The other day, we had a brief discussion of verbal vs. non verbal. In short, verbal means using words or syllables in a project while non verbal are actual images of the object. There is some overlap in these two types of communication, and that comes when there are examples of type as image. I stumbled upon (via stumbleupon.com) a video that animates type as image. Enjoy!
Word as Image by: jibyollee
And in case you wanted to check out or buy the book:
Word as Image
A Project by Ji Lee
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Class Reflection 1.30.2013
Personas was the main topic for today. We discussed in depth the reading from Alan Cooper and certain topics to discuss were brought up. We came up with a definition for a persona: A fictitious character with goals and emotions related to the design goals. We also created a list of specifications that are needed in describing one persona:
- Name with photograph
- Quote - Creates narrative and a voice for the persona
- Habits/schedule
- Family/relationships
- Other related background
- Beliefs - religion, morals, political, philosophical
- Heritage
- Culture
- Technology background
- Age
- Education level
- Income
- Tastes
- Car - Specifications
- Activities/hobbies - Considerations they may make
- DON'T LIKES
- Spending habits
- Where they live
- Physical considerations/abilities
All of these considerations should be limited to one sheet of paper, no larger than a tabloid sheet. This way, no information is lost and can easily be accessible to multiple people in different locations. Then, page layout considerations are also important in creating a persona. Things to consider are:
- Photo with Quote
- Size, hierarchy, word count
- Charts and graphs
- Info-graphic
- Illustrations - maybe
- LEVELS OF INFORMATION - at least 3 to create depth - fly over, drive by, house visit
- How it would function in: a team meeting and after meeting/individual dense reading
Overall, this information is extremely helpful in creating a successful product in the end. If there is time to research and put together a few personas, it really should be considered. I am excited to dive into it!
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Reading HW for 1.30.2013
Chapter 9. Designing for Pleasure
By: Alan Cooper
Universal Methods of Design - Personas (pgs. 132 - 133)
By: Bella Martin and Bruce Hanington
After reading Alan Cooper's article about personas, I have a new understanding of how important it is to have a certain person in mind. He mentioned that "having people love your product, even if it is only a minority, is how you succeed." Designing for a specific person will guide you in the right direction. If you always keep in mind what this specific persona would want out of your product, it will make for a better product. Even if the design is for the 10% of a group, if that group absolutely loves the product, they will talk with their friends and may influence others to buy into the product. Although it wasn't initially designed for the other part of the group, they may get some use out of it. Later on down the line, more products can be made with similar goals, but different personas in mind.
This is similar to the roll-aboard suitcases designed mainly for flight attendants. When other consumers noticed how beneficial it was to have this product, they jumped on board and wanted the same, or similar product. Most people don't know what their needs are until they see a better solution. Soon after, different styles of roll-aboard suitcases were created to provide for different people. Again, people talk to friends and family of a great product, which expands the amount of consumers.
I also enjoyed the idea of giving a name and picture to your personas. This is very important to create empathy with your persona and have the ability to put yourself in their shoes. By being specific (what their abilities -power users, computer-literate users, and naive users- are, the car they drive, their income, lifestyle, family, and job) it makes it even easier to trade places with your persona.
Cooper mentions that it is "more important that a persona be precise than accurate... (that) it is more important to define the persona in great and specific detail than that the persona be the precisely correct one." However, I wonder if in creating a specific persona, the whole design goal falls off topic and the client you were designing for becomes unhappy. How is it possible to pick a persona that we know will solve the client's goals? Or is the idea of a persona to completely reinvent and redesign the initial product? Having never created a persona before, I find it difficult to choose what kind of person would be using my product. I know that later he describes in detail different scenarios with the in-flight interactive screen, but he had much more time to research and pull together facts from interviews. How is it possible for a designer (like our class) to come up with a persona without having prior research of our audience? Will we be as successful creating our own "ideal persona" that we think fits our product? Cooper also talks about if "...a persona (is) very close to the center, that persona should be shunted out of consideration." I'm not quite sure what he is referring to, and I think we could explore that in tomorrow's discussion.
