Design and Me

I definitely think this year has opened my eyes to the depths of design, allowing me to explore principles which feel relevant to my style of design. I know that as a designer I personally want to design products that are simple but effective in there functions, with more attention being paid to the aesthetics to improve user likeability.

I also understand now that psychological behaviour has a big role in defining and shaping designs and as I develop as a designer I'd like to explore and research further into Gestalts principles of psychology. Lastly I have also realised after a university lecture describing where design could be going, that I want to focus on improving my knowledge of technology and simplistic design too.

This blog was a good way of expressing my opinions and criticisms on principles within design and I hope to further carry on this blog.....

Aesthetic-Usability Effect

This principle has been described as looking into the way people perceive more-aesthetic designs as being more user friendly than less-aesthetic designs, whether they are or not. My opinion on this is that by designing under the influence of this principle I can manufacture products that will sell successfully. It is apparent that we live in a world were aesthetic designs receive more positive attitudes.

In the essay it was mentioned that this effect formed through evolution. This statement is still true in my opinion, as over time we have evolved within an ecosystem that includes animals which use intimidating looks as a warning or predatory defense. We have therefore been psychologically conditioned over time to believe less-aesthetic objects bring more hassle, explaining why most people prefer aesthetic design.

To prove that more-aesthetic design is more popular than less-aesthetic design I will do a comparison between the following two designs.

As you can see from the images of the two bikes one has the original paint scheme with the other having a basic black and white combination, Which would you chose? the design on the left is definitely more desirable as it has some colour to brighten up the bodywork and give it character. Colours allow a product to be personalised, creating bonds between the user and product. Customisation allows the users personality to reflect in the design and helps sell vast amounts of the products, an example of this is the Ipod nano shown in the link below.

http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_ipod/family/ipod_nano?cid=OAS-EMEA-KWG-UK_Top_KW_Exact-UK

Sometimes in design you want to keep things simple sticking to basic colour schemes but from now on I am going to create products which focus more on aesthetically pleasing designs, encouraging positive attitudes towards the products I produce.

Use of Closure in Design

This is one of my favourite principles that influences my graphical designs, it is described as the tendency of peoples mind to perceive a collection of individual objects as a single, recognisable pattern. This is caused by the subconscious mind which fills in the blanks between the graphics.

A simple example to show that this principle is very relevant can be found using your keyboard.

----------------------------------

by using the dash key your can see that the mind processes the single dashes into a long line. Another form of evidence is text messages as most of us shorten words missing out letters in order to narrow the length of the message. When we read texts our mind fills in any missing letters allowing us to read the message clearly with understanding. An example of this is below.

Hello, hw was ur dy? did u hav fun thgh u wer cold.

This principle is fantastic for creating simple logos that can be used on posters or advertisements. The most recent example of closure being used can be seen in the campaign and design of the logo badge for the new Alfa Romeo Mito as shown in the link.

http://www.alfaromeo.co.uk/uk/cmsen/models/mito/Pages/mito-landing.aspx?outputXml=true&CustomResponse=WebCrawler

Alfa have proved that by using the closure principle you can come up with an unusual yet cool logo design that in my opinion stands out from the crowd making your design more noticeable, making it perfect for advertising.

Closure is also useful in the design of web pages as you can use a set of images pieced together to animate a product or online advert. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can be used to import a set of still photographs into an animator included with the software, these stills can then be modified and used to create a virtual animated flick book. These animations are simple and reduce memory usage compared to normal mpeg videos as they only use a minimal number of slides which your mind then merges together to complete the animation. an example of this can be found on Youtube.com.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYONNDwcvEA

Looking back at the critical essay I have not changed my opinion on closure, I still feel it will influence my graphical work and believe it's a modern looking form of graphics that will become more popular with companies as time passes.

Consistency in Design

Consistency in design is very common within certain products as it allows better usability and makes them easier to learn. The most common forms of it are Aesthetic consistency which looks at using similar styles and appearances, and Functional consistency which refers to similar action and meanings between products.

Aesthetic consistency mainly relates to the world of graphics/logos and is very useful for enhancing recognition of a brand along with the companies values. This consistency makes it easier for customers to make decisions on purchases, for example clothing labels use the same logo on their designs for brand recognition. Take a look at the logo below, most people will instantly be able to list values/qualities it indicates.

This logo as most would have recognised is nikes swoosh and when seen on any item of clothing will indicate to the customer that the product is manufactured to a high standard.

Other benefits to companies using aesthetic consistency for their logos are that they can explore new business avenues with similar logos, providing recognition of the company values within the new venture. A good example of this is shown below.

The three Virgin logos are for three different companies of Richard Bransons and because of there similarity in colour and font they all carry the same values, indicating reliable, affordable and quality services/products.

Functional consistency relates to products of the same type using similar meanings within they're design. This consistency is seen in the audio/technology and appliance market regarding button symbols indicating certain actions. It allows a design to be learnt and understood quickly without confusion. Examples of universal symbols used in different designs to indicate actions are as follows.

Each of these symbols can be found consistently on any device that provides audio including MP3's, Stereos, Laptops, Voice Recorders, etc.

Keeping consistency in design is vital and as a designer this principle already shapes my own personal designs. It improves the simplicity of the design, with the user not having to re-learn symbol meanings or new logos.

Does Form Follow Function?

It was originally said in my critical essay on design principles that form and function should be considered together at the design stage and I still agree with this. When looking into the world of design there is mixed views as to whether form should follow function, but just like with ockhams razor there should be a balance. Achieving the correct balance depends on the type of market you are aiming at. For instance if your designing for the military function will be the main focus in the design, as the equipment has to meet high standards of reliability and undergo extreme abuse.

