Tricks of the Trade
Wednesday, August 25, 2004There’s an article over at the Morning News called Tricks of the Trade which is a pretty fun read.
The bit about graphic design is right on the money. I do it all the time—I often make the font size or logo intentionally smaller than it should be because invariably clients always ask for fonts and logos to be bigger, so this way I anticipate their changes. If I had to just pick one thing that I hate most about this profession it’s creating work for people who need to make changes to things just to exercise authority and power.
Another trick I like to employ is what I call “The Scotty”. Basically you tell the client, “I canna recharge the Dilithium crystals in less than 3 days, captain!” and then you turn around and complete the task in a couple of hours, relax a little, have a cup of tea, and then come off looking like the hardest-working Starfleet engineer this side of Rigel VII.
Any other design or illustration-related “occupational secrets” out there?
Ryan says:
I like to give my doctoral disertation on Web Standards. Emphasizing the importance of well structured and coded web sites. They forget about the design at that point and by then you can just go off and design it properly the way that is best. And should arguements arise over design even then, justify your design decisions with Web Standard practises. Works every time.
I also like to give clients one design. I refuse to let them choose. I talk them through the best design to suit their needs. It puts the mental mind space in your court. Cus now they are under the impression that “you know best” and afterall, you really do. From a design perspective anyway.
If you have had great communication and generated an accurate brief, then there is no need for roughs or concepts. If the design you came up with doesn’t suit their whims, then re-address the brief. It never takes more than one revision cycle then.
Roughs are a waste of time. Clients don’t need choices, they need direction.
-----
Jg says:
Little things, mostly—when I’ve got a rush job and I haven’t got time to put more than just a glossy face on a ragged idea, I’ll sometimes mimic subtleties of the client’s logo throughout the layout. Say the client is a library, and their logo is the word ‘library’ designed to look like an open book. I might throw a couple of facing rounded-edge corners into the layout so I can BS my way through an argument that the layout serves up a deeper and less-obvious meaning.
Clients don’t really care what a layout means; they’re turned on by a little thought being put into it. For rush jobs, this almost always gets the design approved.
For whatever reason, lately it seems that clients are asking a variant of this question during presentations: “If you could change one thing about these layouts—anything at all—what would it be?” There is a temptation, of course, to point out the one thing that your boss put his thumb on, or to describe how you would have emphasized XYZ if only restriction ABC hadn’t been in place. But if you say something like, “Nothing—I never present a concept to a client until I’m convinced that it’s the best solution for their needs,” the client will nod and your status as Someone Who Knows Best goes up a little.
If you’re ever at a loss for words to describe the emotional impact of a design on the intended audience, use ‘warm’ or ‘comfortable’. Unless your client’s a punk band, chances are these words will be exactly what they want to hear.
ocortez says:
One of my favorites is the use of a “pink shark” ...
When presenting concepts to a client, a pink shark (or similarly awkward item) is thrown into the mix ... just so the client has something to hate and contrast alternatives with.
It has the potential to guide the client in their choice ... allowing them to define what they really DON’T want.
Robot Johnny says:
Sometimes they choose the pink shark, though! I’ve made the mistake of throwing in an obvious stinker into a batch of concepts only to have it chosen.
erinn says:
However as useful the “pink shark” theory is… there’s also the Murphy’s Law end of it. What happens when they feel the “pink shark” is exactly what they are looking for? I’ve always lived with the impression that you should never should a client something that you yourself doesn’t like as it’s undoubtedly what they’ll choose. How do you explain that was just a decoy? Then you’re left to follow through with it, which I find incredibly draining when you already don’t feel connected to the idea. Maybe we’ve just had different experiences… does it work well for you?
Erinn says:
John, we think alike!
Zombie Claire says:
Ry and I think you are an “enigmatic nerd”. LOL!!!!
Zombie Claire says:
Totally getting stone cutter type secrets here LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kevin says:
tell them that it needs to be done in flash. you’ll get days to work on stuff that only takes hours AND you can charge more cause it gots some “motion” ....
Ryan says:
Flash,
$120/second
Best formula.
Fink says:
I agree with John and Erinn about the pink shark. My pink sharks have ALWAYS been chosen. Yet like a moth to a flame, I keep trying it.
Jg says:
Yeah, the pink shark thing is great in theory, but inevitably you just end up with a catalog of pink sharks in your portfolio (if you choose to, you know, actually take ownership of your creation, post-execution).
But in my day job I do this anyway—two or three concepts is my norm, usually a design that addresses everything the client says they want, one that addresses what they need, and one that’s either an outright stinker or a total envelope-pusher.
The envelope-pushers never get chosen. The stinkers have a great track record. It’s depressing.
David says:
MAde the mistake of showing 11 ideas to a client. He showed his wife. She made up a logo from pieces of three of the ideas.
It was hideous.
I labored through it. Took six months to get paid.
From now on “I present to you, your new logo.”