Sites like Crowdspring Ruining our industry??

Most designers who participate in a business model like crowdspring are not going to be able to provide the kind of service that major industry clients want. They may be talented but that doesn't mean they are creative or know how to establish relationships. In order to solve a businesses design problem you need to do the research to come up with an innovative solution. I found that the best solutions come from doing the research; not just jumping to the first solution that pops into your head. I don't think that crowd solutions allow for in depth research because the track is too fast and there isn't enough money. It promotes a first idea is best concept.... or worse yet, a template. A business has to be careful because they might end up with a bunch of cookie cutter ideas to choose from and it will affect their brand in a negative way.

Now that I've said all that... I think there is a place for industries like crowdspring because some startups might not have the capital to hire a real design agency and they might be tempted to do it themselves. As for me, I'm not worried because the kind of businesses that crowdspring would attract is not someone that I would want to do work with anyway. And I'm certainly not going to worry about competing with some housewife in the mid-west who is moonlighting in the evenings with MS Office. Right off the bat, I see the companies that use crowdspring as penny pinchers and no understanding of value of services. I provide ideas and long term relationships to the brand... not generic logos and templates done by a group of strangers type of mentality. Gee, I think I'd rather work at Kinko's than jump on that treadmill.

The sort answer is yes while my long answer is no.

The fact of the matter is whatever the industry there will always be a cheaper way of doing things, outsourcing labour, etc.. but there will always be a need for quality services.

Crowdsource is cheap'n'dirty and will have a place, but companies after quality design will always use the traditional way of doing things unless they are downright stupid. Am I worried about Crowdsource? Well if the majority of my service comes from small business then I would be worried.

People who compete in crowdsource are generally students, talentless designers who know their way around Illustrator or non-designers. I don't compete against them therefore it's a non-event when they do a $100 logo because when a company sees the value in design/branding I will generally pick-up the contract and do the creative the right way.

Look at photography...

Stock photography hasn't put regular photographers out of business.

istockphoto hasn't put getty out of business. (Granted, getty bought istock, but still - it hasn't put any of the other high-end stock houses out of business.)

I doubt crowdsourcing logos is going to hurt or significantly impact graphic designers in the long term. People get what they pay for.

As for me, i've participated in 2 works or so, but i don't know if it's just me or what, but i dind't get the same kick making the job done as i might i've done if i talked in person with someone of the company

THX1139 said:

Right off the bat, I see the companies that use crowdspring as penny pinchers and no understanding of value of services. I provide ideas and long term relationships to the brand... not generic logos and templates done by a group of strangers type of mentality.

Click to expand...

Then make sure your potential clients understand what you mean by this, because it honestly sounds like jargon to me. Everyone says stuff like this, but what does "value of services" and "relationships to the brand" really mean? Seriously, what does it mean?

fxstb2002 said:

Then make sure your potential clients understand what you mean by this, because it honestly sounds like jargon to me. Everyone says stuff like this, but what does "value of services" and "relationships to the brand" really mean? Seriously, what does it mean?

Click to expand...

Well qualitative and quantitative research comes to mind when creating a quality design for a brand, therefore I doubt a $100 crowdsourced logo would take the same amount of care in taking into account positioning, analysis, structure and overall research.

The again quality is an intangible concept, it's the age old car debate... Which one will get from A to B compared to which one does it in style

in a way yes. there's also another site i remember from a while back called 99 designs (part of site point or whatever the name of that big seo site is). it also holds competitions. there are also tons of freelancer sites where people from other countries do work for pennies a day. many of the clients don't know what kind of process goes into designing something, and when they see someone from another country doing a logo for $50, they'll complain to a local designer that they are overcharging them because they saw someone do it for much less on the web.

the majority of the designers on such sites aren't too experienced. i've dealt with several in the past, and most did not have a clue of how things work. most had poor design skills, and no knowledge of print production. a serious company which is looking to hire an designer will obviously not waste time on sites like these because they want someone who's available in-house.

as for someone mentioning lack of research that goes into the projects - many companies that use these sites are on a small budget, and chances are they don't have a creative director to collaborate with the designer to come up with something that suits the company. instead the person who puts up the ad simply goes for what they personally like. there is a chance that this will hurt the company, but sometimes it can help. i'll admit that some of the designs on there look very good, but at the same time they don't always make sense in relation to the company's background.

a lot of times the designs and vector images used on such sites are copied off of someone else's work, so it's like gambling - you can wind up with a logo which is already being used by someone else.