Where is the line between art and design?

Well? What do you define as art, and what do you define as graphic design?

I personally don't consider them mutually exclusive.

I agree with Morgy. I consider most graphic design, if it's done well enough, to be Art. What I attached isn't art. It's a 1 minute MS Paint job. And also, many things stem from graphic design such as Vector Art and 3D Design. :)

Good examples of what I consider to be design, and not art would be architecture and a lot of sigs. As far as I'm concerned, they can be done in an artistic way, but if you aren't doing anything more than getting pictures which were created by someone else and then putting them together with a few words or something along those lines, then that is design, and not art. As I said, it can be done in an artistic way, but it's not something I would call 'art'. I would call that 'design' because it's 90-100% layout orientated. That's like calilng half the billboards in the world 'art'.

EDIT: And I agree that what Rye attached isn't art, much in the same way that I believe that "Modern Art" is not art, either.

In my opinion art requires some kind of emotional connection with ones work (even if that emotion is just a great sense of fun). Right now I define art as "The fusion of emotions and creativity into a tangible existence"

Design isn't necessarily art because it does not require any form of emotional attachment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Lighter

In my opinion art requires some kind of emotional connection with ones work (even if that emotion is just a great sense of fun). Right now I define art as "The fusion of emotions and creativity into a tangible existence"

Design isn't necessarily art because it does not require any form of emotional attachment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Lighter

In my opinion art requires some kind of emotional connection with ones work (even if that emotion is just a great sense of fun). Right now I define art as "The fusion of emotions and creativity into a tangible existence"

Design isn't necessarily art because it does not require any form of emotional attachment.

---

yep,:greenie:

Caricatures from the fair are not art then. (I am still hurt because the lady drew me dancing with a potato-head named Fred)

I think art is making something that is aesthetically pleasing. Whether it takes a lot of soul poured into the making or not.

Maybe it means I'm not a 'true artist' or maybe I'm still immature in some ways, but if you show me a weird blob of color that represents someone's feelings through an abortion proceedure, and a brick hanging from a curved metal rod by a rope (which they had outside the Holiday Inn on Rogers Avenue in Fort Smith back in January) I would prefer the large sculpture, because it *looks* better.

Perhaps we should just ask the College Board.
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/...html?studioart

[edit- graphic design always makes me think of vectors, which is silly because vector art wouldn't be named that otherwise.]

I do not differentiate between graphic art and graphic design. Just "art" is too vague. That could include painting, photography, computer-generated art, architecture, oragami, drawing, illustrating, sculpting, engraving, conceptual art, etc, etc, and so on. It's like saying "design" by itself. What design? Graphic design, industrial design, or interior/landscape design?

"Art", as in graphic art, is the visualized media that one puts out. It lacks practical use, unlike the industrial design of how you'd make a new iron look or the nifty way you place bushes to stop prying eyes and frame your driveway. Graphic design is used to appeal to the heart. One can call a blob of color art, much like they can a brick hanging on a metal rod. Because, really, they are.