Large Numbers Podcasts

Design Guy, Episode 1, Intro Episode

Design Guy

Download Episode 1 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is our premier episode, so, by way of introduction I'd like to explain what the show is about, and how you'll benefit. We live in a design-driven age. We've witnessed a productivity revolution and the spawning of vast amounts of new products and services. Along side of that, we see the rise of design as the high ground or competitive advantage, the differentiator, really, that allows business to stake out and hold unique market positions longer. The other amazing phenomenon that's occurred is this power-to-the-people shift that places creation tools in the hands of us all. Desktop publishing, of course, is old, old news by now. But across the board, whether your arena is the graphic arts or publishing or music or film, the cost of entry and the ease with which people from all walks of life can participate has become democratized. The tools just get better and cheaper every day. So, there's a sense in which everyone is a designer, or at least it feels that way. We're all design guys, and I mean that in a gender neutral way, of course. The impetus for this new program, therefore, is to recognize these facts, and help make the principles of design accessible to professionals and ordinary folks, alike. Now, there's lots of stuff out there about design, including podcasts. So, why this one? Well, often, these programs focus on technique. Others keep us abreast of industry happenings. And, while these, indeed, are helpful, and while I'll probably refer you to these programs from time to time, that kind of information tends to have a short shelf life. What I'll endeavor to do, instead, is point up the timeless stuff. I want to impart information that doesn't change. Ideas that don't expire with successive software releases or date themselves to current events. This way we can concern ourselves with principles that'll stick in our long term memory, rules we can recall when we've lost our way, creatively speaking. Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, If you learn only methods, you'll be tied to your methods, but if you learnprinciples you can devise your own methods. My own background is graphic design. And while I'll be speaking to it in particular, I think we'll find that many principles relate to design in general. So, whether you're engaged in print or web or film, or anything else, a lot of these concepts will apply because they transcend the media you're working in. A few words about the format of the show....And I know some of you have got to be wondering - how are we supposed to discuss visual media in an audio format? I suppose it's a reasonable concern. But, what I intend to do, is to point to the pictures we've all got in our heads. The coca-cola logo. Or the proportions of a human being. And I think we'll do just fine. As far as length is concerned..My aim is to keep each episode brief, so that in mere minutes we can get a new concept under our belts. And hopefully, over the course of time, some lightbulbs will appear above your head and you'll have some new tools to apply to your craft and some markers to guide you on your way. Until next time, this is design guy. Thanks for listening. My Podcast Alley feed! {pca-a353756b8967b6d3c0ae742305b97218}Subscribe in iTunes - it's free! read less

Latest Episodes for this Channel

Design Guy, Episode 1, Intro Episode

Sat August 02 2008

Download Episode 1 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is our premier episode, so, by way of introduction I'd like to explain what the show i... read more

Design Guy, Episode 30, Seeing Unity (Gestalt)

Fri August 01 2008

Download Episode 30 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. ... read more

Download Episode 30 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. We're talking about Unity. And when we began this discussion last episode, we said that unity is a goal of composition - unity describes how a multiplicity of elements combine to achieve one efffect. And this concept hearkens back to the fundmental definition of design we layed down in our earliest episodes, when we said that Design is the process of creating order out of chaos, as we fashion many disparate elements into an ordered unit. But how does Unity work? How is it that one design is perceived to be more unified than another? And that's the key phrase, "perceived to be." Because this discussion lands us squarely in the territory of perception. And it's all perception, when you think of it. Our designs are nothing but bits of paper and ink, or illuminated pixels. It's what our minds of make of those bits and pieces that matters. And while we may not entirely understand how our minds work, we know we can aid cognition by understanding some principles of perception. So, today I'd like to introduce the ideas behind what is called Gestalt Theory. And don't let the terminology scare you, Gestalt Theory is concerned with how our minds connect the dots, so to speak, forming a coherent whole out of incomplete parts. A puzzle with missing pieces still provides enough relational and contextual clues for us to discern that emergent whole. And you may recall that we touched on this idea somewhat in the episode on Shape, when I said that this was a cognitive imperative, the way our minds compulsively and continuously make meaning out of stimuli around us, even connecting random things. And I can't help being reminded of the scene in Woody Allen's Take The Money and Run, when he tells his analyst that the ink blot looks like two elephants making love to a male glee club. But I digress. So, what Gestalt theory does is make much of context and relationships. When it comes to meaning, it's all in the WAY we put things together. Where is the element? What's next to it? Does this element stand alone or is it part of a group? These are the kinds of questions that are important. One Gestalt analogy is how we can take a collection of individual musical notes and organize them as a unified melody. We can even transpose it to another key, which makes us use a different set of notes, yet we still recognize the same melody. The unity is persistent because the relationship of the notes has not changed. The intervals and duration and sequence are still the same. So, carrying this idea over to design, it makes us think in compositional terms, because the unity that we hope to create on the page has altogether to do with context and relationships. But more on that next time, I think we have enough to chew on for today. For now, let me remind you that a transcript of today's show can be found at designguyshow.blogspot.com. Music is by kcentricity.com. If you're enjoying this series, don't forget to click subscribe in iTunes, so that you're automatically notified of new installments. And while you're there, consider leaving a comment at the profile page, which will encourage others to tune in, and I'll thank you in advance for doing so. And I thank you for tuning in today.Subscribe in iTunes - it's free! read less

