My first "thread" would relate to how do you think designers should get paid (based on what) and how do you resolve this problem. If one adheres to the requirements to be a "g o o d" designer, then what else should be the criteria to get compensated? Or every case is different? This question is a response to the discussion we had yesterday about what is a "g o o d" design.
Great idea Lidia. Thanks for starting the blog.
ReplyDeleteCompensation depends on so many variables. Who is your client, what's your relationship to the client, what's the client's budget, what's the production time for the project, what are you being asked to do for the client.
How much can you convince the client to pay you!
Mike
Thanks for starting this, Lidia!
ReplyDeleteIt would seem that the monetary value of the purpose or goal of the project might dictate the amount of compensation as well. For example, if the design will generate revenue, then the designer might be compensated better than if the design won't make money but simply educate the public, then compensation might be less?
test.
ReplyDeleteLidia, what made you think about the monetary aspect of "good" design? Just wondering how you arrived at this based on our discussion the other day in class? -Are you working on something that you need to give an estimate for? The reason I ask is that, yes, there are a lot of different ways that you can gauge compensation; by hours, by project type, even by a "retainer" agreement (on the agency side)...there are a few different ways but the basic way is to estimate how many hours you think the project will take, figure out an hourly rate or figure out what the project is worth and to whom --you and/or the client. Also, always remember to account for any needed materials that will also be associated with the output of the project (ie, hosting fees for web, paper for print etc.)
ReplyDelete