It’s cheap and it’s easy to get something designed at The Design Contest Factory. Just hurry up, before people start catching on

Getting something designed at The Design Contest Factory is real easy. Even though you could totally do it yourself, we’ll help you run a “design contest”, using something everyone’s calling “crowdsourcing”. That’s where a whole bunch of anonymous designers compete to create the best possible design to meet your needs. All you really need is a clear idea of what you want designed and how much you’re willing to pay. Don’t fret over the amount you promise to pay either, cause if you want, you can always ask us for your money back, and you won’t have to pay any stupid prize. You can even help yourself to the ideas that our zany designers have uploaded, and get someone else to render it, before asking for a refund. That’s a lot cheaper than awarding the prize. We’ll keep your $29 ‘listing fee’ if that’s all the same with you. We’ll also keep the money you paid for all those contest listing upsells – bold titles, screened boxes and a link on our front page – ’cause that’s only fair. Running a spec work website is hard, and while designers might be willing to work for free (yeah, we find it hard to believe too) we certainly aren’t. Appreciate if you’d keep that little nugget between us though, as someday, a whole bunch of designers are going to wise up to this whole working for free deal, and then we’re pretty well finished. Torches and pitchforks kinda thing. Obviously, we’d like to put off that day as long as possible, so for the time being, here’s how The Design Contest Factory works…

Step 1: Set Your Budget

We will ask you how much you’re willing to pay the winning designer to purchase their design. This is called the prize. Designers like prizes and stuff. Sometimes we call them awards. Sometimes we call them projects. Let’s just call it all sorts of free. It’s simpler that way. Prize amounts generally range from $100 to $600 depending on the type of design you require. Logo design is probably best. Oh hell, make it a $1,000 if you like. You don’t really have to worry about that figure ’cause if you want, you can cancel the contest for whatever reason that enters your head, whenever you like, and after as many contest entries as you feel is necessary to make your thirty bucks seem well spent. We did mention we keep your listing fee, though, right? And all those upsells. Good. Sometimes, designers will ask you to ‘guarantee’ a contest before they’ll submit anything. Guarantee away. See, here’s the thing. A guaranteed contest isn’t really guaranteed, because you can always dispute the charge with your credit card company. They’re not sure about this crowdsourcing stuff so they’ll probably give you your money back with little hassle. We’d lose our fee, and we can’t have that. Just ask for a refund and all will be peachy.

Step 2: Create Your Design Brief

We will ask you a few simple questions that will form your design brief. Not being designers ourselves, we have absolutely no idea what all the questions mean, but apparently (according to the website we, ahm, borrowed the questionnaire from), a design brief is just a summary of what you need designed. Don’t worry about it right now. Leave the thing blank for all we care. Just click on the submit payment button.

Click it!

After a few designers have uploaded their ideas you can let things pretty well take their course. Don’t worry about wasting the time of the designers fumbling about trying to figure out what it is you want. Designers love designing. A lot. And they’ll gladly design a ton of stuff for nothing (yeah, we still find it hard to believe). As our design community is uber cool, and we don’t want to make you feel fenced in, change your brief at will. As often as you like. Change the name. Change the industry. We’re all cool. The designers aren’t getting paid anything, so what are they gonna do anyway? Not enter your contest and not stand a chance of getting paid? Hah! Remember, designers like ‘guaranteed’ contests. So just guarantee it. And all will be awesome. Remember, it only costs around thirty bucks to post your brief on The Design Contest Factory.

That’s chicken feed.

Step 3: Work with our Designers

Contests usually involve submitting something and then waiting till it gets judged. Or picked at random. Or picked according to some snooty rules and regulations. Not here. For some reason, designers are down with entering contests a whole bunch of times. New versions. Revisions. Edits. (LOL – yeah, we can’t figure it out either). But that’s okay, because once your design brief has been posted to The Design Contest Factory, designers from around the globe will submit design concepts to compete for your prize. It’s your job to rate the designs and provide feedback to help them deliver your groovy vision. Even if you have no idea what that vision is. Use them. Abuse them. Ask for as many revisions and edits as you like. Have a ball. As you’re not paying for any of this, you have absolutely no reason whatsoever to show any restraint. And you know what that is. Awesome! Here’s the thing though. Contest designers need feedback. Even more than a pay check. We realize that it’s a bit much to give every single design feedback (especially that stinkeroo on page four), so we’ve give you feedback tools to use. Stars. Red hearts. Blue hearts. Little trophies. Lightning bolts. The works. Just click on stuff. See, when you click on a lot of stuff, we have contest health indicators that calculate your random hearts and stars into smiley faces. Smiley faces mean your contest is ‘healthy’. That’s good. Because designers like entering ‘healthy’ contests. They look for smiley faces. And by getting stars and hearts and little JPG trophies, designers become better designers. OMG. That is so awesome.

Step 4: Choose Your Favorite Design

At the completion of the design contest (which is typically 7 days, or 14 days, or how ever long you’d like to drag your squirrel fight out, ask for extensions at will) you should choose a winning design and pay the designer the prize amount. Or not. The designer will send you their completed design along with copyright to the original art work. That is, if it’s original, because sadly, as we’ll tell you in a minute, we have no idea if it is. Or isn’t. Because figuring out if something you bought from The Design Contest Factory is original just ain’t our bag.

That’s all there is to it. Except for…

Terms & Conditions

In order to keep The Design Contest Factory as streamlined and democratic as possible, we don’t have much in the way of snooty, elitist terms and conditions. Here’s the important parts: none of these designers actually work for us, so don’t hassle us if things go wrong. And oh yeah, we’re not really responsible for anything that people upload into your contest, cause we don’t know too much about the designers entering, their names, how old they are, where they live or any other pesky details that typically gum up the works. Bottom line, ain’t our problem. And even if we wanted to make it our problem, which we don’t, we couldn’t, because we have no idea who anyone is. Other than some IP number that seems to lead to something called a ‘proxy’ at some dial-up in Uzbekistan.

Copyright claims

If you’re a designer, and one of our designers uploads something that was inspired by stuff you designed, tough titty. Or if they knocked it off completely. If they’re using a free vector from your blog, well, you shouldn’t have given it away for free now, should you? Bottom line. We’re not responsible. We’re not responsible because we say we’re not responsible. We might get around to removing your work if you ask nicely. Or maybe we won’t. Though if you’d keep these little copyright infringement issues on the D/L we’d be forever in your debt. Rather not let contest holders know that a lot of the designs we promised them are copied from someone else. That would only upset them and that’s not what we’re all about. We’re about being a groovy community. And the fun. And keeping bad shit that happens quiet. And we have to tell you that we take stuff down, because if we didn’t tell you we will, we’d be responsible for copyright infringement every time an ‘inspired’ design hits our server. And Lordy, nobody wants that.

Welcome aboard. Click here to launch a contest. Click here to join our community.

Footnote

This article was originally supposed to run as part of our April Fool’s Day prank this spring, but it was nixed as being far too long for that purpose. Reading it again this weekend, figured it was strong enough to run as a stand-alone blog.

Related posts:

1. New! Spec work. Schmeck work. Proudly announcing our groovy new design contest factory!
2. Spec work hackery redux. More of our work copied & entered into 99designs logo design contest
3. How to win a logo design contest

The Logo Factory April Fools Gag. Huge thanks to everyone for playing along with our April Fools gag from a couple of days ago. Special kudos to David Airey who jump-started a lot of the frivolities, twattering to his 7,000+ followers that “Former No-Spec proponent Steve Douglas back-tracks and launches The Contest Factory“. Heh. I’m sure that got the attention of a few folks. Overall, I had a lot of fun putting the irony laden piece together (though it wasn’t that far removed from the realities of most actual design contest sites) and seems like everyone that read it, got the gag, lulzing it around various social media platforms. Everyone, that is, except the couple of designers who contacted the studio, wanting to sign up for our new ‘contest thingy’. And the cat who e-mailed me, suggesting I acquaint myself with the anti design contest initiative No-Spec!. And that I acquaint our new spec work venture with my derrière. Which apparently is both fat, and a sellout. The risks of using irony on a blog, I suppose.

“We didn’t like the hordes of amateur designers cluttering projects with concepts. We liked having a low barrier to entry, but this also means setting a low bar for design quality in many cases. Working for free is hard enough as it is – does every 15 year old with a pirated copy of Adobe Creative Suite have to be included too?”

