Disclaimer: This is a paper I wrote two years ago when I first heard about vista.  I was interested in online communities and was fiddling around with different platforms to create one which is where this idea came from.

VSPACE

Introduction:

Virtual words have become one of the largest growing and most profitable franchises not only in regards to the gaming industry, but also social networking.  These digital worlds are becoming a common part of our daily lives and could soon very well replace our “cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and hangouts”[1].  Though these digital worlds cannot yet be considered to be one of the Great Places as Raymond Oldenburg suggests, it is safe to assume that virtual worlds have made a significant impact on a large enough population around the world that they should always be considered as alternate forms of communication and congregation.  These virtual worlds become part of a larger mediascape[2] which allows a flow of information and ideas across a wide variety of people and places which does not happen as easily in the real world where we still have to travel and meet in person occasionally to discuss ideas.  Virtual worlds tend to have two modes of distribution; either the content for the world is downloaded as a stand-alone program (FLYFF, Lineage, World of Warcraft) or they are browser based engines which you can run while being online (Puzzle Pirates, Pogo Games).   In order to make a game that is widely available, with little effort to acquire the game, I propose a virtual world in the form of a Microsoft Windows Vista Gadget; a virtual world created within the restraints of a gadget could automatically and easily be integrated into a large system of computers.  The world would be called VSpace.

Background:

I would like to start with the current state of virtual worlds, and MMOG’s; though very similar I’m going to use the former to describe communities based around social networking, and the latter to describe the videogame oriented online worlds.  Currently the largest virtual world based around social networking is Facebook with “has more than 69 million active users worldwide.”[3] Facebook is a web based social community which allows to create public or private profiles to connect within college, job, and town networks.  Other major virtual worlds for social networking are communities like MySpace and Friendster (also web based communities where users create profiles to connect with other people), and then social communities based around animated avatars within a self contained graphical world such as Habbo Hotel and IMVU (both of which allow you to create graphical representations of the user’s liking to interact with other avatars).  All of these examples have been targeted at various social groups.  MySpace was originally intended to attract young adults just as Facebook originally targeted only college audiences.

All of these virtual worlds and MMO communities are only available to a person if they log onto their respective websites, or are referred to by a friend as an incentive to join these networks.   My proposal however, would be a part of the many features that Windows Vista already offers thus immediately eliminating the effort it takes to find these social communities and it has an already established niche; those that own computers running Vista (all Dell and HP computers have Vista as their standard OS before shipping).  This would allow a mass distribution of the virtual world (the product) with less of a need for startup advertising, thus allowing money to be saved for other enterprises.  The virtual world I am proposing will incorporate the creation of both profiles/avatars with not only an avatar based interaction system, but also a web based community for when users aren’t logged onto their avatars.

Description:

VSpace would be a virtual world based within the context of a Windows Vista Gadget application.  When a person buys a computer with Vista as the OS, they go through a series of setup options where you register your product, name your computer, and establish what sort of internet connection.  After the establishment of an internet connection, a person would immediately be prompted to create an avatar to represent themselves.  Before being fully able to create their avatar, a person would have to agree to the usual terms of service which apply to most all online communities; afterwards a user would be able to create an avatar that physically resembles them or their imagined personalities.

(Picture from google images, no source to image)

To run Windows Vista properly, 2gigs of ram are needed which should theoretically cover the amount of computer power that it takes to run a widget such as this.  The purpose of this concept is so that Windows Vista users can interact with each other the moment they log onto their new computers for the first time.  If they’re not used to the new Vista system, they can find other users through the virtual world to ask about these questions if they’re not sure about the information offered in an online FAQ.  Though ‘googling’ for answers has become widely popular, many people still prefer asking other people the answers for questions.  Gameplay would be focused around the avatar that you create; the avatar would be able to walk into the environments of other people using the gadget and challenge them to games or make an attempt at conversation.   Each Character would have its own customizable environment within the gadget where users would have to pay for items if they wanted unique rooms for their avatars.