Later in the article, considering the IT manager's needs comes into play. Ideally, we as designers should/need to consider the persona first, and the IT managers second. However, most times IT managers think they know what their audience wants, and drive the entire design process. I wonder, how do we know who is more right? If we have no previous knowledge of the topic we are designing for, how can we tell what the persona may or may not want? If this design process is similar to what we are doing in class now, I can see that the concept map would already be made and developed, and therefore, the designer should have a good understanding of the product. If that is the case, then I think there can be some debate between the IT manager and the designer about what the persona really wants out of the product.
Universal Methods of Design - Personas
The second reading out of the Univ. Methods of Design book pretty much summed up what Cooper described in his article. Creating a persona simplifies the product goal, and is important in designing a successful product. Research in the field is the best way to find common ground between a larger group, and makes it easier to create 3 to 5 different personas to use for a project. By diagramming these tendencies, it makes it easier to see where everyone falls under a similar category.
Personas should be no more than one page length, to avoid getting too detailed. Again, a name, photograph or sketch, and a narrative (life situation, goals, and behaviors relevant to the design) are all needed in creating a successful and USEFUL persona. Other images to help further describe the persona can be used as well. These can help describe their lifestyle, such as their activities, living spaces, and items they may have.
By: Alan Cooper
Universal Methods of Design - Personas (pgs. 132 - 133)
By: Bella Martin and Bruce Hanington
After reading Alan Cooper's article about personas, I have a new understanding of how important it is to have a certain person in mind. He mentioned that "having people love your product, even if it is only a minority, is how you succeed." Designing for a specific person will guide you in the right direction. If you always keep in mind what this specific persona would want out of your product, it will make for a better product. Even if the design is for the 10% of a group, if that group absolutely loves the product, they will talk with their friends and may influence others to buy into the product. Although it wasn't initially designed for the other part of the group, they may get some use out of it. Later on down the line, more products can be made with similar goals, but different personas in mind.
This is similar to the roll-aboard suitcases designed mainly for flight attendants. When other consumers noticed how beneficial it was to have this product, they jumped on board and wanted the same, or similar product. Most people don't know what their needs are until they see a better solution. Soon after, different styles of roll-aboard suitcases were created to provide for different people. Again, people talk to friends and family of a great product, which expands the amount of consumers.
I also enjoyed the idea of giving a name and picture to your personas. This is very important to create empathy with your persona and have the ability to put yourself in their shoes. By being specific (what their abilities -power users, computer-literate users, and naive users- are, the car they drive, their income, lifestyle, family, and job) it makes it even easier to trade places with your persona.
Cooper mentions that it is "more important that a persona be precise than accurate... (that) it is more important to define the persona in great and specific detail than that the persona be the precisely correct one." However, I wonder if in creating a specific persona, the whole design goal falls off topic and the client you were designing for becomes unhappy. How is it possible to pick a persona that we know will solve the client's goals? Or is the idea of a persona to completely reinvent and redesign the initial product? Having never created a persona before, I find it difficult to choose what kind of person would be using my product. I know that later he describes in detail different scenarios with the in-flight interactive screen, but he had much more time to research and pull together facts from interviews. How is it possible for a designer (like our class) to come up with a persona without having prior research of our audience? Will we be as successful creating our own "ideal persona" that we think fits our product? Cooper also talks about if "...a persona (is) very close to the center, that persona should be shunted out of consideration." I'm not quite sure what he is referring to, and I think we could explore that in tomorrow's discussion.
Later in the article, considering the IT manager's needs comes into play. Ideally, we as designers should/need to consider the persona first, and the IT managers second. However, most times IT managers think they know what their audience wants, and drive the entire design process. I wonder, how do we know who is more right? If we have no previous knowledge of the topic we are designing for, how can we tell what the persona may or may not want? If this design process is similar to what we are doing in class now, I can see that the concept map would already be made and developed, and therefore, the designer should have a good understanding of the product. If that is the case, then I think there can be some debate between the IT manager and the designer about what the persona really wants out of the product.
Universal Methods of Design - Personas
The second reading out of the Univ. Methods of Design book pretty much summed up what Cooper described in his article. Creating a persona simplifies the product goal, and is important in designing a successful product. Research in the field is the best way to find common ground between a larger group, and makes it easier to create 3 to 5 different personas to use for a project. By diagramming these tendencies, it makes it easier to see where everyone falls under a similar category.