Gee, doesn’t that sound just a tad elitist and snooty? Just a couple of things too. 15-year-olds with a pirated couple of Illustrator? You should be so lucky. Not paying people for design work attracts folks who might present ‘low quality’ work? Who da thunk it? And at the risk of sounding like a wag, how can you complain about amateur designers tossing their designs into the ring, when nobody’s getting paid for the tossing? Besides, lowering the bar for amateur designers is one of the central themes that all so-called crowdsourcing sites give as a reason for their services, not as a weakness of such services (guessing AdMaven didn’t get the ‘democratization of design‘ memo). Bottom line; the guy doing the reviewing wants professional designers, with licensed software, who just happen to be of legal contract-signing age. Wonder where they’d find such a thing?

Oh, oh, I know…

New Freelance Site: Wednesday marked the launch date of Andrew Hyde‘s new freelance design site Pick.im. Brutally simple concept too. Freelance designers can register and upload their portfolios. Design buyers can search for a service provider with criteria including budget, designer experience and skill set and the localization filters will cough up a list of qualified graphic designers in your area. How much of a market is there for such a service? Quite a bit, if Pick.im’s first day of operation stats (above) are any indication. If you’re a freelance designer, it’s probably worth a looksee. [Pick.im]

The Devil’s in the Details. Or at Least in the Fine Print: Supposed to encourage citizens of St Albert (and the region) to “discover, experience and celebrate the creative endeavours of local artists and performers” the St Alberts’ Cultivates The Arts festival is scheduled for September. The ‘steering committee’ want a logo for it. So they’re having a logo contest (isn’t everyone?). As is typical, they’re offering a prize of $2,000 for the winner. What’s not so typical is one of the contest disclaimers which goes something like this:

“The St. Albert Cultivates the Arts Committee reserves the right to select no winning entry if it deems that the submissions do not meet the needs of the organization”

See, I think these cats are well within their rights to not use any of the designs entered. Ain’t so sure about not picking a winner, or not doling out the prize, especially if you’re advertising the gig as a competition, or contest, and using a two grand ‘prize’ to entice participation. Like, aren’t there rules about such things? [St. Albert Cultivates the Arts]

As this is the Easter weekend, probably won’t be any more posts till Monday. Maybe even Tuesday. Busy hanging out with the family, and digging into our fave Easter treat, those ever-so-yummy Cadbury Creme Eggs. You know the ones. Little tinfoil-wrapped chocolate eggs with gooey insides that look just like egg yolk, are about 120% sugar and who knows how many calories. In the meantime, and in keeping with an Easter theme, you should hop over to the Christian Science Monitor, where they’ll tell you how some online companies, including Google, have set up egg hunts, themed gags and other goodies.

Happy Easter.

Related posts:

1. Snippets: Spec work & crowdsourcing edition
2. Snippets: Crowdspring to offer spec writing, NEA holds a spec work contest & other news
3. Snippets: The Oscar weekend, Logorama, Blog Fail & new Ubuntu logo edition

The bitter-free, Spring Tip o’ the Pint, weekend edition of our regular snippets feature. Throwing a little link love to blogs, websites, logos and logo design articles we kinda dug.

To Upstack. In this spec work, crowdsourcing and design contest era, would be remiss if I didn’t tip a pint towards people who are tilting against the tide. Accordingly, would like to congratulate the good people at Upstack, a web-based design platform that attempts to pair buyers and designers on various projects. In a sea of websites and spec driven companies that all claim to be “doin’ some innovating” (but are merely retreads of each other), it’s nice to see a new operation that’s actually appears, well, innovative. The website, currently in BETA, is lovely, the user interface extremely well done and, as boasted on the front page, the entire operation is spec work free. I’ve given the site a few gears over the past few months, but that was all in good fun (or at least, it was supposed to be) so I’d like to take this opportunity to wish them the best. And if you’re a designer who’s profoundly opposed to spec work, it’s probably worth the effort to hit Wes & Co. up for an invite. [Upstack]

To the Spartan Golf Club logo. Even though I’ve been in this business for way too long, once in a while I’ll stumble over a logo that really grabs my attention, a remarkable piece of design magnificence that works on so many levels. You know, the kind of logo that I wished I designed. And the kind of logo I’ll probably never design. Like this example, a stock logo from Brandstack (we just discussed their fraternal site Upstack) for a business that involves Spartans and Golf. Accordingly, a tip of the pint to Lex Logo (probably not his real name, if you know what that is, let me know.) for creating a mark that has a few of us a little green with envy. Well done sir. And, if you’re thinking about opening a golf club, calling it Spartan, and have $3,600 ready to spend, how could you NOT buy this logo? Comes with the web domain too. Update: Designer of this logo is Richard Fonteneau. [Brandstack]

