When I read Seth Godin’s take on change and advancements in graphic arts, I was taken aback by how right he was.
When I was in college, and early in my graphic arts career, rubylith was the only way to get solid areas for plate making. We would use it to allow space for halftone photos. The following video shows how it was done:
This was the only way to effectively create layouts for graphic arts… until desktop publishing came along. Frankly, I was very glad when computer took over graphic arts. Rubylith was time-consuming. If I made one mistake, I would have to start over. Programs such as Aldus Freehand and Adobe Illustrator became my friends. I still use Adobe Illustrator today.
There was nothing wrong with using rubylith, especially when it was the only way to achieve some effects. But now Adobe Illustrator makes that work easier and faster. When the transition began, I remember several graphic artists that were not fans of the new way. Many eventually came around. Some held on to the bitter end when they were forced to retire or explore other careers.
Now that I am in the second half of my career, I would like to think that when something better comes along, I will embrace it. The change was good then. I see systems and techniques in my current role that have worked well. But could there be something better that we haven’t explored or have been blind to? Are we holding on to another type of rubylith?
No matter how old you are, I encourage you to embrace change. I can understand why artists with decades of traditional layout experience resisted change. But it didn’t serve them well. If there is a new way to do things, check it out. it may be the best thing that ever happened to your career or even your life.
