This article by Frank Chimero explores the fundamental nature of screen design, exploring its evolution, current trends and challenges, and where it should be heading. The author highlights the intrinsic relationship between screens and the design decisions made for them.
The author critiques two ideological camps that arise in this discussion, challenging their limited perspectives. He contends that both camps fail because they solely revolve around aesthetics without considering the deeper question of how screens inherently function. The first being skeuomorphic in which the deign embodies what is being referenced with realistic texture, dimension etc. Flat designs on the other hand remove any reference to the three-dimensional world and opt for flat designs that match the computer screens flatness. Both come with advantages: skeuomorphic can be more user friendly as icons are familiar and easily identifiable, and flat design can simplify web design with clean adaptive/responsive vector images. The also have notable draw backs: skeuomorphic can make the interface feel clutters and difficult to use on smaller screams, flat designs can feel non unique and uninspiring.
I personally prefer flat design due to their aesthetic appeal; they tend to give websites a clean, seamless modern look and feel while skeuomorphic design feels dated and clunky and are no longer necessary as a tool to help users transition from the real world to the digital one.
A zoopraxiscope, created by Muybridge, is a device that projected images in rapid succession while bring illuminated from behind in the rotating glass disc, creating the illusion of movement. This invention marked a shift in visual representation, allowing the capture of dynamic actions instead of static moments. Similar to web design, this device works on screens and manage time, movement and most importantly, change. Designing for screens is managing change or ‘flux’. Another example of this likeness to websites are older handheld gaming systems that host simple interfaces but have optimized their simplistic pixel shapes to be able to morph into a range of identifiable shapes.
Chimero's article urges a shift in focus from aesthetics to functionality, advocating for a deeper understanding of screens' inherent nature. It emphasizes the importance of managing change and movement within digital interfaces while suggesting that the design community needs a new vocabulary, drawing inspiration from various art forms and disciplines to articulate the essence of digital design more effectively.