To Mike Erickson. I’ve known logo designer Mike Erickson for years now and count him among my friends in the industry. We often chat about design, logos (particularly more illustrative logos, one of Mike’s specialties, and our favored style) as well as the personal ups and downs of well, living. Mike’s just launched his new Logomotive site, and have to give him kudos for a particularly nice job. I know it wasn’t easy, as in the re-brand he tossed a duck logo (that he’s been using for eons) in favor of his new train theme (more corporate, and a motif suggested by his business name). Very similar to the angst we went through when we tossed our Factory house last fall, so if they were real pints we’re tossing about, we’d probably be crying into them. I’d also like to bring your attention to this bit of typography porn on Mike’s site. Bottom line, if ever you wanted to find out about what makes up letters, or what all the bits and pieces are called, this page has everything you’ll need to know. [Logomotive]

To the Marquee design agency. We hoist a glass to the people at Marquee, the design agency that developed the new Glasgow Commonweath Games logo. After the design came under fire for looking like previous work, the agency issued a classic example of logo symbolism porn that described in exquisite detail how the mark came to be. The design, based on three concentric circles, two of which are broken, with the letter G in the center, apparently resembles a black and white design created in 2007 by Marquee for The Common Guild, a Glasgow arts group. Not so, claimed Games organizers and agency wonks, insisting that the logo is original, with the broken circles representing “time, data and measurement” something they claim is “the basis of all sport“. The logo is supposed to be based on four numbers associated with the Games – 20 as in the 20th time the event has been held, 17 sports being represented, 11 days of the competition and one host city. Accordingly, the “second ring is 17/20ths of the outer circle, the third ring is 11/20ths and the G stands for Glasgow“. Yowzah. These cats are good. Still not sure if it beats this logo symbolism manifesto though. [Telegraph UK]

To Logo Design Love. Interviews with logo designers are all well and good I suppose, but after a while, many start to sound, or read, the same. Some tips. Sources of inspiration. The usual. Wouldn’t it be nice if we had an interview that was a little off the beaten path? Imagine if there was a designer who specializes in, oh, I dunno, Death Metal and Goth Rock logos. He’d be interesting to talk to, huh? Well, look no further, because it just so happens there is. His name is Christophe Szpajdel (pronounced “shpydel”) and he’s considered “Lord of the Logos” among the Black Metal set. Logo Design Love, the all-things-logo blog curated by UK designer David Airey features a fascinating interview with Szpajdel (by Blair Thomson) and takes a look at his work, his new book and how he finds inspiration for his famous nature-driven work. Alas, I’m a little late to the party with this one, so you’ve missed out on Airey’s free draw for the “Lord of Logos” book. Humble apols for that, but the interview is still worth a read, free book or not. Besides, if you’re really gung-ho, you can always buy it via a link at the piece. [Logo Design Love]

Have an interesting blog piece, logo or ‘different’ take on the graphic design industry that might make interesting fodder for an upcoming Snippet feature? Feel free to drop us a line. You can also hit us up on Twitter.

Related posts:

1. Tip o’ the Pint design snippets. September edition
2. Snippets: Battling logos, a couple of Pint Tips, just like 99designs & the IRS logo scam edition
3. Snippets: Crowdspring to offer spec writing, NEA holds a spec work contest & other news

Exaggerated size of design ‘communities’

A few months ago, we took look at the ‘community’ numbers of crowdsourcing and design contest sites and found, to be charitable, that they were wildly inflated. Bottom line, most design crowdsourcing sites are supported by a fraction of the designers claimed on the home page. Most decent designers that have a go at crowdsourcing either don’t enter anything, or bail shortly after they do, having discovered that entering design contests is a woefully inefficient way to earn a living. While the aggregate appearance is that of monstrous sized design communities (designers who are no longer active are still counted in the numbers), the reality for the individual is something different entirely. After winning one contest in twenty (about the average of designers who know what they’re doing, the win-ratio is much lower if they don’t) most people move on to greener pastures. That’s not anti-spec rhetoric. It’s economic common sense. It could be argued that a great deal of the people left on these sites are bad at one of two things, design or business. Or they’re teenagers earning a few bucks on the side.

All about the logos?

