Art Tips For Programmers?

An anonymous reader writes "Recently I've found myself in a bit of a bind with artwork. My programming contracts have been rather small, barely enough to pay myself let alone an artist. The art needs aren't intensive, mostly icons or sprites depending on the project. Despite owning a few key apps (Photoshop, LightWave, Maya) my art production output is rather poor. Are there any other developers who have learned to be self-sufficient? Are there any resources available to educate me on the finer points of making graphics that look professional?" One resource for the less-artistic among us is the collection of free SVG clip art at freedesktop.org, though it won't give advice for creating new art. What are some others?

Comments

if you don't have it, you don't have it

[parawing742]

Sounds like you have all the right tools, but are lacking the finer points of graphic design. Might be worthwhile to take evening classes on computer design. I've personally found these to be helpful.

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[bigman2003]

I solved the problem the easy way...I married an artist.

I pay her for the projects she works on (we both have our own businesses) but I am always assured of getting great artwork, exactly the way I want it, with someone who will work within my schedule.

Other than pledging to spend the rest of your life with this person, I would recommend a few things:

#0- If you are not an artist- put down Photoshop, Maya, and any other tools created for someone with talent! Use tools that allow you to ASSEMBLE- not create. Creating is a rare talent, which is grossly under-appreciated...until you need it.

#1- avoid too much 'clip art'. Anyone with an eye for art usually thinks it looks like ass.

#2- for a lot of projects, you can make good use of objects (boxes, etc) colors, and some good fonts. And if you want free fonts, I highly recommend larabiefonts.com.

#3- Look at other designs, and borrow, borrow, borrow. Very few people actually create something original. Just about everything has been done before, so just borrow away.

#4- Make it as simple as possible. Strip things down, and maybe use the same recuring graphic over and over- similar to a website with a header. So now you only have one graphic that you need to struggle with.

#5- In direct contrast with suggestion #1- (don't use clip art) you can find fonts that have interesting symbols in them. They are usually very clean, un-cluttered, and you can size them easily.

#6- Keep the same style all throughout your project. It's better to have LESS style than TOO MANY styles.

Well, the original poster asked for ideas- so that is my take on it. I spent 6 years as a 'graphic designer' in the print field, so I'm lucky that a lot of those 'skills' ('practices' would be a better word) carry over to the work I do now with websites, and programming. I'm so far from being an artist that it is sick, but I spend a lot of time organizing, and laying out my projects. I just try to create a layout that uses artwork sparingly..to keep my costs down.

If you pay an artist $200 for a couple of simple graphics, you'll save yourself tons of time, and your project will come out much, much better. So reduce the number of graphics you need, and get the best ones you can.

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[PurdueGraphicsMan]

I wish I had some MOD points... You've made some wonderful points here... I'm a graphic designer that's been doing the exact opposite of what you're trying to do. I've been programming for the last 4 years and still learning every day. I highly recommend some graphic design classes. You'd be amazed at how much of a differce it would make. If that's not the road you want, obviously there are many resources online. Either way, it's a good road to go down.

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[Anonymous Coward]

I solved the problem the easy way...I married an artist.

I call that the hard way, but to each his own.

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[DoraLives]

if you don't have it, you don't have it

Absolutely true, and there's simply no getting around it. But pity the poor shlub who "has it" but is working for a customer/end user who doesn't and must therefore submit to lectures and instructions from a complete idiot who seeks to twist and subvert perfectly good art to satisfy his own losery point of view.

Don't laugh, it happens.

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[Tony Hoyle]

Absolutely true, and there's simply no getting around it. But pity the poor shlub who "has it" but is working for a customer/end user who doesn't and must therefore submit to lectures and instructions from a complete idiot who seeks to twist and subvert perfectly good art to satisfy his own losery point of view. ..sounds exactly like working as a developer!

Re:if you don't have it, you don't have it

[rgravina]

if you don't have it, you don't have it

I'd just like to say that I don't believe this to true in the slightest! As a case in point, I have a friend who now has been working as a successfull web designer for years, and his graphic art/web design work DOES look good (he came from a background in commerce, so had no formal training in being a web designer, apart from those things relating to commerce) even though when be began his work looked like what you'd expect a complete beginners work to look like.

There seems to be this fallacy in the artistic world that graphic design skills, or some other artistic skills you "just have" and can not be learned no matter how hard you try. As far as I know this is unfounded, and alienates those who might like to have a go at improving their design skills. My friend proves that this is not always the case, and I'd like to believe that if I applied myself I could also become a good graphic designer (I don't have the need nor desire to right now).

All too often I hear from artistic types that they are "gifted", "special", "have it" and refer to intangible reasons why they have skill and simply alienate those, like the original poster, who have the desire to learn.

I say, instead, if this is a direction your work is taking, and you want to become a programmer/artist then DO IT. Yes, paying others is an option but there is nothing more satisfying than doing it for yourself. And the artists should come back down to Earth and have think about the difficulty of the work that they are doing - yes, it takes skill and talent, I definately agree - but if this person is a computer programmer and has managed to learn how to do that, do you really think that they can not learn to design artwork for their applications? Is learning how to design really that much harder than learning anything else?