(Picture from http://www.viviannesart.us/Images/vivgallery/waLL4.jpg)

Key Features:

-Easy installation and character creation: The installation of the virtual world would be part of the setup when you first launch your computer with easy and simple instructions.

-Large community to interact with: considering the large volume of computers which automatically come with Vista, with millions of computers sold each day it would make it easy for this virtual world to get off the ground with a large community.

-No Monthly Subscription: you only need to pay for the items you want!: The gadget would be free to download and install, however to customize your personal environment you would need to page a specified amount of money for credit.  With credit you could then buy the items you like.

-Ability to take interactive experience to the next level by challenging your VSPACE friends to games on the Microsoft Gaming Network: Users would be able to move into other environments of VSPACE users where they could either chat or challenge them to games offered by the Microsoft Gaming Network

-Continue talking to your friends on our web based network using Windows Live Space:  Windows Live Space would allow integration with your regular profile and the avatar that you create.

-Virtually no lag with recommended Vista system requirements: To run properly, computers that come with Windows Vista more often than naught have at least 2 gigs of ram and a decent processer, graphics card, and motherboard to support the extensive 3D options that Vista uses.

Community Features:

Windows Vista sidebar gadgets tend to automatically obtain your area code so VSPACE would be able to determine a list of ten users within a certain radius of your zip code.  Your avatar would then be able to either abruptly walk onto the screen of another VSPACE user, or send for an invite to join them within their environment for conversation, gaming, or whatever the user wishes to interact for.  The community would allow a buddy list system where you can automatically ‘warp’ to rooms that you have been in previously.  I would also propose text based chat with the option of VOIP.  The actual gadget size would more than likely not be able to support a system where large amounts of text are visible, so voice chat would be the best alternative for a means of communication.

VSPACE would be intergraded with the Windows Live Spaces where you would not only have your own profile, but a picture of yourself and your avatar.  There would be a series of privacy options which would determine how much information you would allow to be visible to other users of VSPACE or Windows Live Spaces at any given time.  The framework that I have proposed for this game to operate in “provides the foundation to explore different sections of the demographic [of VSPACE users] that are motivated differently, and whether certain motivations are more highly correlated with”[4] different types of users.  VSPACE features such as the ability to integrate with not only immersive environments, but also a large gaming community to appeal to a large demographic.

Genre:

The genre that this virtual world would fall under would be that of a Metaverse; “a fictional virtual world, where humans, as avatars, interact with each other and software agents, in a three-dimensional space that uses the metaphor of the real world.”[5] A Metaverse would be useful for my earlier description of VSPACE because this simulated world would allow a system that would make users feel connected in a world that closely resembles their own.  Avatars would be simple 3D polygon models with humanistic features and environment options which closely resemble modern day cities, suburbs, and countries.  VSPACE would also follow the “Open World” mode of a game where users would be allowed to do as they pleased within the boundaries of the actual virtual world.

[2] “Modernity at Large” Arjun Appadurai

[3] ^{a b c} Statistics. Facebook.

[4] “The Psychology of Massively Multi-User OnlineRole-Playing Games: Motivations, Emotional Investment, Relationships and Problematic Usage” Nick Yee.  PG 12.

[5] “Metaverse”   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaverse

No related posts.

A couple of days ago I saw someone had posted a story to: “People used to stand for something” by Jordan Allen on my tweetdeck which soon got me wondering: “What do I, as a designer, stand for?”. My natural reflex started tossing adjectives in my mind such as ethical, moral, sustainable, green, socially conscious, but they’re just pretty words and it left me wondering what I really stand for in the design world.

There are two kinds of designers. Designers who design to pay bills, and designers who design for something greater. Most, if not all, want to be the latter; yet most, if not all, fall under the former. There is nothing wrong with using your design expertise as a means to keep up with rent. It’s something we all have to face. But a mentor once posed the question to me: What’s more important: your rent or your morals?