I think we can all agree that logo design is a niche discipline, albeit an important one, of the entire graphic design field. Accordingly, here’s another dirty little secret (though to be fair, it’s not really dirty, and as it’s publicly available info, not terribly secret). Most crowdsourcing sites are supported by logo design projects. Not brochure design. Not stationery design. Not website design. Not presentation folders. Not the recent addition of writing on spec. Other than logo contests (or “projects”), and despite being marketed as “creative marketplaces” that offer the full range of graphic design services, not much else is going on. Takeaway here? Other than some high-profile exceptions, logo contests make up of the bulk of so-called design crowdsourcing. You don’t accept my word for this little pearl of info either. You’re welcome to check for yourself (or see the screen shots throughout this post).

“A quick trot through most of the high-profile ‘crowdsourcing’ sites reveals that anywhere from 60% to a whopping 92% of the current contests involve logo design.”

A quick trot through most of the high-profile ‘crowdsourcing’ sites reveals that anywhere from 60% to a whopping 92% of the current contests involve logo design. It could be argued that if it weren’t for logo contests, most so-called crowdsourcing sites would have shuttered long time ago. Some, Logo My Way and Logo Tournament for example, don’t even attempt the pretense. As these kind of offerings have been with us since time immemorial, it kinda puts paid to the “innovative” vibe that’s been tossed around too. I guess the innovation bit was meant to describe the expansion of web-based logo design contests into other areas of the graphic design profession. How successfully is the question. Not very is the answer. Alas, it would appear that despite having a few years to build up the concept to mainstream acceptance in all the graphic design disciplines, only logo development has gained any real traction in the crowdsourcing arena. Trouble is, with the “more for less” appeal of logo contests, they’ve always been accepted by many in the medium, small and micro business market. Crowdsourcing and contest sites just make it easier.

Why all the logos?

Why, on the surface anyway, does it appear that curated spec work sites (cause that’s what they are) appear to have failed to gain traction with anything but logo design? I’m willing to go out on a limb and hoist a couple or theories. The first might concern small business owners’ view towards their logo itself, with many seeing it as a pretty picture that’s only real function is to be slapped on a business card or website header. With a very basic understanding of the digital tools involved, some buyers probably view the logo design process as something that takes a couple of minutes and in the long run, isn’t terribly taxing, time consuming or even important to the overall health of their business. Designers probably share part of the burden too, with some treating it as a ‘quick and dirty’ process, resorting to some pretty predictable and overdone approaches to designing a logo. The buyer thinks it takes ten minutes. Many people entering design contests only take ten minutes (explains some of the rampant copycatting that goes on). The contest holder thinks they’re being magnanimous, shelling out a couple of hundred bucks for ten minutes of someone’s time. Would be designers see it as an acceptable risk – ten minutes time for the chance of winning that couple of hundred bucks. An “it’s all good” kind of equation.

“The contest holder thinks they’re being magnanimous, shelling out a couple of hundred bucks for ten minutes of someone’s time. Would be designers see it as an acceptable risk – ten minutes time for the chance of winning that couple of hundred bucks.”

Risk vs. Return

While some buyers, and some “designers” (bunny quotes mine), might think of logo design as a quick and dirty process (erroneously I would argue) it’s a little different with other artwork. When it comes to designing collateral material, brochures and websites let’s say, everybody shares a common attitude, the accuracy of that attitude notwithstanding. It looks like there’s more work involved. Buyers and contest holders still accept this premise, and are willing to spend more time, money and effort. Spec work designers, knowing how much time might be involved in the production end of things, are less likely to participate in a website or brochure contest that’s going to take a huge time investment with only the “hope” of getting a return. A minimal one at that (crowdsourcing design contests featuring large prizes are another matter entirely but we’ll cover that in an upcoming post).

“Amazingly, what is actually a weakness of the curated spec work model, has paradoxically become one of the primary appeals for people that own them, people that purchase services on them, and designers who participate.”

As a brochure, website or vehicle wrap requires a certain level of expertise to pull off, technically speaking, it’s a lot easier to fake what looks like a logo in Illustrator or Freehand than it is to fake what looks like a brochure using In Design or Quark. Or fake a website using Fireworks, Photoshop and Dreamweaver. Amazingly, what is actually a weakness of the curated spec work model, has paradoxically become one of the primary appeals for people that own them, people that purchase services on them, and designers who participate. Bottom line, logo design contests, or “projects” depending on the site, will continue to flourish. The rest of the graphic design disciplines are relatively protected from spec work decimation. For the time being anyway, as I may have to eat some of these words at a future date.