Design Guy, Episode 29, Unity: Out of Many, One

Thu July 10 2008

Download Episode 29 Design Guy, here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply.... read more

Download Episode 29 Design Guy, here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. We concluded our recent series on balance with a quotation from Alex White's book, The Elements of Graphic Design. White tells us: "Balance is an important route to achieving unity in design. If the various elements are seen to be in balance, the design will look unified. It will make a single impression. If a design is out of balance, its constituent parts will be more visible than the overall design." (end of quotation.) These remarks provide a nice segue into the topic of unity. And they also echo the very first definition we laid down for design itself. To refresh your memories, we said that Design is the process of creating order out of chaos, of taking many disparate elements and forming them into an ordered unit, or a unified whole. So, that idea of wholeness, the E Pluribus Unum of Design, if you will, where from many things we attain one thing, or we achieve one effect is a very important concept both to have and to maintain as we're working. Especially on projects of any scope or scale. My own work experience has consisted of large-scale projects, spanning months or even years, contracts requiring multiple teams of people to execute, with a variety of taskings. When you find yourself in this situation, you can easily miss the forest for the trees. You find that you're working on your own tree, and that, after a while, that's potentially all you can see. So achieving a unified effect becomes an even greater challenge on large, complex projects. And this is why direction is necessary. We need directors on large projects to maintain alignment toward a unified vision of an end product. Movies are a perfect example of this. And the more you think about it, it seems almost miraculous that so many elements can come together so well in spite of the scale of a modern motion picture. There's the music, the special effects, the casting, and the myriad of other components of such a production. Then there's the screenplay itself - often having been passed through many hands after having been in development hell for years. Then there's the director's vision, the studio's input, the test audience results that influence the final product. It's a miracle that films turn out as coherent as they tend to be. And so it's also no wonder that there are many films that just don't work. Whose elements don't come together gracefully at all. But that's the singular idea I want to impart today about unity. Unity achieves one effect. Everything works as a balanced whole. On the other hand, where unity is weak, we find ourselves too conscious of the parts, we're distracted by the parts and pieces. We see the trees instead of the forest. And again, going with the movie analogy, this is a bit like when a supporting actor winds up stealing all the scenes, upstaging all the other actors in the ensemble. Instead of the blend of a strong ensemble, we're aware of strong actors and weak ones, and it spoils the unity. Every link in the chain has to hold its weight, or unity is broken. But let's drive this concept home with a quote from Robin Landa's Graphic Design Solutions: "Unity is one of the goals of composition. Unity allows the viewer to see an integrated whole, rather than unrelated parts. We know from studies in visual psychology that the viewer wants to see unity; if a viewer cannot see unity in a design, he or she will lose interest." (end of quotation). Well that's if for today. Let me remind you that a transcript of today's show may be found at the webpage, at designguyshow.blogspot.com. Music is by kcentricity.com. And just a note about the show entries at iTunes. I've been bumping up against a 25 show limit that is a result of a limitation that, I believe, traces itself to my blogger page, where the feed originates. This means that every time a new episode shows up at iTunes, an early episodes d read less

Design Guy, Episode 28, Balance On Balance

Thu June 19 2008

Download Episode 28 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. ... read more