My response at the time was my rent.  I was also only 18 and despite having worked since the age of 14 to support myself financially I was naive as to how overwhelming something as simple as rent could be.  I quickly found out that my morals fell through the floor when it came to taking any design job regardless of how morally, ethically, and irresponsible the project.  It was only in my later years at Parsons the New School for Design that I did a complete 180 back to my morals.  I started taking design research courses, sociology, anthropology, pyschology related to art, philosophy, and business classes and all of these things helped me not only redefine myself as a designer, but as a person.  

Much to my dismay I found that there were only a small number of young designers who had even bothered to change themselves in this manner.  Not only in New York City, but all over America.  Design to them was about trends, money, and fame.  While these there are important, they should no way dictate your workflow or creative process.  From my learning, I’ve reasoned that design is not a process to make -something-, it’s a philosophy and processed used to find creative, ethical, and sustainible solutions to complex problems that exist in our world.  But what I see a lot of now, especially within the online design community, is trend following trend and ass-kissing received by more ass-kissing.  

To free myself of the litany and excuses plagued by those in my own field, I’ve established a set of personal guidelines and rules that I’ve sworn to follow as a designer.

1. I will not follow trends unless they apply relevantly to the project I am working on
2. Failure is always possible, and I need to know when I’m in over my head.
3. Whatever I design: product, graphic, system, it will be ethical and beneficial to the correct group of people it targets.
4. I will not let my designs and design skillset suffer because of oppinions of others in my field.
5. Yet I will always understand the importance of constructive criticism made by my peers. 
6. I will practice my skills as a designer at any chance I get applying them to any situation I can.
7. I must remember that my designs are never for myself, but for something greater.
8. Perfection as designer means there is a limit to how good I can become, I will seek to -always- better my skills and learn new things.
9. I will consult and converse with not only those in my field, but those in fields far from my own to grasp a better understanding as people as a whole.
10. I will stand up for my design work when it is necessary and I know in my heart that it is right.
11. Finally, I will remind myself that design can’t save the world.  But it can help move things in the right direction.

Now I ask of you, designers, artists, creatives, and intellectuals…do you have guidelines and morals you follow in your own work?  

If so post them here and let’s get a discussion going about your own self reflection on yourselves as individuals.

No related posts.

Just because your client is paying your bills doesn’t mean you have to be their slave. You’re not just a designer because you’re good at doing what you’re told. Sometimes you have to stand up and tell your client that they’re wrong. Clients might have a vision of what they want, and most of the time they are correct because their visions are informed by their vast knowledge of their business, clients, and field in which they belong. Yet because of their over abundance of knowledge they might overlook certain factors that go into a logo, new technologies available in web design, or even trends that haven’t been alerted to them. So how do you go about telling clients that they’re wrong?

1. Make other suggestions. “Your idea sounds good, but what if you did this.” or do a mock up of something potentially better.

2. Let them down nicely. “I like your concept, but I’m not sure if it will ____”

3. Show them the facts. “I understand you want to do ___ but the impact of ___ has been shown to give better results.”

Remember that your work is a representation of your ability to perform as a designer.  If you design something poorly just because a client wanted it, you’re still designing something poorly which could cost you a job in the future.  How do you designers tell client’s that they’re wrong?  I would love to hear your responses.

No related posts.

“Logo Design”

Pixel Logo

Online Logo.com 

Logo Works

Logo Design Gurus

LogoDesign.com

LogoBee

Log Technology

Logo Tree

“Company logo design”

Rewriteables

PWC Webmasters

IQ Logo

Prize Logos

Business Logos

“Professional Logo Design”

E-Logo Design

Logo Design Creation

Logo Labs

Logo Design Magic

Logo Design Pros

Logo Design Team

 

I now pose the question to you, the design community, why and how on earth to the most popular corporate logo design companies can get away with atrocious logos?

Related posts:

1. 18 Awesome Logos Using the Color Orange Orange is by far my favorite color, but sadly I...

 
I expected that with all of the people on twitter, especially since the fact that the majority of the people on my list are tech-heads/geeks/designers/programmers that someone w
ould have either had experience with the HTC Diamond / Touch Pro or would at least have been able to point me in the right direction. Yet the only reponse I was met with was:

The rest of the dialogue afterwards is irrelevant, but it got me thinking. “Fred you sexy beast, why don’t you want a trendy iPhone?”. So let’s talk about why as a designer I make a conscious, ethical, and well informed decision to back my reasoning behind why I refuse to get Apple’s smartphone.