Chicken Little or reason for concern?

While it might be relatively safe to crib Mark Twain and say this – “the rumors of the demise of the graphic design industry have been greatly exaggerated” – if you’re a designer specializing in logos, or want to specialize in logos, you may want to roll up your sleeves a bit. Because the growing number of websites offering logo design contests isn’t going to die down anytime soon. When there’s a ton of people looking to create a clone of Crowdspring and getting quotes back for $750, it’s a safe bet that it’s gonna get a lot more crowded in the upcoming months and years (while others are already suggesting that crowdsourcing is broken). In terms of graphic designers as a whole, does all of this mean a lot of the hand-wringing about crowdsourcing has been a reactionary chicken-little freakout? Maybe, but there’s still lots of reasons for designers to be concerned. The main issue is that design buyers are beginning to accept the basic premise of curated spec work sites – that designers are willing to work for free. That doesn’t necessarily translate into more business for “crowdsourcing” sites, but more requests at the buyer level, straight to the service provider themselves. And paradoxically (liking that word), this is also a very real risk to curated spec work sites themselves. Why pay a $39 service fee, or 15% off the top to some site on the internet, when it’s a matter of sending a few e-mails to designers on the local level, or found through a Google search. And those requests aren’t going to be limited to logo design.

Related posts:

1. Twitter graphic $6 proof that design crowdsourcing works? Not quite.
2. The demise of the logo design industry?
3. Defending crowdsourcing & design contests. The platitudes of spec work.

One of the cooler features on being on Twitter (follow us here) is that you’ll bump into like-minded people that you otherwise might not have had the opportunity. Such was the case with my running into Jeremy Tuber (follow him here), an Arizona-based graphic designer who runs the very-appropriately named website, Being a Starving Artist Sucks (indeed it does). I’ve met lots of designers on Twitter, but it’s Jeremy’s pragmatic, almost utilitarian approach to the business side of graphic design that I found notable. Over the months that we’ve chatted back and forth via Twitter and e-mail, I’ve come to see Tuber as a fellow-traveler, someone who believes that graphic design isn’t a glorified hobby or creative outlet but a business. And a business that freelancers need to approach like any other professional does – like their livelihood depends on it.

Jeremy’s also published several books, including Being a Starving Artist Sucks and Verbal Kung Fu, both of which would be excellent additions to any designers’ arsenal. I’m always loath to recommend resources to designers without knowing something about the author, or the book itself, so Tuber sent me over a review copy of his Being a Starving Artist Sucks to take a look at. Not a bad read at all.

The book starts off with a self-diagnostic test where readers are asked to answer a few straightforward questions about pricing, a designer’s interaction with clients, and your general outlook on your flourishing, or floundering (depended on your circumstances), The test is broken into two halves – a pre-read and post-read – so that you can gauge how much you’ve learned once you’ve finished reading the book. And you will learn a lot. Some of the material is fairly basic and aimed at those just starting out on their design careers, but there’s enough information to keep even fairly experienced designers interested and reading on. The book is written in a designer’s language, and deals with concepts, business concerns, client and day-to-day issues that are exclusive to the creative profession. I liked that Tuber’s book isn’t just a reverse engineered re-hash of a standard business fundamentals text like so many other ‘earn money’ websites and manuals. Weighing in at over 500 pages, the book is hefty with pragmatic info, and covers everything from how to pick clients, to how to make sure a logo design job is profitable, to what to do when a client won’t pay your bill. I particularly liked the section that dealt with saving a gig that’s gone completely and utterly off the rails (had a few of those in my day) and even as an ‘Old Dog’ I found several of the chapters fairly enlightening. The thing that stood out the most for me is that Tuber’s main focus is how a designer remain competitive and profitable – something that’s becoming more-and-more difficult in the design industry with each passing day.

The companion book to Being a Starving Artist Sucks is the somewhat oddly-named Verbal Kung-Fu (which, once you understand the concept does actually make sense). Subtitled “Master the Art of Self Defense against Difficult Clients” (see, I told you it made sense), the book takes a very pragmatic approach to defusing problematic situations with clients (we’ve all had them – had one this morning). I didn’t read this one cover-to-cover (apols) but skimming through the various scenarios, I recognized many that I’ve had to deal with (with varying levels of success) over my career. Overall, Verbal Kung Fu appears to be a decent attempt to address some fairly common situations, and ones that you’re likely to run into, if you’ve chosen graphic design as a career.