Quite frankly, I wouldn't want anyone telling me I simply can't do something - at least encourage this person to try.

Practice and experimentation

[athanis]

Personally, I find any tutorial online a very weak foundation to build on. They teach you specific tricks but nothing about being 'artistic'.

Better would be for you to play around with the different tools. Experiment and keep the results, they might come in handy. And it's best not to start on the computer. Do a hand drawing of what you have in mind.

I heard this quote from my prof. once:
"Laborers work with their hands,
Crasftmen work with their brain,
Artists work with their heart."

m2c

Just go with the flow...

[sH4RD]

When working on graphics just let your creative juices flow. If what you wanted isn't the result, perhaps what came out is better? When I am working on graphics for a program or website I come up with a basic idea for where I want to go, and just play around and experiement. It doesn't take as long as it seems like it would, and some great creative products result. With Photoshop the best way to really get a feel for it is to have a bit of fun. Experiement, see what comes out. If you can't seem to be creative go look at a free tutorial online, many can both educate and inspire you.

Leave it to the artists?

[Proc6]

Despite owning a few key apps (Photoshop, LightWave, Maya) my art production output is rather poor.

All the money in the world doesn't buy you personal artistic talent. Leave it to someone who has it. You could give my grandma a copy of Eclipse, VS.NET, EditPlus and vi and she'd still suck as a coder.

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[mav[LAG]]

Personal skill at art is something that is teachable and can be learned. Objects look the way they do because of where they are in relation to the viewer and what their dimensions are. Similarly light has rules which you can learn if you are to duplicate the illusion of light in a 2d representation like a drawing. Textures also have rules and so on. It's all about drawing what you see and not what you think is there. Sure there are people who have this ability from early on but the rest of us can learn very quickly.
I'd suggest getting Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain if the submitter wants to learn for himself. And let me shamelessly plug my Deviant Art site so I can get a few more views. I must finish that Neo drawing sometime...

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[citog]

A thinly veiled accusation of piracy there, I reckon.
Maybe, he thought he could do it himself and that the long term investment would be cheaper than constantly hiring an artist. Maybe he had the impression, as a lot of us do, that artists are expensive.

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but I call bullshit.

Photoshop costs ~$600USD, Lightwave ~$1600, and Maya at least $2200 (up to $7000 for Unlimited). $4400 dollars' worth of "long term investment" when he can barely afford to pay himself? Yeah, riiggghhttt.

Even if "artists are expensive" -- which, incidentally, they aren't in terms of getting what you pay for (assuming you do your homework and find someone decent) -- that kind of money will buy you a *lot*. For instance, you could buy *many* stock icon packs from the IconFactory (see stockicons.com: around $250-400 each), or much cheaper alternatives if you shop around (a quick search points out InterfaceLift.com, which lists packs for as little as 30-50 bucks). Hell, four grand'll probably get you one or two custom icons from the absolute cream of the crop, so there'll be lots of people that'll do it cheaper.

Plenty of graphic designers and artists work on commission, go hunt some out, there are thousands of talented creative types around. Universities and colleges are a great place for finding artists, too; pay them well and put in the extra effort to help you, they'll have something decent to add to their portfolio and if they think you're cool they'll show you where all the best parties are :)

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[Sunnan]

All the money in the world doesn't buy you personal artistic talent. Leave it to someone who has it.

Or: practice, practice, practice. Maybe you won't be able to "paint a wooden spoon such that you can sense God", but you can become pretty good, with practice.

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[mav[LAG]]

You can teach technique, allowing someone to draw a passable Neo (for example).

Ouch that hurts :) Look at some of the others too!

You can't teach art; nothing will ever teach someone to be able to create original work on the level of the Sistine Chapel, Adam's photos, or some of The Designer's Republic's better works.

I disagree - van Gogh, Michaelangelo and Leonardo, all taught themselves technique and then got to where they were through relentless practice and perseverance. Figure studies, copies, sketches, early drafts, training - none of these artists works just suddenly appeared. You can compare van Gogh's Carpenter (which is crap) to his Woman in Mourning (which is a masterpiece) and see how he taught himself technique and thus improved the quality of his work.
But it depends on your definition of art I suppose. I'm obviously in the "can be taught" camp but I have a good decade of practice still to do before I can branch out and do more original work.

Re:Leave it to the artists?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that smart, not that much money, back to square one this guy is using pirated software that is causing it to be more expensive for people like me that actually NEED it and actually PAY for it! Pisses me off.

Ehrm, you just made the argument that he wouldn't have Lightwave or Maya had he had to pay for them. How can he be causing either to be more expensive then?

Amateurs create amateurish art.

[Raffaello]

Just as in programming, or any other field, amateurs create amateurish output. There is a tendency among technical people to devalue the skills of non-technical people (and the other way 'round as well). This is a mistake. People with training in anything are going to produce better product than people without training.

Invest in a professional. You'll be surprised how cheaply (sadly) good graphic artists will work.

Re:Amateurs create amateurish art.

[IntelliTubbie]

Just as in programming, or any other field, amateurs create amateurish output. There is a tendency among technical people to devalue the skills of non-technical people (and the other way 'round as well). This is a mistake. People with training in anything are going to produce better product than people without training.

Invest in a professional. You'll be surprised how cheaply (sadly) good graphic artists will work.

There's just something about this attitude that runs completely counter to the scientific/hacker mindset. Most people in programming -- and yes, in art especially -- start out as amateur enthusiasts, and through a combination of self-teaching, mentoring, and lots of practice, they become experts. Sure, for immediate results, it's best to hire someone who already has experience under his/her belt. But for someone who sincerely wants to develop expertise, it's frustrating to hear the old "if you don't know it now, you never will" line. It's just downright anti-intellectual.

Cheers,
IT

Re:Amateurs create amateurish art.

[solios]

But for someone who sincerely wants to develop expertise, it's frustrating to hear the old "if you don't know it now, you never will" line. It's just downright anti-intellectual.

Slashdot is a horrible place to come for art tips. Or even coding tips. Or Choice Of OS tips. Mainly because Everyone Is Right, which gets pretty annoying.

Funny how in any other discussion there would be six billion OSS solutions proffered up, mailing lists linked, etceteras... but when it comes to art, the response is "HIRE AN ARTIST!"

Yes, amateurs create amateur art. Sometimes that's all you need. If you really want more, you can buy it or comission it. If you want to do it yourself, then there's nothing to it but to practice. And practice. And practice. And practice. AND PRACTICE. AND PRACTICE. Aud inifinitum. Practice until people stop proferrring tips and start asking you for help.

Hell, I'm a digital artist and it took me five years to get to the point where I can wear photoshop like a glove. Given enough time, I can make it do anything I want. I've been drawing since preschool and I still have problems with hands, persepective, and scaling. I'd have fewer obvious flaws if I spent more time drawing and less time nerding. But hey, I like the blinkenlights.

You want to learn the stuff, you have to make friends with people who already know how to use it. Or take a crash-class on it. Getting the flow of the app from real people who really know it is orders of magnitude more instructive than any online tutorial or manual ever written- mostly because the pros already know where all of the really neat stuff is hidden, which can save you months of practicing and digging around trying to find it.

There's no magic bullet- just like programming. You want to do the crime, you have to put in the time, so to speak.

Re:Amateurs create amateurish art.

[jdbo]

I think that you've grossly misinterpreted the parent post; the point being made isn't that one cannot learn art, but rather that those with professional levels of experience will generate far preferable output compared to those with much less experience.

Seeing as the initial question was made by a professional programmer seeking to generate professional-level artwork, the reply simply pointed out that professional-level work (in any discipline) comes from a combination of training, practice and experience (unusual talent/aptitude already being removed as a factor from this discussion).

The implied logical conclusion (which you may have missed) is that the questioner would not wish to inflict unprofessional artwork on his clients (as this would devalue his professional-level programming), and that therefore paying for pro-level artwork would be the way to go.

In no way is the post indicating that the questioner can't learn to generate pro-level artwork; it is, however, cautiously disabusing the questioner of the notion that there are shortcuts to training, practice and experience, and that trying to save some money by shortchanging the client with shoddy graphics (at least for any work done in the short-medium term) would be a bad idea.

I don't see how this post reflects an anti-intellectual attitude; if anything, the ideas that one must take on the process of learning in order to become good at something, and that some things require more learning than others, are pretty basic tenets of intellectualism.

Finally, nowhere in this post does it state anything equivalent to "if you don't know it now, you never will".

P.S. this post was written by an art school grad whose first few years of programming efforts was for shite, thanks (thanks to training, practice, and experience I can now program myself out of and back into the proverbial paper bag).

Re:Amateurs create amateurish art.

[flsquirrel]

So I guess what you're saying is that we're all born with the same potential. It just matters where we spend our time. That seems a bit idealistic to me. You want to explain why some people are more athletic than others? Why some people have higher iq's than others? Do you want to somehow argue that this is purely and totally environment and has nothing at all to do with genetics?

I have a real hard time accepting that as I suspect that most people on /. would.

There's an old expression that says "the world needs ditch diggers too". That is to say that some people just aren't good at some things and there's nothing wrong with that. Not everyone has the intellect to be college material no matter how hard they study or practice. Likewise, some people just don't have the knack for art and some don't for programming.

Likewise, there is little any book can teach you about which colors just look good together or how movement should flow across a graphic. They can teach you basics like complimentary colors and vanishing points and different things. There are guidelines that they'll teach you in basic art courses but these are just that. Guidelines. True artistic talent comes from having the judgement of when and how to break these and when to embrace these and there is little any book can do to quantify that.

The problem with art is that its all based on opinion and you can't quantify opinion. I know it frustrates us logical types to think there are things that can't be quantified, but those things are out. Our culture and our human nature are full of them.

Now what you're pointing out with that book is good. It is possible to develop the artistic talent that we have and make the most of what we have. But making the most of what we have isn't the same as being top notch.

Likewise, if you don't have artistic talent, you're opinion of how awesome your friends are at art may not be accurate. You may be easy to impress with mediocre works. Other recognized artists may say they suck. On the other hand, you might be some sort of a prodigy and your friends too. Who knows? It's all opinion either way.

Point is, everything is relative and subject to majority rule as far as opinions go. It's just unusual that people are relatively high in both logic and popularly accepted art talent.

Take a look at the Open Source offerings

[Dancin_Santa]

If that doesn't prove to you the utter lack of graphics skill in the Open Source community, I don't know what would convince you. Coming here asking for help from Open Source "artists" is like going to a Sci-fi convention asking for tips on literature: you'll get a lot of input, but it will be mostly useless.

If you want to have professional icons, hire a professional. There are people that do this for a living. They studied and practiced and now are eking out a living doing it. Same as how you studied and practiced and are now making a nice living writing code. Let those people do their job, and concentrate on your job. The product will be better if you let everyone stick to their area of expertise.

Here's a tip: Hire a designer.

[Anonymous Coward]

How ridiculous would it sound to hear a designer say: "You know, I've got some really nice icons, but I just am not that good at the code thing. Anyone know where I can get some quick tips to slap some code on this icon?" If anyone could program, everyone would. If anyone could design graphics well, everyone would.

Practice practice practice....

[tinrobot]

As someone who makes my living as a digital artist, it's really just a matter of practice, practice, and more practice. Anyone who can write their name can potentially draw a good picture, but it takes time to train your eye and your muscles to accomplish that. Chuck Jones once said everyone has 100,000 bad drawing inside of them, so it's best to get the bad ones out of the way early. It's kind of the same for digital art.

If you don't have the time to practice, I'd say spend a few bucks get some good looking clip art. The stuff you buy at Fry's and Office Depot pretty much sucks, but there are some collections out there that look pretty darn good.

Outsource!

[mcrbids]

Yep. You heard it.

Write your applications such that the artwork can be easily added/updated later. Make it clear that artwork is NOT your forte, and that you'll structure your application to allow this later improvement without requiring (much of) your assistance. Make sure it works OK, and doesn't look TOO bad.

If anybody asks about looks, point to the contract. Also, maintain a good relationship with a good graphic artist, and don't forget to recommend him/her.

Re:buy an icon collection

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of the icon sets are GPL.

So risk having to release the source code to the entire application because you borrowed what was essentially public domain graphics? Riiiight.

If you really can't spare a penny

[LeninZhiv]

If the other suggestions given here are still beyond what you can realise, here's one no-cost solution that can work in a pinch (depending on the requirements of your application, of course):

1. Use Google images, a scanner, or any similar appropriate source to get stuff that looks as much like what you want as possible.
2. Open that image in GIMP, add a new layer over it and trace the outline of that image.
3. Delete the original layer (which you have no right to appropriate), and colorise the new layer with all your knowledge of gradiants, textures, etc. that you can muster. (Read up on what the GIMP has to offer in this department if necessary.)

This works especially well when you're developing for mobile applications or other situations where the loss of fine artistic ability is not likely to be noticed. If your needs go beyond this, however, it will not be adequate and many of the other suggestions presented here are far more appropriate.

Why programmers have a hard time becoming artists

[alaivfc]

The poster's comment about having the "right tools" (PS, Lightwave, etc.) exemplifies most programmer's and the general publics incorrect view on computer graphics and technology and art. IT'S JUST ANOTHER PAINTBRUSH.

All too many people think that if you have the right "digital tools" amazing Pixar quality art will pop-out. Its simply not true. The primary reason that pixar is so unbelievable is not because John Lasseter and co. are incredible programmers but because they are amazing artists that understand how to use their paintbrush-the computer-to the fullest extent.

Some posts have mentioned taking evening classes and such. That's a good idea, but all too many of them are stuck in the rut of teaching you how to do different tricks on a particular piece of software.

As a programmer who has dabbled in art my suggestion is to try and forget your programmer self. Don't look at Lightwave and see all its cool features, its extensibility, effects, etc. Approach the project just like you would if someone were to hand you a paintbrush and say paint a picture or a camera and say make a movie. In other words, understand the medium you are working with, but don't get engrossed in it. It's still just art.

I was in the same boat

[skittixch]

You must first be an artist, before you are a digital artist. Learn the fundamentals of the work you're trying to accomplish, if your area is in logo design, research effective logos, get a sketchbook, and jot down any ideas that come to mind. Don't be afraid to venture from the digital realm, that's where the magic happens. Let yourself design on paper, and create and articulate in the computer. (I've spent the past year at art school overcoming that very concept) good luck with your passions

color schemes

[typhoonius]

One thing I've consistently noticed about programmers is that they have no grasp of color theory. Witness the countless ridiculously low-contrast Blackbox themes. Hell, look at Windows XP's primary color-filled default theme.

In general, get to know the basics. Just looking cool doesn't make something usable, and the best art brings together prettiness and usability.

Keep it simple

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, what advice would you give an artist who had to do all their own programming? You'd tell them to keep everything simple, don't get too ambitious, don't try fancy architectures or get hung up on optimization.

The same thing is true of you: keep it simple. Go for clarity, not ethereal beauty. Pick a font and stick to it. Pick one very, very simple color scheme and stick to it. Eliminate anything that is unnecessary, especially anything "decorative."

And don't be discouraged... Oddly enough, if you focus on simplicity and consistency and forget about beauty, you may have the best chance of creating something people call beautiful!

Learn to Think Like an Artist

[MichaelCrawford]

Like, I expect, most people here I was unable to draw more than stick figures until I read Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards. Here are some samples of my drawings.

Edwards based her book on the results of experiments performed by Roger Sperry of Caltech. Sperry's experiments used people whose brains had been severed in the middle to treat severe epilepsy. By studying how these "split-brain" patients reacted to stimuli sent via the sense organs to one side of the brain or the other, Sperry was able to deduce that our artistic ability is centered in the right hemisphere of the brain, while our logical and verbal ability comes from the left.

Most slashdotters are heavily left-brained people. But artists are right brained people. To create artwork for your software, you have to learn to think with your right hemisphere.

Edwards says in her book that anyone who can learn to think in what she calls "R-Mode" can learn to draw. The earlier lessons in her book focus on stimulating that sort of thought while quieting the interference from the left hemisphere.

She teaches drawing with pencil and paper, but once you've completed the exercises in her book I'm sure you will have a much easier time using computer graphics applications.

The right hemisphere of the brain is responsible for more than just visual art. At the same time as I learned to draw from Drawing on the Right I taught myself to play the piano. In 1994 I borrowed some recording equipment from a friend and recorded my album Geometric Visions, which you can download in MP3 format. (Ogg as soon as I get off my lazy arse and encode it.)

I call BS

[Grond]

This guy basically claims three things:

1. He owns Photoshop, LightWave, and Maya. A cursory look at pricing reveals that buying those programs would cost about $3200 total (assuming he buys Maya Complete and not Maya Unlimited).

2. He only needs some icons or sprites.

3. He can't pay an artist to make those things.

I haven't priced custom artwork latetly, but assuming it's -anything- like custom software, I have a damned hard time believing he can't get what he needs for much, much less than $3200. I think it's much more likely that he is using illegal copies of those programs, in which case I think he needs to get out of the commercial software business if he's not willing to respect the copyright of other programmers. In any case, if he's willing to infringe software copyright, he might as well just copy some artwork, too.

Sorry for the harsh language, but this guy is either an idiot not to have done the math or a crook for copying software illegally.

quick start guide to being a fine artist

[indianropeburn]

asking for a tutorial on how to be a professional graphic artist is like asking for a quick guide on how to program high quality, bug free commercial software. it can take years of practice and learning. you eventually find what's right, or what works for your needs. there are countless tutorials online that will teach you little tricks on how to achieve various visual effects with photoshop. you simply need to find a way to apply them in a way that suits you. people don't spend four or more years in college for a BFA or design degree for nothing.

One thing I learned.

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything looks better if you shrink it. Can't color in the lines? Does it matter for shrinky-dinks? Same idea.

Get a scanner, a pen carousel, a ream of paper, and a wide variety of thick colored markers. Keep them thick so there isn't the temptation to draw small, or do fine detail.

Then after that economy of expression. Like anime, the product is not a picture, don't expect, or try to make, it to look like one. Just let it be simple, and clean.

Re:one place to look

[Archon-X]

DeviantArt is really no good for constructive criticism. It's great if you want to have your ego stroked.
Seriously, find the worst peice of art your eyes can bear, read the comments and they'll all follow like
"WOW!"
"o_0 LOVEIT!!"
(_) so sweeet.

It's a place for collective masturbation.

The art is good when it's good. For inspiration, sure, but for constructive criticism, you've hit the wrong place :)

Charge enough...

[barfy]

To hire all the people that need to be involved. Writing, programming, and iconagraphy are three different skills, and have really no overlap. Writers, do indeed write better. Programmers do indeed program better, and artists do indeed art better.
It sounds as if the guy that writes your proposals and specs the jobs (who is that in the mirror?) could use a lesson in resource requirements.

Re:Have you no decency?

[captnitro]

Damn straight. I've been doing various forms of media consulting for a while, but it didn't start to pay off until a while ago, when I realized both client and designer need to be fully invested in the project, financially and otherwise. College kids can't do that.

By which I mean, I had a lawyer draw up a very detailed contract on the rights and responsibilities of both parties. I visit him building every time there's a new client; contracts aren't one-size-fits-all.

You'd think contracts and big prices scare off potential customers, and you'd be right, but you have to think a little bigger. You're thinking about scaring off enormously consuming projects for $500, and I'm talking retainers of thousands and tens of thousands. If you spend all your time on the little fish, you won't have time to spend on the big ones.

A few months ago, somebody needed some design work done, called my ratecard outrageous, went to a college kid, paid him something that would have barely made a night out. Came to me the week afterwards. Shock! You get what you pay for.

Pay a designer well and they'll do good work. Pay them poorly and you'll find out why.

Mask your artistic deficiencies

[Regnard]

How? By not being artistic. If you find that you can't seem to get the right look, try a minimalist approach.

What kind of Artwork or Drawing do you NEED?

[billstewart]

It's really tough to answer the original question, because the anonymous reader doesn't say what kind of artwork he/she needs to do.

• Basic network or equipment drawings (flowcharts, boxes and arrows with labels on them, etc.) are something that's not hard to draw in Powerpoint (though it was easier to do in MacDraw 15 years ago, and pick your favorite Open Source Free Beer drawing package if you'd prefer.)
• Visio is a much more powerful object-ish drawing system that I should get around to learning, and it comes with a wide range of standard object pictures (some in the basic packages, more in various confusingly-priced add-on packages.) Kivio is a similar though probably less powerful KDE imitation of Visio.
• Basic kitschy clip art is available from a wide range of sources if you really like that sort of thing. A Real Artist would probably spend a lot of time telling you not to do it, or at least helping it not clutter up your presentations.
• Photoshop is really good for manipulating photographs. If *that's* related to the kind of art you do, fine, but there's no indication that the kind of art you need is better matched to Photoshop than to Powerpoint or Visio.
• In addition to Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, you're also supposed to go read "The Visual Display of Quantitative Information" by Edward Tufte.
• Go look at the first couple of years' issues of Wired. Then don't do that.

Programming rules for art.

[jellomizer]

1. Colors, Colors, Colors: Understand Colors and what works and what Doesn't Red Green Blue for Displays Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Black for printing. Red and Green make Yellow and Magenta and Yellow make Red. Warm Colors are Red and Yellow, Cool Colors are Cyan and Blue. Black Gray and Whites are Neutral. Green, Magenta are in the middle of Warm and Cool. Avoid mixing inverse colors except for Black and White. (A way to find the inverse color is to use a graphic program and take a negative image of it)

2. Don't Go Crazy: Often for a programmer who starts dabbling with Art they like to go crazy and put as much artwork as possible. Look at companies known to have good interfaces like Mac OS there are plenty of graphics very pretty but they keep it under control.

3. Try to use as many of the standard widgets for your platform. Depending who your platform target audience is, try to make your graphics fit their OS Platform. If you are programming for apple stick to the gray stripes or the brushed metal look (Stripes are easier). In Windows stick to the Blues, Grays, Whites, If XP add some orange in the mix.

4. Animate for a reason. Animations in a program should help the user follow the flow of the information (Such as a box that needed to get bigger or some extra text inserted) Dont animate for the sake of animation.

5. Anti Aliasing goes a long way: Make your graphics big then shrink it with anti aliasing turned on. It makes it look like it is not from MS Paint.

6. A little rounding or making it a little edgier sometimes is all it is needed to make the customer feel that they have a good product. Just take a shape control and give it a curve of 15 make it White with a Black border and put it underneath a group of widgets and they will think it looks super cool.

There is no "look cool" button

[splatterboy]

I have spent the last 7 years as a painter/graphic artist/art director in NYC and twice a day I have to reply to a non-creative (Account, Copy, Admin etc.) about "why cant I make art look good too". Webster: Art: 1. skill acquired by experience, study, or observation 2. a branch of learning. That doesnt mean you cant do it - you can - but its hard work. You never "get there", but you can certainly get better. Its a continuous process and you will probably feel vaguely uncomfortable for a very long time. Just keep trying to learn and improve. Only a pretentious bastard believes everything they do is a holy nugget (it never is) and you do not want to be one of those. Find and hang out with the kind of people who do what you want to do and learn from them... Take basic drawing and design classes... Most of all, PAY ATTENTION to what you like and learn from it. On the other hand, if its a big professional deal ($$$) and you need the help - hire an artist. We all want to learn and grow but sometimes you need to call in a professional. PIXAR has specialized division of labor - why not you?

well, if you don't want to group...

[Paolomania]

... you could always spend a lifetime multi-classing, but don't go complaining to the DM when you discover that divided XP means you make only half the progress in each of your classes. Who cares how many hit-dice you have if HR is only looking at your class-skills!

Art tips from a non-artist...

[Mustang Matt]

If you're not an artist you're not an artist and you aren't going to crank out beautiful work regardless of how well you learn any software package.

Here are my tips...
1. Keep designs simple.
2. Keep designs consistent.
3. Don't mix serif and sans-serif fonts. (Debian.org is a great example of what not to do... All the titles are sans-serif and all the text is serif. Download a copy of the page and edit the CSS file to use Verdana for the body text and look at how much better it makes it look.)
4. Don't do things for the sake of doing them, make sure any layout decisions have some reason behind them.
5. Find an artist and barter services if you can't afford to hire them.

Re:if you don't have it...HOW TO FAKE IT

[Anonymous Coward]

>> #3- Look at other designs, and borrow, borrow,
>> borrow. Very few people actually create something
>> original. Just about everything has been done
>> before, so just borrow away.
>
> STEAL, uh, i mean "homage" any image (OBEY ALL
> PERTINENT COPYRIGHT RULES, AND DON'T "HOMAGE" FROM
> MAJOR SITES THAT ARE KNOWN TO EMPLOY LOTS OF
> LAWYERS!!!!!!!!!)

This kind of attitude really pisses me off (not to mention that it's really, really stupid to suggest "borrowing" or to "homage"). Stealing art is basically the same as stealing code. You must _ALWAYS_ ask for permission. As an artist I can assure you that if I found your companies using my artwork and passing it on as your own then you might be facing a lawsuit. I would hate to resort to legal actions but if you steal my stuff, and haven't been licensed to use it (e.g. artistic license), you'd better be prepared for a bare-knuckle fight.