Note: I have nothing against Apple products, I think Mac computer’s are wonderful for graphic design work and movie editing. I prefer PC’s for 3d animation, programming, gaming, & personal customization. Both products have their specific uses. The product isn’t the issue here, it’s the brand.

1. Androgynous.

I’m a man. Despite the mockery I’ve made of hipsters and designers alike with my avatar photo I don’t wear tight skinny jeans, have real thick rimmed black glasses and I hate my coffee black and above $1. The iPhone’s smooth, slick, and minimalistic design is completely devoid of being associated with either gender. Despite it’s rounded edges it doesn’t cater towards the female market nor does large viewing screen it’s abundance of technology/applications cater towards the technical male crowd. The iPhone successfully breaks down gender barriers and is in essence a phone for men and women alike between the ages of 17 and 35. This is excellent since it’s exactly what Apple wanted. But I want a phone that looks like a man. You might think of this as chaunvistic, egotistical, etc but I disagree; I want a phone that doesn’t associate me with people wearing androgynous American Apparel clothing or movement restricting clothing.

2. The White Hand of God.

I don’t take anything personally, you could call me any racial epithet you wanted and I wouldn’t even bat an eyelash, I probably even have more racial jokes about my ethnic background than anyone on the planet. With that said, let’s talk about Apple’s White Hand of God.  Below is one of the apple backed advertisement’s for the iPhone:

I only need one picture to point something out.  If you go back and look at all of Apple’s advertising for it’s product’s you’ll notice they employ the white hand of god as their central motif when releasing new products.  You’re probably quick to call bullshit; to which I would suggest you stop freelancing, take a course on signage/semotics/advertisements/sociology and then take another look at their advertising methods.  Even so, this isn’t what bother’s me.  It’s the fact that Apple had the nerve when coming under fire for not advertising to other ethniticies to use this ad:

They even had the nerve to use this slogan with it “A little video for everyone.” (2007) used to market the third generation iPod nano”(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apple_Inc._slogans)

When did Apple get this smug with their branding and advertising methods?  I swore on that day that the iPod would never enter my household.  I mean really, the “White Hand of God” offering “A little video for everyone” and using the black ipod nano?  If you think I’m stretching it, I once again point you towards graduate level courses in semoitics.  Apple has an amazing marketing team, they completely understand what they did.  I know they don’t have racist intentions, but they’re distinctly not marketing to me and as such I will not endorse their iPods and iPhones. (Computers are a different story, I need them to edit in Final Cut).

3. Steve Job’s War on Buttons.

My last reason is more of an awkward quirk.  This whole thing about no button’s that Apple has is compltely beyond me.  There’s a reason keyboards have buttons that make noises, there’s a reason that cell phones have buttons that make noises.  It’s completely uncessary but phone designers go OUT OF THEIR WAY to make sure that when you hit a button it makes a noise.  Why?!  It’s because people like to know they’re doing something.  The act of pushing a button and hearing a noise means that their physical action caused a reaction.  And though it might seem simple and illogical that something like this is necessary, quickly remind yourself that human beings are by nature slightly illogical.  I like buttons.  Maybe it’s just because I grew up in the gamer’s generation.

As a final note: Don’t be a flame troll. =]

Related posts:

1. Touch Screen Phones are Dead to Me: Nokia 7205 Intrigue As those of you know, I’ve been meaning to get...

Why  they are important:  Possibly one the the most influential designers of the century, Maeda’s personal and public works offer insight into not only what design is but what it should aspire to be.   

Biography: John Maeda is a world-renowned graphic designer, visual artist, and computer scientist at the MIT Media Lab, and is a founding voice for “simplicity” in the digital age. He was announced as the next President of the Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) starting June 2, 2008.  (http://plw.media.mit.edu)

Works: The Laws of Simplicity, Creative Code, ‘Design By Numbers

Edward Tufte: Information Design & Architecture

Why  they are important: This man was one of the most provacative thinkers in regards to information design and architecture, his work became the best example of how to relate data of any kind to graphics without distorting the data because of the imagrey.