Both these books are available on iTunes, Amazon (as paperback and on Kindle) and are available from the BASAS website. Jeremy’s also been kind enough to set-up an exclusive page where readers of this blog can get a 10% discount off their purchase. While you’re there, I’d also suggest you check out his “Work Smarter NOT Harder” Contracts and More Package, a fairly comprehensive selection of email templates, questionnaires and contracts that most designers will need at one time or another. Tuber also runs an informative (and often surprisingly frank) blog at his website and is always willing to offer design and business advice via Twitter.

Related posts:

1. Get ‘em while they’re hot. The secrets to your Freelance Dreams…
2. Design is a ‘snooty’ business: Forbes
3. Business card design tips

Rather than dying the death that pro-spec advocates predicted, the debate about spec work, so-called “design crowdsourcing” and design contest sites seems to be heating up across the internet, as more and more designers become aware of the issue, with many seeing it as a threat to the graphic design profession itself. On the pro-spec side, there are a few more design contest companies rolling out their websites, presumably as more people figure getting a whole load of designers to work for free and selling the work to their clients is an awesome business plan. With summer vacation schedules, working on our new logo, retooling our website and focusing our brand, I’ve sorta been out of the loop for a month or so and thought a trip around the webs might be just what the doctor ordered.

Without further ado, here’s a few places where spec work debates have flared up in the last few weeks or so, as well as a look at the latest design contest sites now trundling down the pike.

The Marketing and Tech Blog opened a floodgate of comments when site-owner Douglas Karr suggested that design crowdsourcing ‘marketplace’ Crowdspring was an ‘Agency Killer‘ with it’s spec-driven business model. As part of dialogue with Crowdspring co-founder Ross Kimbarovsky, you’ll find a couple of my comments as we got into it on whether or not design contest sites signal the death-knell of the graphic design industry, or are a previously untapped avenue of “opportunity” for designers just starting out in their careers. Speaking about Crowdspring, they’ve posted a Crowdspring by the numbers featurette, no doubt in an attempt to quell critics who’ve been vocal about the site. Don’t know how to introduce this post, so let’s just point you in the appropriate direction and quote the title of Brian Jung‘s opinion piece Crowdspring Blows Donkey Balls.

Professional blogging consultant Problogger probably didn’t expect the designer pushback he received, both on his blog comment section and via messages on Twitter, as designers railed against his promotion of blog design contests on Australia-based 99designs, the largest and most prolific of all the design contest sites currently operating. But once his Run a Competition to Find Your Next WordPress Blog Design was published, rail they did. 99designs pushed back, adding a few snippy comments, one of which I couldn’t resist answering. Before you think that everyone’s feeling the hate towards 99designs, I should probably hit you up with a link to Tim Ferriss‘ Design Competition: Want to Design My Next Cover? post in which he directs readers to submit their work to a contest he’s running on 99D and as per usual, his comment section has turned into a pro cs. anti gripe-fest. Worthwhile noting that Ferriss is the author of The Four Hour Workweek, a principle that probably doesn’t apply to poor bastards slogging away, without pay, on his next cover artwork.

Couple of weeks ago, we told you about SpecWatch, a designer initiative that’s been documenting some pretty surprising goings-on at design contest sites via their Twitter account and causing quite a stir with online designers. UK graphic designer David Airey managed to score an interview with SpecWatch for Web Designer Depot that reveals some interesting stuff about the hows and whys of the apparently publicity-shy outfit. The comment section is particularly compelling as designers and design contest management chime in to express their varied, and often strong, opinions.

Self-described “creative and crowdsourcing specialist” Jason Spector waded into the fray with his positively beaming article Why Starting Designers Should Crowdsource which tells young designers of all the lovely reasons why design contests and spec work are a healthy choice for their careers. In an effort to be even-handed, he looks at some of the risks but in toto, his outlook on spec work is an enthusiastic ‘thumbs up’. Can’t say 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. Spector’s blog post is worth a looksee if you’re interested in how pro-spec work people tend to think.