Download Episode 28 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. We're in the midst of a discussion on balance, and in the previous episodes we discussed how elements act as optical weights within certain balancing schemes - and those schemes are typically classified as either symmetrical or asymmetrical. And we spoke about some of the implications and the effects - the feel that we get - out of those schemes. Alex White, in his book, The Elements of Graphic Design, defines balance, and also sums up those balancing schemes as follows: "Balance, or equilibrium, is the state of equalized tension. It is not necessarily a state of calm....Symmetrical, of formal, balance is vertically centered and is visually equivalent on both sides. Symmetrical designs are static and evoke feelings of classicism, fomality, and constancy. Asymmetrical, or informal, balance attracts attention and is dynamic....(and it) requires a variety of sizes and careful distribution of white space. Asymmetrical designs evoke feelings of modernism, forcefulness, and vitality.' (end of quotation.) And that's more or less what we concluded, except that we emphasized the notion that if symmetry is essentially static, then asymmetry, on the other hand, suggests movement, because the equilibrium we've achieved is a dynamic one, made up of unequal parts, in an imperfectly resolved layout. Now, before we get too conclusive about this distinction, I'd suggest that symmetrical designs can suggest motion also. Think of a paint spatter shape. Now if the splash radiates out pretty equally, we could call it an example of formal balance, or its close cousin, radial balance (to introduce a new term), nevertheless its shape is highly suggestive of action and movement. Not to mention the choice of color and and other elements that we could employ to further heighten our sense of dynamism. Like a tie-died t-shirt, symmetrical designs can be extremely dynamic if there are other things going on besides balance. So, I wanted to provide my own counterpoint to the general truisms that we outlined before. Now, finally, there's one more kind of balance we should touch on before moving on to another topic. This one is called "Crystallographic Balance" otherwise known as "Overall balance." This describes those compositions that are set up in a mosaic or grid. If you're familiar with Mondrian, think of one of his grid compositions, consisting of primary colors and black grid lines. Or maybe Warhol's painting of Mao Tse Tung, where the same portrait appears in three rows of three. These can be done well, but in general they tend to lack any point of emphasis or distinct focal point, so graphic designers will want to create a better sense of hierarchy and order by staying away from the purest form of Overall balance, which tends to just have too many elements everywhere. By creating a compromised version of overall balance, with less elements, you stand a better chance of establishing focus and contrast and reading order. I'll sum up by quoting White once more, when he says: "Balance is an important route to achieving unity in design. If the various elements are seen to be in balance, the design will look unified. It will make a single impression. If a design is out of balance, its constituent parts will be more visible than the overall design." (end of quotation.) But that's it for now. Sorry for the delay on getting this one out, but my life has been a bit, out of balance with various commitments, so I'm happy to get another show out today. Let me remind you that notes and a transcript are available at designguyshow.blogspot.com. Music is by kcentricity.com. Well, I thank you again for listening, and I hope you'll join us next time. References Alex White, The Elements of Graphic Design, Allworth Press, 2002 Subscribe in iTunes - it's free! read less

Design Guy, Episode 27, Asymmetrical or Informal Balance

Sat May 24 2008

Download Episode 27 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. ... read more

Download Episode 27 Design Guy here, welcome to the show. This is the program that explores timeless principles of design and explains them simply. Now these days we've taken up the principle of Balance. And having established the concept of optical weight, and the way our page becomes a kind of balancing beam as we add visual elements to it, we turned our attention to the idea of Formal or Symmetrical balance. And we described this as a mirror image type of arrangement, where elements are symmetrically balanced on a page with respect to its central axis. And wee also pointed the implications of formal balance, the effect achieved by symmetry. Which is a feeling of equilibrium, and a sense of stasis and stability. And if I'm recapping too many concepts, too quickly, just take some time to listen to the previous programs, where I explain each idea in turn. But moving on from there, the next concept we need to identify is Asymmetrical Balance, also called Informal Balance. And the typical example of this kind of balance is when one large element is counterbalanced by several smaller objects. Or if you'll recall the role of value that we described, we may have a situation where a smaller, dark object, is counterbalanced by a larger, light-colored object. At first glance, we might think these kinds of compositions aren't balanced, because they don't have the obvious symmetry that makes the situation feel all the more stable. But on closer examination, we realize that the teeter totter of our page is balanced, after all. And though the objects distributed on either side of the central axis may be very different from each other, the optical weight of each side appears to be about even. An even more clever example of assymetrical balance is when a large object on one side of the page is balanced by a smaller object placed at the very far end of the opposite side, mimicking the physics of leverage. But, as we explained last time, the visual designer is usually more concerned with the effects or implications of the type of balance being employed. And where we said last time that Formal balance imparts a conservative and a stable feeling to a composition, Informal balance, on the other hand, with its lack of symmetry, achieves quite the opposite. In fact, the effect is what I'd call a dynamic sense of order. And that's because there are differences in the page. While it feels resolved in terms of balance, it isn't equalized, the way water seeks its own level. And in that sense it's unresolved, but in a good way. It's got a dynamism, and so informal balance implies movement. So, look around. Pay attention to compositions in ads and books and magazines. And you'll see what I mean. Those ads for Absolut Vodka, with their perfectly centered single bottle, and the perfectly centered caption are always symetrical and formally balanced. And that stable feeling we infer from those layouts is a good thing, because that bottle has never once appeared to be in danger of tipping over and spilling its contents in all the years that we've been seeing it. Then scout around some more and you'll typically see many more examples of informal balance, and while the pages feel stable enough, you'll notice the dynamism I'm talking about. They almost seem to move, they're dynamic. And you'll notice, that these layouts generally tend to be less staid and formal and conservative feeling. Now, as a final note on this formal versus informal balance thing, I just want to be clear that my intent is not to pit one against the other, as if one is superior to the other. The decision to choose one over the other is often an intuitive one, but where we're very aware of our thought process, the decision should be based on suitability. It's about what kind of feeling we want to convey in the composition itself. It's interesting to note that Jan Tschichold(1), one of the titans of typographic design, was the author of a landmark book titled, The New Typography, back in the read less

Large Numbers Podcasts

Design Guy, Episode 1, Intro Episode

Latest Episodes for this Channel

Large Numbers Podcast Channels