Login or Register
Facebook
Why Must I Go This Route?
Drawar allows you to register through your Facebook, Google, Yahoo, AOL or Twitter accounts. The reason this method is used is because it makes sure real people are going to use the site and participate in the Community. It also means no personal info is stored here which is a very good thing.
If you need a reason to register then just check out the About page. Drawar is a great place to learn and discuss design amongst great people.
A web design and development community for people with a thirst for knowledge. Follow the Community on Twitter right here.
What Is Design?
A question that doesn't seem to have one right answer. Maybe that is a good thing and maybe that is a bad thing. Either way, it is a question that you should ask yourself if you are involved in the process of design. It doesn't matter if you are the actual designer or you are the person that employs the person doing the design, design is important and if you are going to be part of the process you have to understand your own idea of it.
What is design to me? Like design I think it's best to break the problem up until you find the simplest solution. So to answer the question maybe it's best to take a design approach to it. This might mean looking at what others are saying about design. You can see how people responded to the question on Twitter to the right. The Wikipedia definition of design of course doesn't keep things as simple as a 140 character response.
Design is the planning that lays the basis for the making of every object or system.
That sounds like the engineer's definition of design.
Now that we have what everyone else feels design involves, lets see what else the problem involves. The design of a website contains the information architecture, colors, white space, typography and resolution. So is design information architecture? Is design colors? Of course web design involves all of these so you can say that each of these falls under the umbrella of design. However, there has to be a better answer than simply listing what can be shown on a webpage.
When looking at a physical object that you like, what aspect of its design draws you to it?
I love the design of the Apple iPod as do many people I'm sure. What do I like about it? I like the curves. I like the screen. I like the way you interact with the iPod via its dial. So from this we could say that design is how we interact with something. Maybe design is how we interact with a product or how an object interacts with its environment. However, I feel that design means more than that.
Digging even deeper we sometimes like the way something is designed because it is easy to work with. Making something easy to use is a by-product of great design. We don't like to think too hard to solve a problem. Nature is the greatest problem solver of all. Looking at a plant, every piece of it can be justified. Nothing is extraneous, everything serve its purpose. Are all plants aesthetically pleasing? I don't think so, but to me aesthetics is an opinion. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say.
Going back to the iPod example, what many people love about the iPod is that it solves the problems of storing large amounts of music and listening to it in an intuitive fashion. Although for some features, like turning it off you might have to read the manual, the overall usage of an iPod is pretty easy. They say the quickest way to get from Point A to Point B is a straight line and in many ways the iPod's design encourages that. So in this case maybe we can say that design is the process of finding the quickest way to complete a task.
What about emotion?
The main issue is that emotions have a crucial role in the human ability to understand the world, and how they learn new things. For example: aesthetically pleasing objects appear to the user to be more effective, by virtue of their sensual appeal. This is due to the affinity the user feels for an object that appeals to him, due to the formation of an emotional connection [with the object].
If you take this into account, is design the ability to evoke emotions from the person interacting with it? It can be, but in nature rarely are there emotions used when one object is interacting with another. The design of how humans breathe has nothing to do with our emotions, although I'm sure we would all be sad if we lost the ability to do so. I believe that trying to evoke an emotion in some designs is very important, but it is not essential and as I have already stated emotional design isn't included in all design.
Now we don't have to worry about including emotions in the definition of design, but that doesn't mean we should forget the important role that emotion plays in the designs that we create daily.
The Answer
Now that I have established some guidelines of what I feel design does and doesn't include I can come up with a better definition of what design is to me.
Design is the process of finding the most elegant answer to the question of 'how do I?'
Paul Scrivens
How do I ensure the Twitter responses on the right are visually separate enough so that the reader can easily scan them? How do I create an article layout that encourages the reader to actually want to read the whole article? How do I open this door? How do I get oxygen into my lungs?
You can have a number of answers to each question, but one answer will be more elegant than the rest. One answer will be the simplest solution. You might not get to that answer the first time around, but that is why we redesign. Don't redesign just to do something new, redesign because you have a better answer to the question.
Is my answer the correct answer to the question of what is design? I have no idea, but I know it makes perfect sense to me and it's the answer that helps guide me whenever I start a new task. Don't hesitate to really think about the answer yourself, you may be surprised at what you come up with.
Here are the responses I received from Twitter. There is also a running forum discussion on the topic.
