Urban Art Association

Exactly what I was going to say

Not necessarily 'purely' functional. But function is a requirement in my opinion. For example, a well designed kettle has functional and aesthetic requirements. Art doesn't always have those constraints.

It can also function badly

Or... can be pretty AND functional.

I once had a conversation with a painter about making a living through creating and selling art. She was having trouble living solely off selling art (of course), so had started doing design on the side for extra income. She told me "I couldn't afford to be an artist. So I became a designer."

I always liked her answer.

One's made by an artist, the other by a designer.

Always a fun discussion, I recall this discussion on here within the past year.

What separates "art" and "design" is convoluted, and has been discussed for ages, certainly well before CAD. Artists and designers both create visual compositions using a shared knowledge base, but their reasons for doing so are entirely different. Some designers consider themselves artists, but few artists consider themselves designers.

A work of art typically starts with nothing - a blank canvas. A work of art stems from a view or opinion or feeling that the artist holds within him or herself. They create the art to share that feeling with others. The most renowned (and successful) works of art today are those that inspire the strongest emotional bond between the artist and their audience.

By contrast, when a designer sets out to create a new piece, they almost always have a fixed starting point, whether a message, image, idea or action. The designer's job isn't to invent something new, but to communicate something that already exists, for a purpose. That purpose is almost always to motivate the audience to do something - buy a product, use a service, visit a location,learn certain information.

Good art inspires...good design motivates.

Good art is interpreted...good design is understood.

Art connects with people in different ways, because it's interpreted differently. Design is the very opposite. Many will say that if a design can be "interpreted" at all, it has failed in its purpose.

Good art is a taste...good design is an opinion. Art is judged by opinion, and opinion is governed by taste. Design has an element of taste, but the difference between good and bad design is largely a matter of opinion.

Good art is a talent...good design is a skill.

Good art sends a different message to everyone...good design sends the same message to everyone.


So....who's an artist, and who's a designer...

There are no rules for art thus design can be art, and art can be design. Having a valid correct answer will never happen as most art is fluid and design is art in many circumstances. I think the question lies not with is design art, but is what is the designers intent. Any designer can call design art if he says so, if he says its not art then its not art but could still have artistic merit. Its not for anyone to decide other than the person creating the design, or art. We cant push our agenda on another's intent.

My dear Sir



Art is useless because its aim is simply to create a mood. It is not meant to instruct, or to influence action in any way. It is superbly sterile, and the note of its pleasure is sterility. If the contemplation of a work of art is followed by activity of any kind, the work is either of a very second-rate order, or the spectator has failed to realise the complete artistic impression.



A work of art is useless as a flower is useless. A flower blossoms for its own joy. We gain a moment of joy by looking at it. That is all that is to be said about our relations to flowers. Of course man may sell the flower, and so make it useful to him, but this has nothing to do with the flower. It is not part of its essence. It is accidental. It is a misuse. All this is I fear very obscure. But the subject is a long one.



Truly yours,



Oscar Wilde


Still sums it up quite well 125 years later. Conversely Design is at least intended to have some use - even Graphic Design is basically aimed at selling stuff

...available in all book stores.

No problem.

Not sure what you are referring to...times of wealthy patrons circa 1600-1800?  Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel?  Are you comparing graphic designers to classically trained fine artists?

If so not a valid argument imho.

But if one was a graphic designer certainly a thought to make one feel better about themselves.

Its as valid as saying a modern architect is just a designer compared to Christopher wren because they use a computer to design