Friends,
Agreeing with Klaus, I'd add a further comment.
It's difficult enough to sort out what constitutes good work. The nature
of "good" graphic design -- or good design of any kind -- involves a fit.
Fitness for purpose, fit within a niche, sutiability to a frame of understranding.
The questions we ask estanlish the kind of fit we seek to underatand.
I can't imagine any designed artifact that is "perfect."
Yours,
Ken
--
Klaus Krippendorff wrote:
you have to be more specific in your question, lack of it is the main culprit
for vague talk about the quality of graphic design. a graphic object is not
either good or bad.
for example, the recognizability, say of a logo or poster, is one thing. the
information it can convey at a particular time and to a targeted population
is another thing. how graphic designers work creatively is quite another.
each (and many more questions) could guide you to different methods
and different answers.
--
Kai Reinhardt wrote:
I simply don't understand what differs a good from a perfect piece of work
--
|