). Every one does his own calculation of whether it’s worth it. That doesn’t make contests wrong.
Even when a contests protects IP, some violate that. Same with NDAs. So does that mean we should cancel all contests or not participate in any of them?
Whoever paid your wages for the X-Prize was spending their resources (you and any additional money) on the contest. Your team lost the X Prize and had nothing to do show for it expect a new addition to your portfolio and a bit more experience. Same goes for whenever a designer competes in a design contest.
Look around the world: people are doing free things everywhere in almost any professional (certainly all the artistic ones) – usually they do it because they love it. If they have chance to be paid for it along the way, then why not?
Others are looking for a break or resume builder. I worked for free as an intern just to build experience. Are you going to discourage a college student (or anyone else) who wants a break to use a contest as a means that end?
FT
I’m not angry at all. Just perplexed for why some designers make such a stink about contests when every profession under the sun has contests.
I paid money to enter a writing competition. How’s that for crazy? Not only did I give my free labor, but I paid them for the pleasure. And yes, I lost!
The contest I’m running is free to enter, unlike many other contests. There are designers spending endless hours doodling with illustrations, photographers playing with photoshop, and writers writing endless articles and posting it all online FOR FREE! Instead of goofing off on the weekend practicing their craft, why practice it and get the chance of getting paid? If you think that’s stupid, then don’t do it.
Authors give away their eBooks for free and compete in contests. I guess I should write a blog about how that degrades my profession, but I prefer letting people do what they want. Besides, I’m sure the world at large doesn’t think less of authors than they ever have before.
The only part of your argument that makes sense to my little brain is when you mention how people steal your designs. I agree with you 100%. I think it’s horrible that 99designs doesn’t do a better job at policing their site (although it’s hard to do). Stealing designs is unfair, unethical, and wrong. Just like someone plagiarizing a writer or stealing valuable notes from a chemistry lab. And people hosting phony design contests should be hung by their balls.
However most contests aren’t hosted by thieves. And most who compete aren’t thieves. And most importantly, nobody is being forced to do anything. I’m not telling you to participate in a contest, so don’t tell me that I can’t host one.
I understand you hate contests, but if others want to compete with their free time, let them.
FT
Francis – The reason you’re perplexed is that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue, now conflating competitions with design contests. In the former, designers, photographers, writers, whatever, submit previously created and/or published work to be judged, usually by qualified peers, and awarded a prize or publication in a journal, while still keeping the original rights to their work. Generally speaking these type of affairs aren’t frowned upon by designers, graphic design organizations, etc.
The latter, design contests, are frowned upon by many designers, and most professional graphic design organizations around the world as being unprofessional, detrimental to the design trade, cynical and exploitative. The AIGA is one such organization. The RGD is another. In these ‘offerings’ designers create finished product, without pay, to your specifications in the hopes of being selected for that work, using some vaguely defined parameters, if any at all. Accordingly, while I appreciate your continued, and rigorous, defense of the rights of people to create artwork, without pay, for your benefit, the leading design organizations in America, Canada and around the world are opposed to your position. You can take it up with them if you’re so inclined.
And while I found it amazing that you were patting yourself on the back for not charging people to enter your book cover contest, hopefully you’ll now realize how daft that part of your comment actually was.
I blog. I write. I doodle. A lot. I paint. A lot. Hell, I even tinker with synthesizers, guitars and other instruments. I participate in all of these activities without any hope of, or desire for, payment, as a creative outlet, to stave off boredom and to practice whatever skills and talents I possess. If, however, anyone wants to use the fruits of those labors to promote themselves, their product, or in this case, their book, then I would request a fee. It’s a pretty basic capitalist concept. When I doodle for myself, it is for my benefit. When I doodle for you, it is for your benefit. As odd as this might seem, I view design as a profession. Just like page layout, binding, typesetting, printing, distribution, accounting and all the other trades that your book will require to get to market. To sell.
You keep going on about me “letting” or “not letting” people compete in design contests. I don’t have the power to stop anyone from doing anything, nor do I try, other than bleating about design issues on my blog. While I think designers that enter design contests, including yours, are wasting their time, it is, at the end of the day, their choice and their time to waste. That doesn’t preclude me from having an opinion, nor writing about it as I have done here. At the end of the day, that’s my choice, and while it’s probably a waste of time, it’s also my time to waste.
In terms of trying to stop you from hosting your book cover design contest, up until you commented on a year-and-a-half old article, on my blog, that takes a cheeky look at crowdsourcing logo design, I had never heard of you, or your contest. And other than the two comments I’ve made here, both in response to you, haven’t given it another thought.
I like your response! Well thought out and I agree with it.
I found this old post because I was researching contests to see how I could conduct a fair one. I also read (and commented) on this post because I want to try to understand why designers object to contests.
So thanks for enlightening me.
Of course, we’ll continue to disagree in the end, but we’ve made our points and there’s little hope that we’ll change, although I thank you for making good arguments.
You’re wrong about competitions only featuring prior work. There are writing competitions to write the best travel essay, for example. Some participants may:
1. Submit a prior work.
2. Tweak a prior work to fit in the contest rules (laboring for several free hours to do this)
3. Write something from scratch.
The vast majority of writers would do #2 and 3. This ratio is the similar in other artistic contests.
You’re not laboring for my benefit only. If that were the case, then nobody would compete! They’re doing it for a chance to win.
Lotto tickets are similar. You labor to earn $10. You spend that labor on a lotto ticket for a chance to win. You don’t win. You’ve labored for free, for someone else’s benefit.
The difference with a contest is that whether you win or lose has more to do with your merits than with a random drawing.
Also, in my first cover (http://francistapon.com/hyoh), I followed your advice. I hired a designer outright. I researched several and felt they could do the best job. I paid them $2000 to do a kick ass cover. Although I’m happy with the final cover (they made 4 prototypes and we narrowed them), I’m not convinced that was the best way to get the best cover possible. I could have found a talented young designer to do a better one for $500.
Instead of looking for one and putting all my eggs in one designer, I’m using the power of capitalism and competition to get the best design. If you were in my shoes would you do differently? Or would you blow another $1-2k on a cover that is good, but doesn’t blow you away?
I wonder if you (or others) see the irony of us having this online debate: we’re both laboring for free for the benefit of the readers. I say we charge people to read this article and its comments! We’ll split it 90/10, your advantage since you did most of the work.
FT