Last week, legendary design studio Pentagram shared the case study for one of its latest projects, a new design for the Federal Government's performance tracking website. Unless it reveals bold new look for a renowned brand, agency case studies always don't tend to attract a ton of attention outside of the design industry. But this one made quite the splash for one very simple reason: it involved the use of AI.
In order to create over 1500 illustrated icons to represent various government divisions and topics, Pentagram turned to Midjourney to create icons based on a bespoke illustration style created for the project. Somewhat predictably, this led to a public outcry on social media, with commenters criticising Pentagram for using generative AI instead of hiring illustrators, and in some instances going as far as accusing the agency of theft. But as Pentagram partner Paula Scher sees it, this vocal minority is missing the point of the project – and of AI in general.
We caught up with the renowned designer, who has been a partner in the New York office of Pentagram since 1991, about the rationale behind Pentagram's use of Midjourney, and why the response to the case study is unlike anything she's seen in over 30 years.
What can you tell us about the initial brief?
In short, all the different divisions of the federal government make annual reports, and they go on a website called performance.gov, and the reports are very cumbersome and dense, as if they don't want ordinary people to really read them. For the average person who just wants to find out what's going on in the housing industry, they’re illegible. The government wanted to create a more user-friendly website.
Now, in my experience with working with the government, the biggest problem is its own bureaucracy. All these divisions of government and topics needed illustrations, but they would never be capable of making a decision. So if you want to run contemporarily, you kind of have to lock people out, you have to set up a system that is carefully designed and approved and can repeat without interference.
What was behind the decision to use AI for the illustrations?
Firstly, with regard to the structure of Pentagram and the way we were hired, we were not hired to use outside illustrators and photographers. This thing was a design project with a capital D, it was not an illustration project. But we were fortunate, because I had on my team a guy called Bruno Bergallo who's both a terrific illustrator and designer.
Bruno had worked with AI before, and he knew Midjourney. These tools couldn’t do our work – they couldn’t create the right images, and Bruno didn’t want to use more than five prompts or you’d be doing it forever. So he made the paintings of our drawings, and he designed an entire style, made with paint and tape. They are originals. He is an illustrator. This was then programmed into the computer, and now we have 1500 illustrations in that style.
We decided to be transparent and show the website to people because it solves a specific problem. Here, the problem that’s plagued government publishing is the inability to put together a program because of the interference of different people with different ideas. This solved that, which is why we published it. And our clients at OMB are very proud of it.
Were you surprised by the the response on social media?
I don't care if they don't like the project or the illustrations. That doesn't phase me at all. But I don't like it when they say, ‘you made millions of dollars on this,’ – this was not a really well paying job. And being accused of theft, I really did not like that. I thought that was really stupid, and rather inane. We posted a case study that shows you exactly how we did the thing, it couldn't have been more honest or open. And while only a small proportion of the comments were negative, some of them were very nasty – they hurt my feelings.
I've never seen anything like this happen when we post something – people questioning who got hired to do the illustration or photography, I don't remember ever having comments like this. I've had people not like the work or think it's crap or whatever, that's sort of the ordinary. But this was different, and it was the Midjourney thing.
Some of that I have to blame on myself, because the Midjourney thing is a point of sensitivity because a lot of illustrators are afraid they're going to lose work. But look, I'm married to an illustrator. And nobody's ripped anybody off more than my husband. And this project didn't take work away from anybody. There wasn't a job there. My firm and my team were hired to do this job, we weren’t given budget to hire illustrators.
Do you think the fear of AI among illustrators is justified?
I really think it's silly. I have been a graphic designer now for years. I started with rubber cement and exacto knives, and that was my advanced technology. Then all of a sudden there were photostat cameras you could buy and personally make your photostats. And then finally, the computer, which was the worst for illustrators because it invented something called desktop publishing, where companies just stopped buying illustration altogether and used things that already existed. And that was probably the worst version of it. There were few illustrators who pioneered and did their work on computers. And the next thing is AI.
I mean, this is a progression of life. I like AI because I see it seeping in and being a private little helper. I guess you could say, oh, well, this is going to ruin originality, or people are going to steal, or whatever you say about it and like, I'm sorry, but I don't think anybody will be more ripped off by any kind of AI than my husband has been by other illustrators. Designers stand on each other's shoulders. Illustrators do it. You get influenced by somebody, and often that helps your work. From my point of view, AI is another tool, and how it’s used is the responsibility of the designer who is charged with delivering the project and making those kinds of decisions. I’m sorry that the illustration community feels threatened by it, but I think they'll be fine.
