I love my clients. Many of them treat me well, and I'm good friends with them. Without them, I wouldn't have a job. Yay for clients!

But every now and then you come across a situation that is inherently frustrating. This can happen with "good" and "bad" clients alike. More often than not, the frustration stems from assumptions and miscommunication that happen early on in the design process between clients and their designers. These can be avoided with experience and intelligence, but sometimes in spite of your best efforts, both client and designer can end up together in a pot of boiling hot water.

So, here are three things (based on patterns I've observed with my own practice and that of others) that I wish I could tell all clients everywhere, all over the world, to help things go more smoothly with the design process:

1. Garbage in, garbage out.

This is a truism that works very well in life, but that I've seen happen far too commonly with design. If you don't give clear instruction, or if your instructions are vague and/or require a vast degree of interpretation, you won't get what you want.

It is, of course, a designer's job to listen very carefully, ask good questions, and dig as deep as they can to understand the scope of your project or idea, and to then propose a solution that matches your description of the problem.

This can't be accomplished, however, if there's not enough information, if the information is vague, or if you neglect to mention a critical parameter (i.e., "it has to be in full-color," or "we only have $X for this project," or "this is geared toward the Latino community").

So as a client, the best thing you can do for your designer is bring them alongside you, help them to understand your business, your intentions, and your needs.

Here's are a few resources to get you thinkin': a client survey that establishes guidelines for a logo design, and an article on how projects are priced.

2. Web is not the same as print, and must be treated differently.

One of the biggest sin you as a client can commit as a client is to download an image off the web, a logo from someone's website, or other web clipart graphic and sent it to your designer for use in a piece of printed material.

Asking a print designer to use graphics downloaded off a web page is like asking them to feed the multitudes with 5 loaves and 2 fish... except we're not Jesus. Here is the technical explanation of why you need large, high-resolution files for print:

The images you see on your screen have a measly 72 dots-per-inch (dpi), while the images you see on the paper of a magazine have a whopping 300 dots-per-inch--that's three times as much image information needed to produce something that appears "normal" to the human eye.

What this means is that images that have been prepared for use on a website will not meet requirements necessary to print them as "big" as they look on screen. An image could be as "big" as 7 inches by 10 inches, but if it's only 72 dpi, you're still stuck with something tiny for your brochure. High-resolution images are well worth what it takes to obtain them, so do yourself a favor and chase 'em down (or ask your designer for help) if you need 'em!

Secondly, don't make the assumption that what works for readers and users in your printed materials will work similarly on your website (or vice-versa).

Many studies have been done all over showing how unique the web is as a medium for reading and interacting, as well as how advertising and writing have to be altered in order to hold people's attention.

I highly recommend asking your designer or doing some of your own research to acquaint yourself with this reality before jumping in to a large-scale project. It will help your website and web strategy to be more effective, in addition to creating more synergy between you and your designer(s).

3. Drip-torture editing (and its cousin, "over-the-shoulder" designing) is ineffective and frustrating.

The drip-torture method of interaction is defined as sending ("dripping") a change, random thought, or edit to a proof as you think of it throughout the day.

You may feel that this is the best way for you to communicate immediately with your designer, and that by providing up-to-the-minute information on where your brain is at, that you're helping him or her to understand what you want.

Not so. Requesting 29 different edits at 29 different times during a single day is not only very frustrating for a designer, but highly ineffective. It makes your desires more difficult to keep track of, keeps designers spinning their wheels, and can lead to extra charges on your bill in the end.

"Over-the-shoulder" designing is the in-person equivalent of drip-torture interacting. You stand over the designer's shoulder and ask them to make changes in front of you until you hit on exactly what you want.

Caveat: This method can be good, but usually only in the final stages of editing when the overall design and mission has been established, or in the initial phases when designer and client are brainstorming together.

When it's bad: When the client "over-the-shoulders" the designer mid-way through the process, both parties often get caught up in a never-ending cycle of redesigning, which costs both parties time and money.

What is more effective in communicating with your designer is to do two things: provide and trust them with all your thoughts and information at the outset (see #1 above), and then, during the proofing or feedback process, send your changes, edits, and creative feedback in a complete, comprehensive batch. This helps a designer to see the overall picture of your reaction and direction, therefore helps them to execute your request more quickly, or even make a bold suggestion to head in a different (better) direction!

The end result of effective communication is a better design, a happier designer, and a fuller budget in the end. So please, for the sake of the designer and your pocketbook, avoid the water-torture method of proofing and editing.