May 24th, 2006
When less is more
Less is more. We’ve all heard that saying a thousand times. What does it mean though? For me it’s the result of a particular way of working.
In October last year, Jason Fried of 37Signals gave a 10 minute talk at the Web 2.0 show about, well, ‘lessness’. In an interesting talk, Jason described five things which you need less of (which you think you actually need more of). A lot of what he said made absolute sense from a business perspective. I’d like to add to that some thoughts on what you need less of in graphic design.
The Spark
What triggered my thoughts on this, in addition to the recent debate about graphic design on the web (and yesterday’s post on SvN regarding Don Norman’s thoughts), was Malcolm Gladwell’s fantastic book, Blink.
In the book, Gladwell describes how a doctor called Brendan Reilly developed an algorithm for making the diagnosis of heart attacks easier for doctors. The algorithm, based on months of statistical research, was based on three factors which Reilly would propose doctors use to diagnose chest pain. Reilly proposed that factors such as extensive patient history shouldn’t play a part in diagnosing acute chest pain. Of course, the other doctors have a difficult time accepting this as a way of working.
The idea behind this conclusion is about removing distraction. It’s not about making things simple, or reducing complexity, but increasing focus on the immediate problem.
It really got me thinking.
As I mentioned, there’s been an ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of Google. I’m not going to dwell on this too long (as a lot of it has already been said), but I think the same concept applies here. Google works because of a lack of distraction, not because it’s simple. A search engine like Google is complex, as it’s other services. Where Google succeeds is by removing obstacles in the user’s path. They want to search, they’re shown a search box and results. No distractions.
The same can be applied in graphic design.
Five things
So, following on from Jason’s idea of doing more with less, here’s my five things you can do more with less in graphic design.
Less Noise
There’s too much visual noise. Whatever you’re designing, if it’s a magazine cover, the latest web app, or a orange juice label, how do you stand out in the crowd? How do you compete visually? This is a tough job, as any designer will tell you, and the natural reaction is to add more noise. More colour, more type, more expensive production and ultimately, more money.
I’m not really talking about minimalism. More like restraint. When you feel this coming on—and I’m sure we all do—try and focus on the problem and the visual steps you need to take to solve it. This usually sorts me out and gets me on track again.
Less Distraction
This is as much about interaction design as it is about graphic design. Is the solution (the design), fit for purpose? Does it answer the brief? What could you remove that just isn’t needed? I ask myself these questions, especially the last one, a lot. What could the client do without? It’s always a natural reaction to add. Complexity, visual noise, colour etc. They all increase distraction.
Fewer Typefaces
Erik Spiekermann once said ‘You need as many typefaces as you need ties’. True, but not all on the same page/screen. It’s a great idea to increase your typeface vocabulary — emmerse yourself in the various type foundries books (Linotype has a great book available). At some point though, find a few typefaces you really like (more often than not, this will happen by accident as you find yourself using them all the time), and really get to know them. Get to know the quirks of that particular cut, such as the kerning and the fact that the ‘fi’ ligature doesn’t look quite right. Soon after, you’ll find yourself using less typefaces, but being very familiar with the ones you do use.
Fewer Trends
Trends are fashionable. Sometimes they are a solution to a brief, but not always. Like bad furniture, they have their place, but the trick is knowing where.
The web has a fashion turnaround similar to the fashion industry I guess. It’s a fast paced environment and industry leaders set the trends. But I guess, like fashion, this can be exhausting for a designer (and a client). A classic, timeless design is almost always a more successful solution to one which has all the latest bells and whistles.
Less looking in the future and more in the past
A lot of designers are well versed in graphic design history. A lot aren’t. I guess it’s all about building up a visual vocabulary from past experience. Thing is, if all your experience of graphic design is from what’s around you now, you have much less to draw on in terms of inspiration. Read some books, visit exhibitions, maybe even start a weird hobby like collecting old Penguin books!
When less is more
Less is more isn’t always about minimalism. It isn’t always about simplicity either. For me, less is more is about clarity—whether that’s a search engine, a teapot or a really great plate of food. Clarity is vital in graphic design and without it, well, it may as well just be art. But that’s a whole other blog post.
