« Pandemic Flu Conversation is Exciting! | Main | Event: Measuring Social Media in DC »

May 25, 2007

Comments

Matt Mickiewicz

I highly disagree with your characterization: "This is nothing more than a commodity marketplace for outsourcing at the cheapest price. This will not spur innovation or even good design. It will spur the growth of Photoshop amateurs creating crap."

The difference between our marketplace and others is that it's NOT based on lowest price or cheapest service provider. In fact, it works in the exact opposite direction.

Over time, we've seen prize amounts increase significantly, as small businesses compete for the attention and time of designers all over the world. The more money they offer, the more concepts they'll see -- in some cases hundreds of them.

The person who claims the prize is the BEST and HIGHEST QUALITY designer, as judged by the person running the design competition, rather than the "cheapest bidder" as is often the case in other marketplaces on the web.

Of course, it's very disruptive to the industry at large, as it empowers designers anywhere in the world compete on a flat-playing field and be judged solely on their skill, and not what they wear or if they have an office in New York City or that they charge $50,000 for three logo concepts!

Likewise, it removes a lot risk for small business owners since they don't have to worry about paying for work they are unahappy with.

John Bell

At the heart of this is the expectation each of us has about the value and therefore the price of graphic design. I say $100 is too little. You clearly think that $50,000 for three logo directions is too much.

The best graphic design is driven from research (context) and insight and isn't as simple as applying craft. With current prices this low (a few hundred dollars) is it even possible to apply that kind of thinking in a logo or other solution?

Sitepoint's graphic design marketplace (only one of the things the company does) will be disruptive to the established graphic design industry. And I have no issue with that so long as it doesn't lead to the commoditization of design and more, lower quality solutions.

I have browsed through the entries. I see evidence of hope. I also see a lot of poor design. Will the marketplace cause the cream to rise?

One thing that would help the service overall is to require business to post the basics of a Creative Brief: business decription, business objective, audience, current message platform, competitors, etc... This is the least information necessary to create thoughful design AND provide evaluation criteria beyond teh purely subjective tastes of the individual (who may or may not be the business owner). At the same time you would help business become better clients and get better results for their inquiries.

Mark Cahill

I'm in total agreement. I spend a lot of time trying to educate customers on the value of professional design and development. Let's face it, your website is one of your primary points of marketing contact, to take a chance with anything less than the best is a risky endeavor.

Carl

I think one definition is still hard. And maybe it's good to let the discussion about it last a bit longer to let it evolve. I've made a list of what people at assignment zero think about it. It's at http://www.crowdsourcingdirectory.com/?p=50

Logo Design

Hi there i just come to your post while searching, i got this post informative, Thanks for it.

tinggi badan

Just look at SitePoint's site design, especially compared to CambrianHouse. I have no squabbles with it's simplicity, but they clearly have no appreciation for any significant level of design beyond the most base level of function-driven design.

Sam Pierce

I think one definition is still hard. And maybe it's good to let the discussion about it last a bit longer to let it evolve.
Custom Logo Design

The comments to this entry are closed.

more

  • RSS

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz