Subscribe to
Posts
Comments
NSLog(); Header Image

Design Contest

I'm having a design contest. It'll last until I say it's over. 🙂 (This means it'll last a few days - say until Friday or so?). Yes, that's short notice. The rules are very simple: deliver to me a mockup of a redesign for this site. An 800 x 600 TIFF or PSD would be fine.

The entries will be listed in a later blog post, and a quick round of voting will ensue. My opinion counts the most, though, so it'll more likely be a matter of trying to sway my mind.

The winner gets a $20 gift certificate to the iTunes Music Store and any one piece of Freshly Squeezed Software or a $40 iTMS gift certificate.

I'm not the owner of the site - I'm just curious to see what people might come up with. You should not contact that site's administrator - it's a pretty standard site with some reviews, some external links, some sponsors, and so on.

This is, as they say, for shits and grins. No designs submitted will be used for any purpose other than to select and award a winner. The administrator of the site is unaware of this contest and will not be using any designs in any fashion whatsoever. Should the administrator become aware of the contest and/or like some of the designs, I will refer him to the designer for further conversation.

Comments re: the legality of using images in a mockup will be deleted immediately. So, to the two idiots out there who can't even bother to leave a name, fuck off.

21 Responses to "Design Contest"

  1. What about the international people without iTunes Music Store access? Amazon.com perhaps? 😛

  2. The lovely thing is that with a gift certificate, you don't need a credit card account to use the iTMS. I've sent gift certificates to friends in Austria, Italy, France, and the UK. If you'd like an amazon.com gift certificate instead, no problem.

  3. Any special rules? I suppose we can take pictures from the site and such? (I don't really have any such pictures lying around :-).)

  4. Pictures from that site or any other kayak or fishing site are okay for the mockup but would clearly need to be replaced if the site went into production. It won't, however, so I shall not worry about such things.

  5. Copyright infringement is "okay" for mockup?

  6. Yes. A good lawyer assures me that this clearly falls under "fair use" as we are merely generating images as a composite of other people's images. We're not selling anything, we're not promoting anything, and we're not demeaning or vandalizing original works. Now, buzz off.

  7. For the un-informed, most designers worth their salt don't encourage people to "Design on Spec" especially in cases of RFP (Requests for Proposals).

    Zeldman agrees with this and so do I - just some food for thought for all you newbies out there in the big world…

  8. This isn't a design on spec. The designs aren't going anywhere, they won't be used, and this is simply a fun contest for some silly prizes. If you don't wish to participate, it's very easy: don't.

    I do not recommend designing on spec either, Ryan. The entrants, however, will gain some publicity and recognition.

  9. Update: one entry has been received. Cutoff remains Friday (midnight), and results will be posted Saturday.

  10. You would require more payment for this to mock up because after the initial look I had to buy much much chocolate to stop my eyes from hurting

    😛

    But seriously i would have participated had I seen it earlier and had I not other work to do before fryday evening :-/

  11. In support of EJB: It's standard and accepted practice in desktop publishing (print or web, no matter) to use copyrighted material as a "comp"... which is exactly what EJB has asked for: comps. The theory goes that without actually using the image in the design, you can't really get the gist (or "oomph") of the design itself. But, it is your charge (as the designer) to be ethical and properly license any copyrighted material before moving that design into production, as you could get sued... a lot. Here, "in production" means "published to the web", which Erik has already stated will NOT happen. Copyright is a moot point.

  12. Gary, that just doesn't make any sense. In design projects, artwork is to be *designed*, not ripped from someone else. According to you, designers don't sell original or otherwise saleable artwork with their designs, eh? After the client "bites," designers go around trying to license the stuff that they have already "sold" to the client? That's completely ridiculous.

  13. Okay, blanknamed pussy, then it's not a design contest, it's an art contest. Please, everyone, design a nice collage of someone else's work and we'll call it "art," thus allowing you to use whatever you'd darn well please.

    Stop posting here until you can leave your name, your email address, and a URL. You've been asked nicely. Soon you won't have a choice. Comment registration is not far off.

  14. The design contest I made a few days ago has ended. The winner is Randall Schenetz (I checked the spelling three times Randall!). He's elected to go with the $40 in music, and the iTMS gift certificate has been (e)mailed!...

  15. Thanks for asking nicely, but it takes a lot of time to type my name, my email address, and a url. More to the point, I have little incentive to use my real name if you're going to name-call. As far as instituting a registration system... do what you like with your site.

    Lastly, I'm under the impression that web designers are quite happy and eager to create *original* graphics and artwork for their web designs. Why is this so hard for everyone to understand?

  16. Unnamed idiot: that's what "Remember info" is for. You don't have to type your name repeatedly. Duh.

    Web developers are happy to create their own designs, but you can't go around creating your own photos. That's why places like istockphoto.com are so popular. Thus it's difficult to understand because you're wrong.

  17. Funny. You're making *my* point. Remember when I told you permission was required for copyrighted materials used in proposed web designs, even "mockups"? As you just pointed out, there are many stock photo sites that provide royalty-free (or nearly free) materials that can be used for these purposes. As I correctly pointed out before (and as you've now conceded in your recent post), it's illegal to infringe copyright, even if it's just a "mockup."

    By the way, it's too bad you're not insightful enough to detect the humor in my recent post. Of course I know all about "Remember personal info." I just choose to remain nameless so I won't subject myself to your use of labels such as "pussy." Most people I know stopped using words like "pussy" in the 8th grade. If the level of discourse improved in this forum, I might be inclined to reveal my surprising identity.

  18. Most people you know are probably pretentious pricks like yourself. I got the "humor" if that's what you'd like to call it. Then I ignored it. Why waste your time? Just go away.

    The only person attempting to make your point is yourself, and you're failing miserably.

  19. Actually also in Erik's defense, I still use the word 'pussy' daily and I've been out of 8th grade for... some time now.

  20. Artistic Zealotry should be an Oxymoron

    To He of the Heretofore Unveiled Surprise Identity: You're confusing ideology with practicality. Your pitbull masseter is locked on your...

  21. To He of the Heretofore Unveiled Surprise Identity: you're confusing ideology with practicality. Your pitbull masseter is locked on your mind's own zealotry: All true design is original.

    Art is defined solely by the artist, and nobody can say otherwise, just like religion. This I give you. But how can you apply your own religion to others? Are you on some sort of crusade to rid the world of perceived copyright violations?

    If you're going to deign to post comments to EJB's website, and discuss the level of discourse, then I suggest you take time away from your academic pursuits and join the real fucking world. Where we live, those of us with "a good eye" have the ability to hone the craft of design, yet comply with copyright laws (regardless of our artistic purity or lack thereof), and everyone comes out happy.

    One thing to remember w/r/t text-based interaction: There is no inflection. What you type is what we see, and there's no room for interpretation. Your words must stand on their own, without implication. As an academic, I would hope you'd understand this concept, and avoid using it as a tool in your own defense.

    Why not show us all your virgin designs? If only to prove your point. Who knows? We might all kowtow to your artistic purity and join the cult.


Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Please abide by the comment policy. Valid HTML includes: <blockquote><p>, <em>, <strong>, <ul>, <ol>, and <a href>. Please use the "Quote Me" functionality to quote comments.