Mark
Well I’d certainly agree with those sentiments — as indeed would any self-respecting designer. It’s a pity though that sometimes the client get’s in the way of our better judgments — and every designer has that one client who just won’t listen to common sense. To illustrate, I’ve recently done a batch of 20 business cards as part of an organisation’s rebrand — and one card in particular had to be reprinted because the person concerned wasn’t satisfied and insisted instead upon having seven logos included on their’s. Seven logos on a business card — no arguments, no compromise. So sometimes you’re just obliged to settle for an easy life and make the world just that little bit ugglier.
So top of my list of things to wish for is a LAW AGAINST LOGOS.
I’ve long thought that designers ought to adopt some of the business acumen of farmers and promote the concept of ‘set aside’. So, just as farmers get EU subsidies for not farming their land, why don’t we collectively promote the concept that designers ought to be paid for what we leave out, not what we put in? A sort of ‘penny for every font we don’t use’ policy.
It would certainly make the world a more beautiful place. And put is in the same earnings league as accountants and lawyers to boot!
David
This is a bit off-topic, so I apologize, but I was wondering what recommendations you would have for a fledgling designer looking for a history of design. Are there books or sites that chronicle the “classic and timeless” that you are particularly enamored of?
Thanks!
David: Yes, some of these points are a litle utopian. We all know the pain of when a client thinks they’re the designer. I do like the idea of being paid for what we leave out, rather than what we put in. Maybe we could be even commissioned to produce nothing, but get paid well to do it.
Jason: I wrote a while ago about my top five design books, in the comments you’ll see a whole list of other people’s favourites, many of which are about design in the past.
“You need as many typefaces as you need ties.” Actually that works pretty well for me…I just checked my closet and I own exactly four ties!
Dunno if this is a recent glitch, but I’m not seeing this post or any of your other recent ones on your site itself, just in RSS—when I look at the URL for this post I see it’s in a directory called /comments rather than the directory called /journal, which is probably the explanation.
Great article.
I do agree — the client can many times be their own worst enemy. We need to be willing to spend time educating why and how we have come to our decisions. Understandably, many people think what we do contains a considerable amount of hokus-pokus.
I also greatly agree with the clarity bit. Not surprisingly, simple is usually more clear. Imagine that. ;)
Seems to be a developing theme here — ‘clients wrecking good design’ and I can’t agree more. In the short time we’ve been at this game, we’ve come up with (in our opinion) some really nice stuff only to see it gradually degraded by the client’s requests for changes until we’ve ended up with stuff we’re basically ashamed to put our names to. Unfortunately though, the clients pay the bills, so what can you do?
I agree wholeheartedly on the article though — we’ll just have to fight the good fight against the white space warriors — you all know those clients who get agoraphobic when you’re designing something for them. There’s too much white space — can’t we just put something in here, or there, in fact lets just make sure that the whole page, every page is absolutely crammed full.…..
By the way, glad you enjoyed your trip to Aus, next time make sure you come to Brissie ; )
Thanks Mark,
I came to this article after reading the new HTML Editor Reviews site. If you check out the various links to the editors you will see that the Mac apps subscribe to the less is more approach to design:
TextMate
skEdit
whilst the PC based editor site is far too busy!
<a “http://www.ultraedit.com/index.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=10″>UltraEdit</a>
The first two sites are simple and straightforward, although the design is ‘nice’, more than that it helps the content to shine through, which is what the web is all about.
BTW — I use a PC …
Oops! UltraEdit link didn’t work. Try this.
UltraEdit
nice is beautiful…
It kind of undermines the theme of your article, but I thought I should point out that two of your subheadings, “Less Typefaces” and “Less Trends”, should actually read “Fewer Typefaces” and “Fewer Trends”.
You can have less of a single thing (less aggravation, less pedantry), but fewer of quantifiable, plural items (fewer complaints, fewer pedants).
/grammargeek
http://www.markboulton.co.uk/new/index.php/journal/top_five_design_books/