As a designer, I’m not real thrilled about this idea, but it’s an old idea and doesn’t come as a suprise.
We designers make our living designing things like logos. Obviously if you’re a hobbyist or don’t make a living, one wouldn’t care so much. It’s been done before, but iStockphoto carries a lot of weight in the stock arena, and I for one hate to see them go down this path.
From their announcement:
We’re excited to announce a whole new product coming to the iStock collection. Clients will soon be able to download a unique logo to brand their business or organization right here at iStock. This is a huge opportunity not just for existing iStock contributors, but for our community of designers as well. If you’re a designer, you’ve probably created hundreds of different logos over the course of your career and we’re offering you an outlet to start selling logos to the world’s largest community of creative buyers.
What is lost
That all sounds well and good, but removing the thought processes and creative background work that designers do for logo design customers is a disservice. It’s not like we just plunk down a logo; no, we talk to the client and solve the brand problems unique to their business.
They’re turning a valuable service into a cheap shopping-cart knick-nack.
Josh Taylor at Borshoff says it very well:
iStock is a valuable source. When you simply can’t afford to pay for professional photography, it’s a viable option. But. Let me say it again. But. You are not getting the same quality of product. As professionals we know this, but it seems like more and more folks are starting to believe that the quality is the same. The reality is a quick five-minute browse comparing the images at iStock to the images at Getty will quickly dispel any notion of parity.
So if photography can be replaced, what’s the big deal with logos?
It removes the design.
Design is not simply making things look pretty. It is visual communication. Designers are hired to make images speak, not just to make them look good. The purpose of our industry is to tell stories with visuals. Our job is to make the image tell the right story.
Follow the money pie
Rather than protecting and standing up for designers, iStockphoto is out for profit (which I don’t have a problem with.) Instead of designers charging their clients the fair market value based on the time and effort spent, you get iStockphoto setting the royalty to the designer at 50% right now, to be dropped to something undetermined in a few months. It’s cost is set from 100-750 iStockphoto “credits” by some cog in the iStockphoto machine.
iStockphoto is owned by the stock giant, Getty. Geniuses that they are, they saw an opening into the stock logo business and wanted a slice of the pie.
I almost fell out of my seat when I got the official notice from iStockphoto a few days ago. “$5 bonus” for a logo design is literally a slap in the face to the hard work and effort of all genuine designers out there.
Some interesting responses:
Most of the masses on iStockphoto’s forums respond with thoughtful comments like “Wow, sounds exciting!!!” but one comment caught my eye:
“Thanks iStock for thinking ahead and I look forward to receiving the logo training manual.“.
Ladies and gentlemen, iStock is going to be selling you logos from “designers” who need a “logo training manual.”
Why we’ll be OK
I know I’m technically complaining here, so let’s do a reality check and have a bit of optimism. I’m an unabashed capitalist – I work to make money and I think everyone should. Sure, iStockphoto’s logo conveyor belt idea cheapens the whole industry, but there should always be businesses who see the value in working directly with a human being for something custom-made to fit their needs.
Just like cheap Chinese furniture didn’t stop the Amish from selling handmade, quality pieces, iStockphoto’s logo chute won’t stop real designers from successfully selling the real deal.
March 11th, 2010 at 5:13 am
Well, I couldn’t agree more. The other day when I needed some photos from iStock, I was shocked that their price went up quite substantial comparing in the past. Fair enough, business is business. However, they are also following monstertemplates business strategy as I see it. Selling logos for a cheap price, it only drops the quality of the future designs. I couldn’t agree more, with any design, we need to seat with clients and hear their requirements and try to find the best solution to solve their business problem or better, to improve it. With this business model that iStock is going through, it is burning the professional designers.
Shame but that’s the truth and what’s going on.