Important: Bonus Features and Soundcloud

An important read for anyone who is even remotely involved in application development: [ http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2006/11/01/922449.aspx ]

I am not fond of any application that does anything that I don't explicitly tell it to do, or software that causes unnecessary clutter. I do enough of that on my own, actually- and I routinely clean up my desktop as a result.

Just because I clean my desktop regularly does not mean I am okay with unnecessary features. I detest the installation of items in my taskbar or browser unless I specifically request them and install them myself- all of the installers that have the "We recommend _____ toolbar..." and have the option to install it automatically checked is deceiving and borderline malicious, in my opinion.

Enough ranting.

I'm no professional discjockey, but I put together some bass-heavy dubstep to listen to.

Dubstep Mashup Mixtape Eins by cleancutwellkept

What are your thoughts?

Good design, part 3? Fonts in a wall-of-text.

Courtesy of some comments in previous posts, I figured that it wouldn't be right for me to throw words at you without a few pictures to support them. Most text on this page displays (by default) as a serif-heavy typeface. To describe it in a more common fashion, it looks pointy. Sans-serif fonts are the ones that look smoother and cleaner. A great example of sans-serif in design is Apple's branding, viewable here. There's even a documentary about Helvetica, which talks a lot about some of the ideas in design.

I would assume that there are studies that delve into the difference of message impact based on font, but that's not entirely my realm of interest or expertise- I think that things should be clean, consistent, and easily-readable if (and only if) you're trying to get nothing but information across.

There's plenty to be said for sans-serif. It's clean, easily readable, and probably displays better on screens. I'm personally not that fond of typefaces that are otherwise quite boring.

Serif fonts, on the other hand, are my favorite. I find the little accents make it much easier to read and more refined- in the sense that I find a fine wine more refined than a minimalist would find a glass of distilled water.

Here, have an example: Two sentences in two different typefaces.

It is important to choose typefaces with care and attention to detail.


It is important to choose typefaces with care and attention to detail.


The former is slightly larger than the latter.


For what it's worth, most print sources tend to be created with serif fonts, and most online or electronic print tends to be written up with sans-serif typefaces.


I could elaborate for ages on this subject, but I will instead pose a question and save more for later: Do you find serifs agreeable in print? What impact do you think that presentation has upon the audience?

( My previous posts on design are here and here. )

Good design, continued:

I posted a few days ago about the importance of good design. Here, have some more:



To the end of eliminating design that interferes with understanding, I would thusly suggest the following:

No fewer than three short words should fit within a column, unless they are wrapped around a graphic.

Negative space- columns, rows, and the like- should never detract from the message or cause issues with readibility.

Anything even remotely related to typography should be handled with extreme care. The difference between fonts may seem minimal but carries the weight of affecting legibility across screens and between eyes. A font that uses serifs affects the perception of the individual characters. Large flourishes and unusually complex script places less emphasis on the message and more on the delivery.

Choose colors carefully. Colors and chromatography are in and of themselves a complex matter that I don't know enough to speak authoritatively about. Suffice it to say that certain colors look beautiful when accompanied by certain other colors. Finding all of these links - or a way to calculate them - is a science, if not an art. Color can be used to make distinctions, separate space, draw emphasis, and convey messages of their own.

That's all for now. Here's a question for y'all:

What makes something pleasing to the eye?

Ranting, raving: Good design.

THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT

THAT IS WHY I HAVE USED CAPITAL LETTERS

IT HURTS MY EYES AND ANNOYS ME TO NO END WHEN I SEE GOOD CONTENT RUINED BY POOR DESIGN.

/cruisecontrol

Shouting aside, I think this is important to clarify:  Great content can be ruined by poor design.

Excellent design takes work. Excellent design takes risks. Excellent design does not EVER get in the way of content delivery.

Good design is simply elegant.

Bad design is many things, among them:

- Complex
- Distracting
- Unnerving
- Misleading
- Redundant

Those are merely the most obvious of things that can cause issue with design.

I do not mean to suggest that being complex or distracting or misleading is always bad- artwork and similar pursuits that have the visceral reaction of the audience in mind should do their best to take advantage of such possibilities.

What I do mean to suggest is that there are clear and important boundaries that anyone with the reader in mind should be conscious of. Notable among these are the following:

- Clarity of lines
- Ease of viewing
- Stimulus of thought

Design should never be uniform; to suggest that everyone remain constrained by the same unrealistic standards is wrong and unethical. Tastes vary, too- but I think it is fair to say that websites that are difficult to navigate and content that is difficult to process discourage the audience from participating and reduce the efficacy of communication.

More to come later this week, I think.

What makes for good design? Your thoughts, please.