Personas should be no more than one page length, to avoid getting too detailed. Again, a name, photograph or sketch, and a narrative (life situation, goals, and behaviors relevant to the design) are all needed in creating a successful and USEFUL persona. Other images to help further describe the persona can be used as well. These can help describe their lifestyle, such as their activities, living spaces, and items they may have.
Monday, January 28, 2013
Class Reflection 1.28.2013
Since we didn't have a reading for last week, this will be sort of a combination of last week and today's class...
After critique, we further dissected what a concept map can and will be used for. Overall, it is a technique used by designers that creates trust with their clients. Some designers have no previous knowledge of a client's request, and the concept map encourages the designer to explore different ideas. Once everything is mapped out in a well thought out chart, the concept map, it will then be presented to the client. At this point, everything is still considered a "rough idea" of what the topic is, and the client can present more of their ideas and thoughts without feeling like their are changing the entire concept behind the project. By gaining trust, everyone can then aim to being on the same page, and therefore, can come out with a strong final project.
Last week we presented our first edits of our concept maps. The main point of this project is to create a universal language that everyone in your "team" can understand. By starting with a main sentence that covers a broad range of the topic, and then breaking down each individual word, it really makes the designer think about what we are studying. This also sets boundaries for the project, making the overall task more simplified and condensed.
From the first critique, a few things were mentioned that everyone should take note of:
- Use of hierarchy - By making the most important words or phrases prominent, while the details are set back, it shows the viewer at first what the main focuses are, and if they wish to learn more, they can take the time to read more. Later on in the project, our focus may be in one topic more than another, and the concept map will change according to this relation. It was pointed out to me to consider more scale change in text and to consider what information may be more important than other information.
- Layering - Creating depth gives the concept map more interest, and can also make it easier to understand. By layering larger words or phrases behind a grouping of words, the viewer can make associations between that grouping. Concept maps can be very detailed and confusing, and any means to clarify ideas are worth considering. I had a few problems in this area, especially in the area where lists are formed by the amount of information included in one single category.
- Webbing of Ideas - Overall, everyone had a great start to the maps, but there was hardly any overlap with their topics within each individual concept map. This was definitely a struggle in my topic, and was worth revisiting.
- Point of entry - Find ways to make multiple ways to read the project. Have more than one interesting/intriguing topic that gets the audience involved.
With that, I needed to focus on a few things as well:
- Larger scale - Allows for more space to explore connections between categories, as well as making it easier to read and follow the map.
- Hierarchy from initial categories - Which topics are more/less important? Which topics will I further explore? This all may change as the project develops, but it is still good to consider at this point of the project.
- What is more important vs. less important - Consider what is worth exploring more, and what isn't.
- Start creating an identity - Also, apply this identity to previous projects. Start creating a look that can be maintained throughout the entire class.
- Bring CLARITY to complex ideas - find a way to combine/fix all the previous concerns to make it easy to read. Someone that has never seen or heard of your project should be able to understand what you are trying to do in the concept map.
- Depth, clarity, relationships, description of project
Today, we held our second critique on the concept maps. We talked about verbal vs. nonverbal ideas/concepts that everyone needed to consider trying. I think I need to consider using more nonverbal ideas to get the viewer more involved. Images, shapes, or even type as image are all possible ideas that I could explore in my project.
Some areas I need to consider editing are:
- Large layered text in the background is difficult to read. Consider increasing the contrast to make more legible.
- White dotted line and small white text are difficult to see. Bump up the line weight and increase the size of the text to make more legible.
- Another layout option - Baseball diamond shape. This is worth trying because I don't have more than one point of entry, this could help with this problem, but could raise more problems in legibility and flow.
- Size/scale of the overall poster doesn't need to fit in the book, although it would be a nice feature. Don't compromise design of the map in order for everything to fit. A disk can be included for those interested in looking at the entire map.
Overall, it was a great critique. Everyone was very helpful and positive!