Biography:Edward Tufte teaches statistics, graphic design, and political economy at Yale University. His books include The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Political Control of the Economy, Data Analysis for Politics and Policy, and Size and Democracy (with Robert A. Dahl). He has prepared evidence for several jury trials, and has worked on information design and statistical matters for IBM, The New York Times, Newsweek, Hewlett-Packard, CBS, NBC, the Bureau of the Census, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, International Paper, and New Jersey Transit. He is a fellow of the American Statistical Association and has held fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation and the Center for Advanced Studies in Behavioral Sciences. He founded Graphics Press in 1983. (http://www.usatt.org/rseguine/tufte/bio.html)

Works: Napolean March Diagram, “The Visual Display of Quantitative Information”

Eric Zimmerman: Game and Interactive Design

Why  they are important: A pioneer in game design practice and theory;  Zimmerman stands as a great example that great games have nothing to do with how good they look, but rather how much fun they are.

Biography: game designer and the co-founder and CEO of Gamelab, a computer game development company, which is known for the game Diner Dash. Each year Zimmerman hosts the Game Design Challenge at the Game Developers Conference. He is also the co-author of 4 books including Rules of Play with Katie Salen, which was published in November 2004. He has taught at universities including MIT, the University of Texas at Austin, Parsons School of Design, New York University, Rhode Island School of Design and School of Visual Arts.  Zimmerman is a director of the RE:PLAY series of events and activities on gaming that included an exhibition, conference and accompanying book. The first online game he helped create was a collaboration with Word.com called SiSSYFiGHT 2000.

Works: “The Rules of Play”, Diner Dash

Arjun Appadurai: Design Ethics

Why  they are important: Ethical design is something hard to come by.  With all of fields of design becoming more and more popular it is easy for designers to lose sight of what it means to design something properly.  Appadurai has written countless essays and books tackling the topic of what it truly means to design by ethical standards.  

Biography: Arjun Appadurai serves as Senior Advisor for Global Initiatives at The New School in New York City, where he also holds a Distinguished Professorship as the John Dewey Professor in the Social Sciences. Until recently, Arjun Appadurai was the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs at The New School.  Appadurai is the founder and now the President of PUKAR (Partners for Urban Knowledge Action and Research), a non-profit organization based in and oriented to the city of Mumbai (India). (www.appadurai.com)

Works: “Fear of Small Numbers: An Essay on the Geography of Anger”, PUKAR (Partners for Urban Knowledge, Action and Research), PUBLIC CULTURE

Andy Switky: Design for Asian Markets

Why  are they important: With the rise of Asian populations, commerce, and design; many designers across the globe have adjusted their products and designs to find a place in this new booming marketplace.  Andy Switky is an expert of creating and innovating products and spaces for this market and is a great place to look for inspiration when it comes to designing for other cultures.

Biography: Andy Switky is an associate partner and the former founding manager of IDEO’s Shanghai office. For nearly 10 years, he has led IDEO’s manufacturing discipline, a group of engineers and scientists who inspire clients and designers with new ways of thinking about materials, processes, and mass production. During his tenure at IDEO, Andy has worked on and managed many types of programs, from traditional product development of consumer, industrial, and medical products, to rethinking teaching and learning in pharmaceutical manufacturing. When not recovering from intercontinental jet lag, he enjoys playing the trumpet and piano as well as long-distance road cycling. (http://www.ideo.com)

Works: 

Bill Moggridge: User Interface Design

Why  are they important: User interface design is easily one of the hardest fields to grasp for any designer, you have to juggle the task of being both functional and engaging and all the time remain human in your design efforts and results.  Bill Moggridge manages to do all three and shows his UI skills with expertise in his work.