A couple of new design contest sites began announcing that they’d be launching soon, no doubt to recruit designers before contest holders come a-calling. One, Design Tourney, promises that it will be “the biggest threat to Logo Tournament, 99designs, and Crowdspring” when it opens up shop this fall. Another outfit, Freshly Branded, promised that their contest site would launch in July, but recently revised that to an August date via their website once the clock chimed 12:00 July 31. Over at Graphicdesignblog.org, some cat called “Charlie B. Johnson” has been pimping an in-BETA design contest site, the oddly named MycroBurst.com via an article here and in the thinly disguised pro design article entitled Spec Work – Curse or Blessing?. All of this ‘excitement’ is kinda odd because MyrcoBurst.com is currently nothing more than a couple of place holder pages with a come-on for designers to sign up for contests “launching soon”. Makes me think that good old “Charlie” has connections to MycroBurst.com that are a little more involved than meets the eye.

Pre-designed logo and brand ‘marketplace’ Brandstack (abruptly renamed from the much nicer IncSpring, shortly after Crowdspring hit the scene) is now taking some fire from designers who are viewing the service as spec work, rather than than the pre-fabricated logo agency BrandStack would like to see themselves as. Bad boy designer Toni Zova has penned a provocative piece Why Brandstack is The Silent Killer in which he opines that far from being an ‘opportunity’ for designers to sell unused concepts, Brandstack is something else entirely. Almost simultaneously, designer Fatima Mekkaoui explains in fairly dense detail why she pulled all her logo designs from Brandstack. I’ve always been non-plussed about IncSpring, whoops, Brandstack, so it’s interesting to read others’ perspectives on the service.

All this spec stuff kinda makes me want to get into the mix with yet another ranting, railing anti-spec work special that will bore half our readers and jazz up the other half. Be right back…

Related posts:

1. Again with the design contests
2. Design is a ‘snooty’ business: Forbes
3. SXSW “Is Spec Work Evil?” panel transcript

For graphic designers, the internet is awash in free information. Some of it good. Some of it, well, not so good. Some information is so valuable, that it’s worth plonking down your hard earned cash for. Take this example. Seems there’s this book out for freelance designers. Called Freelance Dream, it’s available here. Visually, the page looks like every other kooky get-rich-quick scheme on the internet, but this one advertises a freelance design book that promises all sorts of career enhancing knowledge. The web page claims that the book has been featured in Entrepeneur Magazine and offers all sorts of glowing testimonials about how full of awesomeness it really is.

Written by top freelance professionals you say? That certainly sounds interesting. Learn from the best? Why, that would be wonderful. And what freelance designer wouldn’t want to be the best that they could be. Surely, such wisdom would cost hundreds, if not thousands to tap into. No?

Only $49? That is a steal. And imagine, the book regularly costs $99. All sorts of bonuses too (as long as you order by 11:59pm on Thursday, June 18). What graphic designer worth their mettle can resist such a deal? Hell, I’m reaching into my wallet right now. I mean, who wouldn’t want to know about such hot button topics as “Simple steps to make sure you’re covered with Trademarks, copyrights and intellectual property”. Every designer needs to know that kind of stuff.

So who’s the author of this brilliant treatise? According to the Freelance Dream webpage, it’s some designer called Jon Engle. Anyone remember him?

The layout of the page is so barmy that I’m ready to call bullshit on the whole thing. Perhaps this is some direct marketers idea of using a high-profile name to sell their product (without doing much research into why the name is high profile in the first place). Or it may be some cockamamy affiliate program. Though there is the “© Jonathan Engle | Relevant Studio 2007. All rights reserved” at the bottom of the page which makes me wonder.

Far be it for me to harp on about something, but the little juggling dude in the logo for Freelance Dream looks awfully like a Hugh Aaron image from Stock Art. And in case you don’t remember, that’s how we first got to know Jon in the first place. Now, this could be legitimately licensed artwork – I’ve contacted the legal firm that represents Stock Art to see if they’ll tell me – but even if it is, it’s one of the most unwise artwork decisions I’ve seen in a long time. Okay, ever.

Hat tip to Mark who pointed this out in the comment section of the original article.

Update: Shortly after this post was published, the Freelance Dreams website went dark. Probably sold out. Or something.

Related posts:

1. How-to business advice for the freelance designer
2. Snippets: The Easter weekend, spec work, new freelance site & Pink Ponies round-up edition
3. What logo design secrets can we learn from the top 100 brands?