Graham Smith got the call last week from the Topic Designer for the business section of The Washington Post. The illustration assignment involved an article about debt collectors, and how they are trying to change their perceived negative image.

For this section cover illustration, Graham presented a number of ideas ranging from vague and safe, to scathingly editorial.

This was the safe sketch, paper sharks circling a debtor cut from paper money.

Graham was hired based on his ability to draw people well with pen and ink, the irony is, he didn't use pen and ink in the final execution.

"Inking her made her into a specific person, instead of generalized debtor," Graham explains,  "so I thought it better to present her as receipts and money."

"This sketch was a bit too much for The Washington Post," says Graham. A giant cockroach on the section cover, on Valentines day, just might put folks off their breakfast. The writer, Christian Davenport, came up with new headlines to fit each new round of sketches. This rejected sketch would have potentially been paired with, "Debt collectors: We're not just here to bug you. We promise."

So: is it better to present a safe sketch, an edgy concept, or both?