One of the hardest aspect of designs is trying to take a complex idea and presenting it in a way that the audience can understand.
super human problem solving story telling.
design is communication. good design is succinct clear communication.
design IMHO is an aesthetically pleasing solution to a visual or functional problem
Visually guiding humans through the unknown
Design is solving a problem
Design is solving a problem as awesomely as possible.
Design = simple effective presentation of content (data or information)
Design is a beautiful, public and visual way of presenting information in a way that gets the right notice from the right people.
it's the chance to bring to life dreams and ideas ready to be shared around the globe
Creating the impossible and Advancing in technology
design is the creation of a human-friendly appearance
Design is the aesthetic reinforcement of content and/or function
(Good design, anyway.) @futuraprime
For me #designis making life easier.
Design: the process of finding the most beautiful, effective, and useful way of shaping something.
the filtering of an idea into it's visual counterpart...i think
Remember when your mom straightened up your bow-tie just before your prom? That's my metaphor for design in a nut shell.
This article was a bit different than what you usually see right? That is what Drawar is all about. It's not about being different, it's about helping all of us dig deeper into what web design really represents. It thrives off its members contributions so if you like what you see consider becoming a Plus Member or Drawar Friend.
25 Comments
and then, boom, drawar hit the nail on the head - again! really, i couldn't agree more!! It's not how it looks, its how it works... or: how you come from A to B...
I'm amazed how many people see design as purely visual.
Anonymous@drawar You might as well want to read http://bit.ly/6wvZO8 There are many areas of design in software/web development alone.
Design is how something works, not how it looks.
But isn't how something looks part of the answer to the question? I think how it looks is part of the design and that is how it works. I work differently with a square steering wheel than a circular one wouldn't I and they look completely different.
I can't speak for Mike but...
As I said in my forum post (albeit briefly), how it looks is only part of what something is.
It may be a small or large part depending on what the aim of the process of design is. Is it a poster? Then it's almost entirely visual, but then again, how it looks isn't the poster. The poster is what it does, what a designer wanted to make an observer do, the visual medium is simply a language, a tool, an enabler.
I think this quote pretty much sums up my thoughts on this discussion going on here:
"Don't make something unless it is both necessary and useful; but if it is both necessary and useful, don't hesitate to make it beautiful."
And i wouldn't consider a squared steering wheel necessary nor useful at all! Conclusion: That a steering wheel is round isn't just aesthetics or the look or style of it. It's part of how it works, and that makes it a part of the design!
Design always be because of a men´s need. look at this example: Function 1 - the wheel was invented Function + style 2 - better wheels and better looking.
The first invention was for pure human need as the wood weapons created in pre history. Pure needs. If we look at the second example we´ve the wheel and we´ve the second need that is commercialism (better looking sells more!? perhaps) and that needs to be visual.
In my opinion design must be functional at the first step. In a second level must be visual. that´s the base.
3th can catch our emotions as Drawar wrote very well in his article (but this level requires a lot of study background about our target).
Design, like beauty, is subjective and there a way too many variables defining "design" to qualify it as ultimately and universally as good or bad.
For instance, you may have a well designed strategy on paper, but a tragically pitiful execution of it. Was it well designed? Debatable.
The earth was designed for man to inhabit and man designed to inhabit and propagate the earth. Yet too much of one can absolutely kill the other -- good design?
Humans still have a coccyx even though after twenty one centuries we've evolved beyond (or never needed) a tail.
That gadget you love, it'll be beautiful until the next iteration, technology improves or enough years pass, then it's a brick.
My point is, I think you can take anything and drill it up or down to a good or bad design with your own brand of feelings. If that's indeed the case, then ultimately, it's emotional and personal.
I think you have simplified wikipedia's definition of design. In a way, better.
I've seen some of the smartest design minds' answers to the question, and I'm not sure anyone ever really hits in on the head. A designer is essentially like an engineer, a planner, etc, but they also seek to bring beauty to their solutions.
It's easier to flip the question around on its head: What isn't design?
Design is also constrained to the knowledge and resources available at the time. Just look back at the devices that were used prior to the 20th century in medicine. In 20 years is chemotherapy going to be seen as an archaic, even dangerous way to treat cancer?
To bring it back to the web, look back at the sites developed in the mid-90s compared to today. Does any of that stand through the test of time?
The Blackberry was great design until everyone start pushing email. The iPhone was a stand alone in greatness until Google came around.