Biography: Bill Moggridge founded his design firm in London in 1969, adding a second office in 1979 in Palo Alto, in the heart of California’s Silicon Valley. He designed the first laptop computer, the GRiD Compass, and pioneered interaction design as a discipline. In 1991, he merged his company with those of David Kelley and Mike Nuttall to form IDEO. Bill has been active in design education throughout his career, notably as visiting professor in interaction design at the Royal College of Art in London, and consulting associate professor in the Design program at Stanford University. He is most interested in what people want, who they are, and how they interact with other people, things, and places. His book, Designing Interactions, is available from The MIT Press and was named one of the 10 Best Innovation and Design Books of 2006 by BusinessWeek.

Works:

Roshi Givechi: Branded Experiences

Why  are they important: The lovely Roshi Givechi finds pleasure in designing branded experiences.  Ever wonder why you feel nostalgic walking into a McDonalds?  She’s the reason why.

Biography: Roshi Givechi is a design director and associate partner at IDEO. She leads IDEO’s storytelling discipline, a cross-functional push for deeper engagement with clients and other stakeholders through all forms of storytelling. With roots in communication, interaction, and new media design, Roshi works to explore and define how people interact with objects, space, services, and each other. She has co-taught cross-disciplinary design at the California College of the Arts, has designed websites at Microsoft and MSNBC, frequently speaks at conferences, and often coaches IDEO workshop clients on ways to innovate. (http://www.ideo.com)

Works: “Impact: Inspiring Graphic Design through Human Behaviors” , “The Saving Grace” Innovation 2007

Dana Cho: Environments Design

Why  are they important:  Designing spaces and environments is another way of thinking about user interface design.  Only envrionment design focuses on how a person interacts within a space, rather than how a user interacts with an object or graphical creation.  Dana Cho excels designing experiences, urban planning, and social interactions.

Biography: Dana Cho is an Associate Partner and leads a group of designers who are passionate about Design of Community and Branded Experiences in Palo Alto. Dana helps designers and clients think about the emotional experience between brand and consumer – as an avid consumer who cries easily, this feels quite right. She has led large-scale programs for Mayo Clinic, Nike, The Ritz-Carlton and Gap Inc., bringing together multi-disciplinary teams in a human-centered approach to healthcare, hospitality and retail customer experiences. Dana began her career in architecture and urban planning, with an undergraduate degree from MIT and a Master of Architecture from Harvard University, where her thesis work was carried out under Rem Koolhaas. She has taught classes and lectured at California College of Arts. (http://www.ideo.com)

Works: “Going Off the Beaten Path for New Design Ideas”,  “From Plague to Paradigm: Designing Sustainable Retail Environments”

No related posts.

1. The job’s payout is too good to resist
2. You’re fresh out of college / freelancing and are willing to take any project, large or small.
3. You’ve done something like it before on a personal/smaller scale.
4. You think taking on a big project will make you a better designer.

While these may be valid reasons, they all seem to fall short when a design is truly faced with a project they knew little to nothing about.  The steps to avoid getting into this sort of situation are just as simple as the alluring reasons above:

1. Write down a list of your skills and rate them on a scale of your choosing.
2. Know your design process, how long it takes you to complete a project, etc.
3. Understand your limitations.
4. Know that you can fail at any given moment.

Try as we might, the above reasons aren’t enough to stop designers from taking on projects they shouldn’t, so there are ways to get around this if you’re ever in the situation:

1. ASK FOR HELP.  A good designer always has a pool of EDUCATED peers to ask for advice.  Worst case scenario is you have to bring them in on the project and pay them part of your cut.  But this prevents you from looking bad in your client’s eyes and you might establish a relationship with an other designer to form a team.
2. HONESTY – Tell your client that you can’t complete the project and offer them a list of other designers that can.  If you’re going to bow out of a project at least leave them with options as to what to do without you.
3. READ – As tempting as it is to just Google “How to design this and that” and get a bunch of search results to blog tutorials on designing various things, go out and get a real book published by actual designers who have been in the field and are accredited for their methodology and skills.  

What do you guys think is the proper way to handle a situation like this: What do you do as a designer when you can’t handle the project you’re already contracted to?