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Reading HW for 1.16.2013
Exposing the Magic of Design
A Practitioner's Guide to the Methods and Theory of Synthesis
By: Jon Kolko
Jon Kolko's article about concept maps really opened my eyes on how we can have an effect on a project. We can start at the initial proposal of the project, rather than the tail end of the timeline where visual design is the only task left to complete.
He first explains different experiences we can create for the user. First was a story they could create that illustrates an environment and feeling that the artist wants to convey. The overall goal is to create an experience for the audience rather than focusing on the technology or engineering behind the scenes of the project.
The next was taking different viewpoints of a project into consideration. By looking at the bigger picture, the designer can study the context in which the product would be used, whether it be a somewhere in a house, a city, or a geographical region. Then, looking at the details opens the idea of abstract thinking. Where do the components come from? How are some things seemingly the same, different? The final viewpoint is to backtrack and look back at the timeline created. Revisiting old ideas and concepts and comparing them to the current state may raise new ideas, making the current project more solid.
The last way of thinking is by "shifting the placements", which I had a hard time understanding at first. What does Kolko mean by complex systems related to thoughts? Is this what comes from shifting the placements or is there more to the process? After reading through the example of the Coffee maker, it made a little more sense to me. But as a designer for interactive/print design, how does shifting the placement relate to interactive and print design? It was hard to relate this way of thinking to our methods of design.
After reading Kolko's experience with Java and concept maps, it really put it in perspective of how beneficial mapping out ideas can be in a team environment. By creating a concept map, we are creating a language that everyone, even people that don't normally work in the design field, can understand. The example of teeth-brushing cleared up Monday's lesson on concept maps, and gave me a perspective of what my concept map will be like for our project in class. Although the Java example was very in-depth and informative, I don't think we have a year and a half to spend pre-planning our project…
I'm really excited about this new way of thinking. It's initial rough sketching of ideas is very beneficial because everyone can jot down ideas without anything being concrete. Ideas can be flushed out or developed, depending on importance. Once everything is agreed upon, then developing is stopped and the map is refined to be handed out to everyone else working on the project. This ensures that everyone is on the same page, and the project will be a success according to the concept map.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Clients from Hell
 |
| clientsfromhell.net |
Clients from Hell is a site I've been following for a few years now. After our discussion today, it reminded me of this blog and how it gave me a few good laughs, and a few things to worry about. :(
Have a good night!
- Heather
Class Reflection 1.9.2013
In class today, we held a class discussion about the reading assignment. It covered four different ways of approaching a design problem, the four being: user-centered design (UCD), activity-centered design, system design, and genius design. Although Saffer barely touched on the topic of intertwining some of the techniques, we believe the most successful designs come from those that do so.
We as designers must satisfy the needs of a client. However, some clients believe they know exactly what they want, or exactly what it takes to make a successful design, and this may not be the best solution for the problem. So, how do we approach the situation? The best way, in my opinion, is to present three or four options... one of which is exactly what the client had previously requested, while the other two or three are your take on the problem. They may see that your design is really what they want and go with it, or, worst case, they go with their "well thought out" design. At this point, it would be best to suck it up and set your pride aside for one project. Although we hope that this isn't the case, it does happen in the field many times.
Another option would be to present some research (if time is not an option...). Show the client who is doing the same thing and which ones are having success while others are failures. Saffer states that "the user is always right", but the user doesn't always know what is best.
If they did, then why would they be paying a designer to tell them otherwise?
We as designers must satisfy the needs of a client. However, some clients believe they know exactly what they want, or exactly what it takes to make a successful design, and this may not be the best solution for the problem. So, how do we approach the situation? The best way, in my opinion, is to present three or four options... one of which is exactly what the client had previously requested, while the other two or three are your take on the problem. They may see that your design is really what they want and go with it, or, worst case, they go with their "well thought out" design. At this point, it would be best to suck it up and set your pride aside for one project. Although we hope that this isn't the case, it does happen in the field many times.
Another option would be to present some research (if time is not an option...). Show the client who is doing the same thing and which ones are having success while others are failures. Saffer states that "the user is always right", but the user doesn't always know what is best.
If they did, then why would they be paying a designer to tell them otherwise?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)