Talk:Commercial art
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] contempt among artists?
I do not think this should be in this article.
"Commercial art is often held in contempt among artists for having different values."
This is an opinion which is not verifiable and not necessarily relevent or important encyclopedic information.
[edit] Commercial art vs. Visual communication
"The term is somewhat obsolete and is currently being replaced in many colleges with the now 'it' term Visual communication."
Commercial art more clearly states what graphic designers, illustrators, art directors, etc. are actually doing. Although colleges are offering Visual communication programs, this does not mean the clasification of "art" made for commercial purposes should be changed.
According to the Wikipedia Visual communication article, art is a part of "Visual communication". There needs to be a clear way to point out the difference of art made to express an artist’s creativity as opposed to art made to sell shampoo. Unlike fine art, Commercial art and design is normally used for commercial purposes, to convey a specific and persuasive message to a large audience.
I think the term Commercial art does this justice.
This classification should not be changed to something even more ambiguous than commercial art. See the work of Christopher Wool as an example of an artist's work that could easily fall under the category of "Visual communication".
This is not to say that another term could not stand to replace "commercial art", but in my opinion this new term should do a better job explaining itself rather than blurring the lines even more than they currently are.