No related posts.

No related posts.

(It’s great and productive to have -some- of these things, but God help you if you think it entitles you to some sort of designer title).

1. Black Rimmed Glasses. – I know for a fact they don’t give you a new perspective on design.
2. Being a Hipster. – Normally assosciated with some sort of art and design background.  False.  Designers don’t spend money to look like they don’t have money.  Money is meant for Adobe.
3. Owning The White Hand of God Products (iPhone, Macs, etc). – If you don’t get the White Hand of God Reference you’ve never taken a semiotics class and shouldn’t be designing anything.
4. 3/4 Black and White Myspace Headshots that make you look better than you really are. – The picture says enough. Not even Photoshop could make this girl look ‘artsy’.
5. Drinking Lattes or any form of cafinated hot drink that doesn’t start with “Cof” and end with “ee”.  - $1 for coffee or $4 for a lattee?  I wonder.  Frugal, Frugal, Frugal.  Design costs $$$.
6. Owning a moleskin journal. – When did these suddenly become insanely trendy?  Useful they are, but they’re not an icon to represent designers.  We’ll use napkins to sketch ideas if need-be.
7. Being friends with other ‘designers’ on Twitter. – It’s kind of like digg, one giant political system, no one will properly critisize your work as long as you keep giving them floats & diggs.
8. Posting lists of resources. – Posting lists is great for other designers, until you realize people only posts lists because they have nothing substantive to say.          

There are plenty of other things but this completely distracts from the point of this article which is below & Big up’s to google for these images:

If you’ve gone to any accredited design university, college, or trade school there is one question that is bound to come up no matter what field of design you hail from: What makes a good designer?  The question rivals some of the most paradoxical philosophical questions today and is very much the center of debate among design researchers and scholars.  The question applies to all fields of design and suggests that there are basic requirements and that there is an ideological designer that all designers should aspire to be.  After copious amounts of design research both at universities and on my own, I’ve come to the personal conclusion that the ideological ‘good’ designer is one whom can design ethically functional societies and systems.

You might be asking yourself now: Design a Society?  I daresay Fred McCoy I’m through with Megalongcat and this foolishness.  But I must ask you to wait and hear me through.  What would it take to design the systems to help run a functional society?  Te help think about this, I’d like to point out here that being a designer is awkwardly similar to being a scientist.  The scientific method applies to how ‘Good’ Designers should go about design. Here’s the scientific method:

SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY:

1. Observe some aspect of the universe, “free from bias.”
2. Invent a hypothesis that is consistent with what your empirically described observations.
3. Form a falsifiable theory to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations.
5. Modify the hypothesis into a theory in the light of your results.
6. Publish your findings in a peer reviewed journal (Newer addition)
7. Consider criticisms offered, and revise your theory
8. Go to step 3. 

You might be wondering how to apply this to design, especially since nothing about being creative, talented or being abreast of trends is mentioned here.  The fact of the matter is the above methodology is how designers can think about going about their projects:

1. Find a problem in the world regardless of what it is.
2. Create a well though, plausible, and ethical solution.
3. Publish a well-written proposal and outline for your solution.
4. Prototype, Prototype, Prototype.
5. Test the prototype in the field.
6. Gather observations and publish in a document to send to relevant scholars, peers, designers, and artists.
7. Take in all constructive criticism and revise solution.
8. Return to step 4.

This is nothing more than a general guide, rather than any sort of hard rule of thumb for designers to think about their projects.  I will leave you with two parting notes.  The first is that if you can design a logo, you have the thought process and capabilities to  design a solution to war in the middle east.

The second is that when design is done right, no one will have any idea you did anything at all.

What are YOUR thoughts on what makes a good designer?  I’m sure there’s plenty to be said for my article which pigeonholes a lot of people who will come across this article.

**My profile picture you see everywhere associated with Megalongcat is the 3/4th’s MySpace headshot with black rimmed glasses.  It’s there to make fun of the very people described above, the glasses are actually 3D glasses I got from the movies. . 

No related posts.