I'm telling you this for your own good. Just because it's there doesn't mean you can take it and use it as you see fit because you see, like code, it does belong to someone unless explicitly stated to be public domain. After all, like parent stated -- art is subject to Copyright laws.

If you asked me for permission and acknowledged me as the artist, however, I would probably be more than happy to accomodate you and grant you permission to use it. It's a matter of pride - please keep that in mind.

Thanks alot, now I feel dirty for having to spell this out in such a impolite fashion.

Re:one place to look

[ExtremeGoatse!]

The poster's comment about having the "right tools" (PS, Lightwave, etc.) exemplifies most programmer's and the general publics incorrect view on computer graphics and technology and art.

All too many people think that if you have the right "digital tools" amazing Pixar quality art will pop-out. Its simply not true. The primary reason that pixar is so unbelievable is not because John Lasseter and co. are incredible programmers but because they are amazing artists that understand how to use their paintbrush-the computer-to the fullest extent.

Some posts have mentioned taking evening classes and such. That's a good idea, but all too many of them are stuck in the rut of teaching you how to do different tricks on a particular piece of software.

As a programmer who has dabbled in art my suggestion is to try and forget your programmer self. Don't look at Photoshop and see all its cool features, its extensibility, effects, etc. Approach the project just like you would if someone were to hand you a paintbrush and say paint a picture or a camera and say make a movie. In other words, understand the medium you are working with, but don't get engrossed in it. It's still just art.

Re:Advice from a designer

[gtada]

Of all the advice I've read, the parent gives the best. Seriously, listen to a designers advice, not another programmer turned "artist". No offense, but programmers usually don't make the best designers (rather unsophisticated). It's the same as asking an artist who dabbles in programming for software engineering advice. I'm speaking in general terms (I've met some great designer-programmers and programmer-artists), so save your flames. :D

To add to the parents advice, I'd say to look at fashion magazines for color schemes. Also, pick up a book on graphic design.

Last piece of advice: don't be too literal when designing icons... usually an icon that is too literal is also rather busy and hard to understand. It seems that the tendency is to take a metaphor and tobrun with it. Fight the urge and find a simpler way to represent the same idea.

To buy something free ?

[doudou42]

If you have to pay them 350USD, they are not royalty-free...

Photoshop, LightWave, Maya

[mwvdlee]

If you say you can barely get by with your assignments and don't need to produce high quality artwork, why have you bought expensive licenses for Photoshop ($500-600), LightWave ($1600) and Maya ($2000)???

You should have just picked up some free or cheap products instead since your not going to use the expensive features anyway, that way you could get along easily and perhaps invest in something you'll actually use.

I'm assuming you're not making money by using cracked versions of said software, naturally.

Re:if you don't have it...HOW TO FAKE IT

[shaitand]

"art is subject to Copyright laws."

Absolutely and the parent's implication that it is ok to heist it is entirely wrong.

"does belong to someone unless explicitly stated to be public domain"

It's this part of your statement that is wrong and this line of thinking must be corrected wherever seen. It's particularly important to correct (even anally so) someone who creates copyrighted works and has this wrong view. When any man creates a work subject to copyright, that work is owned by mankind, not by the man who made it (although the man owns the physical object, that isn't what is subject to copyright)!

Copyright is the OWNER ie mankind (or the nation on it's behalf) granting you temporary and limited controls by contract for a limited term. It's a way of saying thankyou. You own the copyright, not the material which is copyrighted.

Your pride you may be entitled to, but it becomes arrogance to think to own the miracle of man's imagination, even the piece of it you bear through life. Human history shows in thousands upon thousands of documented instances that NO idea is unique. You can think something first, but even if you never tell a soul there will plenty of others who form the same thought.

Why not simply...

[zeruch]

...go to someplace like Deviantart.com and seek out artists often willing to do it for you, and in may cases for free?

I'd like to learn martial arts. . .

[Fantastic Lad]

so that I'm really awesome. Only thing is, I don't have the passion or patience to spend the minimum ten-to-fifteen years necessary to become recognizably good. And I certainly don't want to spend the life-time needed to become really, really good.

Any tips? --I already have my own nun-chucks and expensive cross trainers.

-FL

From someone who has an art degree

[Qbertino]

Having studied and practiced art professionally for 8 years I can say that, just like programming, the essence of making art boils down to about 10 to 20 rules. Yet grasping these rules to the full extend and improving your skills to actually apply these rules usefully is long hard work. A basic tip I'd give is to copy the artists you consider best. The rest follows the usual pure and simple rule:

There is no secret. Work your ass off.

And, btw, no amount of powertools will bend that rule. Just as is it is with programming.

Maya PLE?

[DarkMan]

Maya personal lerning edition is free (as in beer). It looses the plugin capabilities that made Maya an industry standard, and watermarks images, but in terms of seeing if you can pump out useful work with it, that's not an issue (same interface, and most of the same capabilities as full grown Maya).

I seriously expect that the submitter is talking about Maya PLE, rather than any of the proper versions of Maya in the byline, for more or less the same reasons as the parent - it's too much money otherwise.

Photoshop is prehaps not too surprising, given that it is often (not completely corretly) considerd _the_ 2D raster packege [0].

