The Front Panel

by Marianne Klimchuk

Be True to Your Artistic Design Instincts, as the Tools of Today Will One Day Be as Outdated as Rapidographs and Schaedler Rulers

A remarkable incident happened the other day. When I told someone my professional vocation, she replied that her young daughter plays a computer game in which she must pick out the most suitable packaging design for a given item. She went on to explain how educational this game is. She went on enthusiastically about how this game was not only wonderfully creative, but also its integration of marketing and mathematics makes it an ideal educational game.

How exciting to think a young generation is not just cognizant of packaging design as the physical representation of their favorite brands but as a career choice as well. Although it sounds like this game creates the perception that the objective of packaging design is to simply pick out a material that physically suits a group of items, it's a start nonetheless. Maybe this kind of informed awareness is precarious since in our technologically accessible world anyone with the applicable software thinks they can replace an experienced professional.

We see this in so many design disciplines—interior design, architectural design, and graphic design, among others—where those not professionally trained believe that with the proper software they can resolve challenging design assignments. Believe me, I know this first hand from countless acquaintances who show me their own attempts at package designs, corporate identities, and websites.

Wouldn't it be nice if packaging design were that easy? Even my own packaging design students—who never knew the days of specing type, making stats or sending out for transfers—are learning that access to technology does not make the design process any easier. Nor does access to technology make the results any more marketably successful. When I want to show my age, I explain in detail the early days when typesetting was a profession. I would explain how a type compositor worked, how designers needed to spec type, how the copy machine was utilized to create color comps by assigning colors to black and white art, and how transfers were one of the primary tools for comp creation.

Markers, ruling pens, Rapidographs, T-squares, triangles, and Schaedler rulers were among our tools. I describe how research consisted of actually walking through markets not simply sitting at a desk searching the Internet. When these young designers are told about the days when a 24-hour turnaround was acceptable, or expected, they laugh. How did anyone meet such deadlines?

Not as simple as some think

Let's fast forward to the day when my current and former design students are telling the next generation of packaging designers how when they started in the business the technology that eased the design workflow was in its infancy. Files still had to be created and transferred in precise ways and production was not fully integrated into the designer's tools. Although packaging materials, components, and suppliers had websites, three-dimensional databases did not exist. Designers still needed to request physical samples to create comps or three-dimensionally render the structures.

They would then have to recreate packaging dies in Illustrator, import and export files from different formats, and cross-platform 3-D software was not fully integrated into the design process. Federal regulatory requirements were not readily available as software plug-ins, either. Designers needed detailed understanding of color print production, environmental standards and the design to production process in order to successfully spec a job. They may even recall the days when they still had to create three-dimensional comps to show a client—although virtual packaging was becoming the prototyping standard and machinery was just being introduced which made it easier for students and designers to create physical prototypes.

These future designers would be astonished by how archaic packaging design was. The selling environments for these designers have changed their professional roles. Shelf impact and brand awareness meant something completely different. These designers are able to virtually experience the competitive environment, place their packaging design into this environment, and experience the design from the consumer's perspective.

Products are no longer simply designed for the masses. With product customization, packaging designers are recognized for their individual design style, much the way we fashion designers are today. In this new customized design world, packaging designs harmonize with their aesthetic environment and are no longer designed to scream from a store shelf. Material waste is reduced as customers refill many of their favorite packaging designs. Mass branding has little value since the client is now the consume—not the manufacturer. For those staple products that are still designed for the masses, the tagging devices on every product allow the designer to collect measurable research results in real time and alter the design immediately to achieve marketable results.

Needed: tool kit and skill set

Maybe I have it all wrong. It does seem as though, like a child with the computer game, we are moving to a place where anyone can input all the marketing variables and output various design solutions. No creativity needed! Or maybe designers will choose not to let technology replace creativity. If it is the role of the new designer to fulfill all aspects of production, then certainly tools that ease the workflow certainly alleviate much tedious labor. Remember though, there was once a whole world of production specialists who enjoyed their jobs. Nowadays, true production artists are hard to come by, and those who are still active in their profession do not get the true respect their vocation deserves.

Don't get me wrong: Although we must not allow technology to replace creative thinking, we can still allow it to ease execution. I just hate to see designers jump into execution without sound conceptual development. Designers should not lose either their own artistic inventiveness that brought them to packaging design—playing, drawing, doodling, and experimenting—or their trained experience and expertise in the latest workflow technology. The two must work together. Although artificial intelligence will keep us moving forward, we must accept the challenge of not relinquishing that which defines our distinctive creative profession.

Marianne R. Klimchuk (marianne_klimchuk@fitnyc.edu) is the Associate Chairperson of the Packaging Design Department at the Fashion Institute of Technology, where she has written curriculum, taught courses, and directed the packaging program for over 13 years. Marianne holds a Masters degree in Packaging Design, and has worked on many major consumer brands as a packaging designer.