In the civilian markets form and function need to considered equally when in the designing stage, this I feel is key to a products success. To prove my point look at the following images and decide, which would you prefer to buy?

These two 4x4 Mercedes both have the same functions but the M-class (left) has been designed with form being taken into consideration more than it has been when designing the G-class (right). An example of the opposite where form is considered after the function can been seen in motor racing.

These pictures show two high powered cars with one design focusing on function. In the world of F1 and motor racing the main focus is on the performance of the car with each team needing the best functioning parts. The form of the car in this case is not considered till after function, because if considered first the performance could be compromised.

Design therefore does not have to be dictated by form following function in every design scenario, but it depends on the product as to what ratio you use of each. This is why when I read a design brief I now make the decision on whether to put form before or after function. In most cases the more complex the products workings are, the more the form follows function. To conclude the following show examples of work and the decisions I made.

This project was aimed at providing a new ornament for Crofts and Assinder to add to there garden range, for this brief I decided to focus on its form as the product was ornamental/decorative.

This brief required a new design for a humane mammal trapping device, so the main focus I decide was on function as it was more important in this case.

Mimicry

This principle refers to the use of properties from organisms, objects and environments to shape a products design, improving its function. Mimicry is very popular in designers as it solves important issues in the advance of technology, especially biomimicry, which analyses organisms with the designer reverse engineering certain aspects of their evolved form. One example would be the use of research into bird flight being used to help make the design of the aeroplane successful in flight.

There is three types of mimicry that any designer including myself can use to help in a products design and these are:

• Surface mimicry - Making a design look like something else.


• Behavioural mimicry - Creating a design that acts like something else.


• Functional mimicry - development of a design to work like something else.

Use of the three types of mimicry in design provides very positive results but in different ways, examples of these follow. The first example shown is the Black & Decker Snakelight which is designed to provide lighting at awkward angles and is typically used in D.I.Y or whilst working on cars.

As can be seen on the picture the torch functionally mimics the snakes ability to coil round and grip objects, having a flexible vertebrae structure covered by rubber membrane to give the desired result. The second example provides a link a video that shows an example of biomimicry in robotics, using the Robosapien robot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqDsV1mdO1c

This video shows a perfect example of behavioural mimicry with the robot reacting to its surrounding and also showing a form of basic human personality. However though this form of mimicry provides likeability to a product I feel there is no positive benefits to copying the behaviour of other creatures within my designs.

Moving on to the final example showing surface mimicry, the image shows a set of icons every computer user is familiar with.

Each icon is designed to mimic the image of a familiar object, using this to indicate the icons function or use. These simple images allow the desktop and other files to catalogue a PC's icons in a space efficient manner. For more information on products which use mimicry to improve the design, follow he links below.

Catseyes:

http://inventors.about.com/od/cstartinventions/a/cat_eyes.htm

Velcro:

http://www.velcro.com/index.php?page=who-is-velcro-r

Self Cleaning Paint:

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/09/sto_lotusan_bio.php

Following the search into use of mimicry in products and the evidence above, I still believe that using this principle to design can be very productive and successful. However I feel my personal designs will be influenced more from using functional and surface mimicry, rather than behavioural mimicry. This is down to feelings that behavioural mimicry has to many complex issues in the future regarding morals.

Okhams Razor - Is a simple design better than a complex one?

This principle asserts that a simple design should be chosen over a more complex design, as any unnecessary physical or visual weight can affect the designs efficiency. The critical essay that was done prior to this originally stated that I fully agreed with the principle, saying that designs can be too complicated which can put of users. After a few months however my opinion on this principle has changed.

I now feel that some complex designs should not be classed as being inefficient due to they're extra weight or applications/accessories, as sometimes they need this extra design to improve the usability of the product. It can also be said that some simple design can look too basic which can put off a user from buying the product, this is because certain buyer groups (particularly the older generation) have been programmed to think "more mean better value". The following photo's show one comparison I found proving simplicity isn't always the better way to design:

The two designs are both used for opening wine bottles, however the one on the right which would be classified as the more complex actually works better. This is because the twin arm corkscrew allows the user to control the pulling force on the cork through the mechanical force of the gears. The simpler T-bar corkscrew applies the opening force suddenly, which could possibly cause spillage of the contents.

Information from the above paragraph and image should by no means give a designer/user the impression that complex designs are always more efficient, it is there to show how I have got to my conclusion on the subject. Some designers follow the Ockhams Razor principle resulting in successful simple products that would be less efficient in there more complex form. The evolution of technology is the best example of this with companies such as Apple, Nokia, Sony, etc capitalising on the simplicity, as this type of design works better in the market. Following the first set of links below shows a set of simple products, the second set show older versions of the product to compare the design:

New

http://store.apple.com/uk/browse/home/shop_ipod/family/ipod_classic?mco=MTE2NTc
http://www.nokia.co.uk/link?cid=PLAIN_TEXT_1204523#/main/landing
http://www.sony.co.uk/lang/en/product/dsc-t-series/dsc-t900

Old

http://blogs.msdn.com/frankfi/archive/2007/11/19/forget-all-your-mp3-players.aspx
http://www.maurograziani.org/wordpress/wp-content/motorola.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Olympus_XA_camera_and_film.jpg

Comparing the old to the new products shows that the new simpler designs are more appealing and more efficient to use. Apples IPod has the simplest design around with just a screen and circular touch sensitive navigation and this product has made the company millions and started off a new trend in customer loyalty through itunes.

In looking further into different products and they're variations my original opinion has changed from "designers should follow Ockhams razor principle", to that of "the success of a design relates to a balance between function and simplicity". I will therefore only let myself be influenced by this rule as long as simplicity does not compromise the way the product works.