Crowdsourcing
- Started
- Last post
- 47 Responses
- Miesfan0
I don't understand your point. Do you defend that no one is paid? In the crowdsourcing you're taking advantage of a lot of people. Is that better?
"What would be more cost/result effective:
Define effective.
And check out this interview to understand whether the effectiveness of product you see is what you want. Or it could occur.
http://www.creativereview.co.uk/…- My point is that every taxpayer coin counts and in many cases public work can be done pro-bono.raf
- atomholc0
crowding sourcing is Socialized Designing ... kind of like Socialized Medicine.
- didn't mean that as a statement .. more like a point of discussionatomholc
- hahahahaukit
- Couldn't disagree more. It's pure free market. If u can pull it off, ie. get agencies to fight for yr budget, more power to you.raf
- it's the other way. someone is making a ton of $$$$ on cheap labors.akrokdesign
- ukit0
While I dont have the numbers in front of me, I'll hazard a guess that this is not in fact going to make a significant difference one way or the other for any country's budget. Politicians like to make examples of these kinds of things ($500k for a logo!), but when it comes to cutting debt/ deficit $500k is a drop in the bucket. The only things that really matter are long term factors like taxes and benefits.
- lukus_W0
The only reason it could be cost effective, is the fact that the vast majority of people working towards the project effectively work for nothing.
It's exploitation. In the same way that a lottery exploits people who play. Only in this case, people are betting time and effort, rather than a small amount of money for the price of a ticket.
- monNom0
some pretty good arguments against it here.
- boobs0
Let's say you crowdsource a logo project, and get about 500 submissions. Who's going to look those over and pick the "best?"
The real work in making a logo is not drawing the thing. It's deciding which of the thousands of possibilities are actually "the one."
- NONEIS0
Crowd-sourcing results in mediocrity, not solutions. It's the sum of what EVERYONE thinks is great, so in the end that lands it right between middle of horrible and great – bland.
It's also directly detrimental to the design community as a whole.
- +1 great answer.akrokdesign
- You get mediocrity on average, but you're looking for those standing out submissions.raf
- It is a bland, defensive, non-empirical answer though :) Crowdsource solutions, not logos!raf
- Of course it's detrimental, it endangers our financial status quo we enjoy so much.raf
- akrokdesign0
raf, do you think you could make a living out of crowd-sourcing work?
- not that you would probably work on this project alone. i am sure you would hire freelancers.akrokdesign
- I am arguing crowdsourcing is good for clients. We're on the other side and must oppose it vigorously, don't we?raf
- monNom0
crowdsourcing (should be called CHUMPsourcing) must be absolutely fantastic for the company running the service. They get a 15% cut of everything for basically having an operating web server and disclaiming any sort of legal obligation to the contest holders or entrants. It's like a recipe to print money. Who cares if you're raping eager young designers, facilitating copyright violation, and credit card fraud/money laundering. DRILL BABY DRILL!
- monNom0
as to raf's original question:
I do not believe a government agency could conduct the production of a new identity as efficiently, nor to the level of quality, as a seasoned, professional design firm can. No matter if they hired in-house designers or crowdsourced all materials, they don't have the experience nor the knowledge of the landscape that a focussed service provider does.
With respect to the fee: These large numbers often reflect the entire project cost to the government; not just drawing the logo but applying it, everywhere. 400,000 pounds actually sounds on the low side, but probably reflects the scope of the project.
Think of it this way: How much would it cost to change all of McDonald's signs to another logo? That's where the cost comes in, not the 5 minutes it takes to draw another 'M'.
- 400,000 IS chump change for this sort of thing! I bet CP+B is being paid 10x that for the GAP debacle...NONEIS
- polytechnic0
No agency could afford to take on a project on the scale of the olympics branding "for peanuts". It would bankrupt them.
- monospaced0
< frustrated that this discussion is even happening here
- raf0
Just for the record, 400K sounds very low if production work was included, it's unthinkable applying Olympic brand would cost this little.
I assumed it was for identity and research associated with it only, I might be wrong. 400K is a likely sum and not a small one for brand design alone.My assumption was there would be a hundred agencies in London alone who would line up to take part in an Olympic branding contest even with just a small portion of that 400K budget to be won.
I based this on my experience in how advertising budgets are often overblown at corporate level and especially when nobody's (public) money is involved.
Talking about quality, I used the Olympic logo as an example because as much as it stands out among some lame games identities of the last decade, it will go down in history as an example of bad design. Funny we usually refer to 60-80's games when talking about classic games identities.
I still think spec work is good for clients and obviously something our industry, being on the other side of the table, should oppose very vigorously – this thread being an example.
Spec work works in architecture, doesn't it? Actually, it's how architectural contracts work, correct me if I am wrong on this.
- I don't know for sure, but I HIGHLY doubt this is how the architecture industry works.monospaced
- I really have no problem with it. It may be unorthodox but whatever it grows on you.Countryman
- JSK0
crowd sourcing is more about marketing effort.
Engaging consumers with the brand directly with an illusion that they are helping to create the brand or design.
It is same as any design competition sans exclusivity of design community.
- Daithi0
1.
"the comfy situation of being paid what we like to be paid for work"
What planet do you live on? I want to be there.
- Daithi0
2.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." - Red Adair- so truemonospaced
- on second thought...
+1,000,000monospaced - brilliantbabaganush
- +1Glitterati_Duane
- Daithi0
3.
The olympics is a particularly poor example. Millions have been spent on the design of buildings and infrastructure, the figure of 400,000 for an identity is a tiny fraction of the overall design spend.
- lukus_W0
If someone is spending time, working on an idea, for _you_ .... you should expect to have to pay them for it.