Just a few years ago, web site builders had a keyrole in coorpariton and identity creation. However, recently when we look new technological developments, we see that blogs; social media* and other mobile platforms have alreadey taken this role from “pure programmer website builders”. I think programmers are aware of this situation, and they slipped their workspace more on other fields. For instance, I was really surprised when I heard from a computer engineer that she was working on a database interpreter for a political party. These kinds of fields are not so appreciable in global markets, unfortunately.
In Turkey and most of its surrounding countries, I regretingly see that website developers are working as “Computer Graphics Artist” as well. This situation is quite competitive for designers, indeed; for the reason that clients never are aware of the importance of visual characteristics the company wears on, however, they care about fees and gusto-catcher visuals. A Visual which looks beatiful, attractive and playful (all these three are subjective claims) is considerable and acceptable for client. Nevertheless, it does not work like this. The idea of visual identity of a company is all about function. A logo has a big but not indispensible role in market. If all companies are closed whose corporate idenitites are curated by the same designer, we can say that the designer probably is a bad designer. Still his can be caused by the market situation in real life, There is just a little room to blame designers :)
Have a look at Paul Rand‘s great identity designs: They are not beautiful! Attractive? Do not think so.. They are dinstictive, distinguishing, and they give visual “identity” to companies; at least all these companies are still alive :) Some of the designs are re-designed for reason “changing collective gusto” over years, yet, recreations are still based on Rand’s visual ascriptions.
Alternative softwares, creating visual identities with templates can sound like destructive for design market. From my point of view, these softwares make it easy for designers to work on more “elite” designs. Surely, a visual identity must differentiate all the segments of a company from other companies in the market. Visual identity must be intelligent by itself; not by product, mottos or shareholders’ meeting decisions, &c.. Who can design a self-intelligent visual identity? Can a software which gives a few features to play on just “visuality” of logo? Can a web-developer writing intelligence of a website, build a visual intelligence also? A painter who can draw good landscapes? I think, The answer is %90 “A Specialised Graphic Designer”. This is a special field, of course all these above can design corporate i.d., if they are specialised on this field, yet I still insist that this is a field must be done by specialised people. Otherwise, There is a huge visual pollution, and we have no room for a garbage to recycle these rubs… In graphic arts departments in collages should educate prospective visual creators about the importance of these issues above; they are just being prepared for the battle in design market.. This is the reason why we do not have huge advancement in visual arts, recently. Past designers are idealist at the same time. Designers of 20th century are lucky on this matter, as Wim Crouwel confesses in this video:
People are crying for their visual manipulation! They are asking for it! Be aware of this! If not, they will all be lost in mass hordes..
* I never understand the meaning of this concept, the word social is already a derivation by idea of concept: Medium