So, does great design only last for a while, or is it timeless?
"So, does great design only last for a while, or is it timeless?"
@Mark it i´ll be always aside with the human´s needs. Hard to point a time mark for his end...
Mark, you seem to be focusing on designs. Is design really the final outcome or the process and ideas behind the design?
Yesterday I assisted at a screening of Objectified. Every designer in the movie--not the guy from around the corner--had its own definition of design. Neither was wrong, yet all differed in one way or another.
Because it's too broad and influenced by so many factors--from the designer's personality to the environment surrounding the designed object--all attempts at giving a single answer to this question is bound to be either too vague, incomplete or utterly wrong.
I mean, what would someone new to design get from your definition or the one on Wikipedia?
Perhaps what design needs is not a definition, but a definition of what a definition of design may be depending on several factors.
What do you think?
I understand what you think but i think also that all things made for the man´s goodness can stay in the design field. And the field is huge :D
I understand what you think but i think also that all things made for the man´s goodness can stay in the design field. And the field is huge :D
I think that's too narrow. I think it's a mistake to limit design simply to humans. Aren't we designed ourselves through the process of evolution (or divine creation if you're into that sort of thing)?
Actually WiBu, my examples might be pointed toward the outcome of design, but what I was trying to get at was along the lines of what you're saying -- that the concept of "design" -- be it the process or the outcome of -- is way too wide a chasm to try pinpoint with one single definition.
I was also attempting to show that not all design ends up in an elegant or simple solution. Or, if it does, that elegant and simple solution can be, on another plane, complex and catastrophic.
AnonymousPaul Rand has a good definition here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51z-t7T0_6E
'The manipulation of form and content and it's relationship'
@WiBu But if you think it right that divine creation as churches, temples, chairs, ... all the object around the religion were made for us. Also that images were made only for adoration or to give a gift to the Gods ..... were made as human purpose - because they feel that need!
Its all around our needs. But we ´re our selfs and we create our needs as well... that´s why sometimes are created products that ppl dont no yet that they ´ll need and its design job to show to the people that this object is cool, new, better for this and for that it ´ll help you in this in that...bla bla bla...
So the needs have two faces or the process had two faces. starts from human needs and or the needs that the designer created on ppl.
Be around of the society needs and you´ll find lots of best design masterpieces...
Paul Rand is a men of graphic design... design can be more diverse :D
AnonymousThank you for the very nice article, Paul. Because of the editing nature of our work at Smashing Magazine, we regularly have problems with authors having very different backgrounds. In fact, we usually have different underststanding of what design means and how it should be addressed in the articles. In my personal opinion, design is first of all about communication. Either it should communicate a message or functionality, its main purpose is to serve a certain purpose. Aesthetics is important because it can support the visual aspect of design, but it's not crucial. I also like your interpretation of 'Design', Paul. Indeed, design is about answering questions; and good design is about answering questions in the most effective and functional way.
Even though you might be searching for the most elegant/perfect answer, one should consider that concepts such as these are held in peoples minds and personalities. So, one should design for the collective concepts, not just our own. Design is a social act.
AnonymousI never questioned a broad definition of design; problem arise with definition of role of a "designer" What does a designer do? The definition above suggests "everything" and everything a too strong promise for others to believe in. That is why designers are often placed in "aesthetics" box as it easy to understand their role in a project. Media and education play crucial role in this boxing showing "great design" as esthetically special objects. I'm very happy with "design thinking" trend, but it not yet on the mass market and probably will never be, as it not a simple concept to grasp and not something beautiful to look at. There is nothing wrong with association with beauty in the minds of the public if our clients will understand the wider definition. And articles like this one will help. Thank you!
Post A Wonderful Comment
To comment you need to take a couple of seconds to login or register. Seriously it takes seconds and if your comment is worth it, which I have no doubt that it is, then you should do it.
I think you're definition of design is certainly a lot more elegant than mine in the sidebar. This kind of article is hard to write, for me anyway, but you covered all the bases and certainly made me think.
What stuck out to me was "Don’t redesign just to do something new, redesign because you have a better answer to the question." Design as a word is taken to mean many things by many people and misconceptions can lead design astray. I appreciate you encouraging people to think about what design really is. Hopefully this will lead to clearer and more effective thinking about how design can help and individual or a client, beyond aesthetics or emotion.