Lightwave is still somewhat anomolus, however.

[0] Photo's and photorealistic style images it's great for. Icon design, other, simpler packages might be better.

That's insightful

[Moraelin]

It's not just about masking artistic deficiencies. Sometimes the clean minimalistic look is actually the best.

The dot-com era was filled with clueless PHBs who thought that the user wants an artistic experience. Every single site had to have some horrible colour scheme (e.g., cyan on bright blue, or orange on light orange are actual colour schemes I was asked to implement.) It had to have gradients, 1 MB of animations per page, impossible to read funky fonts, and graphics _everywhere_.

Turns out that most users _don't_ want an experience. They want a simple an intuitive program that just works, or an easy to use and navigate site.

I.e., my advice to anyone would be:

1. Usability and clean layout before funky graphics. Remember that you're making a professional program, not a work of art. The purpose of that interface is functionality, _not_ expressing yourself or evoking feelings.

This is the main reason why graphics artists are bad web site designers, unless you get them to also learn proper web design. GUI design is a completely different skill from graphics design, and for that matter from programming. (Witness the many excellently programmed OSS programs, that nevertheless have an utter crap UI.)

2. Keep it simple. For a back button, a simple left-pointing arrow will suffice. For file operations, a 3.5" floppy icon works wonders.

Basically, if all you need is an icon, do _not_ try to paint the whole Book of The Dead, with the Pharaoh being led into the underworld and judged. You're making an icon, not a fresco.

3. Keep the learning curve low. If the users have already been educated that symbol X means operation Y, use that. E.g., everyone was already broken in that a left pointing arrow means "back", so use it for that and only for that. Don't try to teach them new tricks just for your program.

This may seem like a rehash of 2, but really has more to do with 1. It's all about usability. Steep learning curves are bad. Reusing the user's existing skills is good.

4. Keep it simple.

4.a. You have precious few pixels in an icon or button, so complex images tend to end up with details that are 1-2 pixels tall or wide. The images must be easy to recognize without squinting to see the details. To that end, for example, a stilized telephone symbol will actually work better than a 3D-rendered anti-aliased phone that's been shrunk to 32x32 pixels.

4.b. Remember that the role of icons, again, are to allow the user to quickly locate common actions on a toolbar. Again, functionality before artistic expression. They are _not_ there to evoke feelings or express yourself.

So simple and clear is good in that aspect too. An arrow or a magnifying glass are things that aren't just easy to draw, they're also very easy to recognize and visually locate.

Etc.

So basically what I'd argue is that often keeping it simple, abstract and clean is actually the _right_ way, and making it overly artistic is the _wrong_ way. Not being an artist or creative can actually be an advantage.

Yes, you can't take a programmer and expect him to be able to paint the sixtine chapel. But here's the fun part: you want an UI, _not_ the sixtine chapel. Someone who tries to make a sixtine chapel out of the UI is actually the _wrong_ person for the job.

Vector vs rastor

[swerk]

I know folks who do abuse Gimp's or Photoshop's filters and effects, that's another good point. But using a rastor program itself is not the problem and in a lot of cases is a perfectly good solution.

Use your graphics programs as tools, not factories. Art doesn't come out of a machine, it comes out of you.

Re:So where do you get it?

[bigman2003]

Sure-

Most importantly, find a WORKING artist. Not someone who just considers themselves an artist. Every jackass hipster living in downtown Sacramento thinks they are an 'artist'. That somehow explains the piercings, stupid spiked hair, crappy clothes, crummy apartment, and dead-end job. "Oh he/she isn't a loser, they are an ARTIST". Bullshit- they are a loser with a weak excuse.

Find one who is actually working. So therefore, don't hang out at clubs/bars/restaurants after about 10:00 on a weeknight, or 12:00 on the weekend. People with jobs actually need their sleep. And if they are WORKING at said club/bar/restaurant, then they are probably a WAITRESS, not an artist.

So, now that you have cut out 95% of the 'art community' where do we go from there?

Well, someone with a degree is a good starting point. They were serious enough about art that they spent 4+ years studying- rathing than just relying on the fact that "I've always liked to draw".

Next- when you meet up with this young and educated hottie, ask her pertinant questions like "what kind of computer do you use". The best, is if they use a Mac, but don't really know a damn thing about it. Remember, you're looking for an artist, not a computer geek.

So- where do these chicks hang out? (Hopefully not above their waistband).

Cities like San Francisco and Seattle have big 'designers' conferences of some sort. That is a potential. But then again, they are going to be too overwhelmed to really meet a guy.

Do what I did- hang out in your company's art department. (You KNOW they have a job) Even if you get 'in' just by lifting heavy boxes, etc. it gives you a reason to stand around. Now, start asking them out to lunch, calling them on the phone (see...they aren't wasting their work time, because it is 'business related') and generally start running into them as much as possible.

After they get over the fact that a total dork likes them, they'll start to see the advantages of the computer geek. For one, he is EMPLOYED, unlike all of her stupid hipster friends who hang out at clubs every night. For another, he doesn't look ridiculous. The guys who looked cool when she was 20, and in school, are starting to be embarrassing. And, the computer geek probably has a car, unlike her loser friends.

So there you have it- how to meet an artist.