In reading White Space is Not Your Enemy: A Beginner’s Guide to Communicating Visually Through Graphic, Web & Multimedia Design, I could not help but recall a line from the famous Saturday Night Live “cowbell” sketch, where Christopher Walken’s character states, “[e]xplore the space.” Visual culture comes with a distinct language and set of rules. However, designers have an opportunity to bend or break the rules with good reason, thereby advancing visual culture further. To do so, designers have to “explore the space,” establishing a balance between new ideas and established elements and principles of good design.
Kim Golombisky and Rebecca Hagen deftly showed the flexibility surrounding the rules of visual culture. While they both stress the importance of knowing the rules of visual design, they also encourage a designer’s curiosity as they seek to find ways of breaking or even bending the rules. There is a balance at play here. Instead of breaking visual rules simply to break them, Golombisky and Hagen both stress that designers should have a good reason to do so, as opposed to “out of ignorance.” Breaking the rules can provide great examples of poor design, but, if done correctly, breaking the rules can also facilitate important innovations in design without forfeiting the message.
Strong design strikes a balance between incorporating the rules and finding instances when the rules do not work. As a novice, I find myself battling a misconception that innovation comes from the quantity of design. Yet, Golombisky and Hagen both showed that innovation can come from simplicity. Busy and incessantly flashing designs do not work, as they appear tacky and detract from the message. However, the appropriate use of negative space can facilitate a visual message. The “Shoe Crazy” advertisement (page 44) for instance showed how lines offered a sophisticated tool that separated positive space from negative space, while also creating an image that drove the advertisement’s main point home. Even though the design appeared basic at first glance, the use of lines as well as negative and positive space presented a much more subtle, but sophisticated design.
Equally important, the design highlighted other important rules, namely using the way people read. Golombisky and Hagen both stressed how people read a design like they would a book, starting with the upper left-hand corner and ending in the lower right-hand corner. In the “Shoe Crazy” advertisement, the designer placed the pertinent information in the upper left-hand corner and worked downward. Viewers moving to the right would see the design of a shopper, apparently having taken part in the sale by leaving the store with shopping bags. By placing the shopper on the right, the designer gave his or her audience with one more message as they left the page: This shopper can be you.
Ultimately, the importance of visual design is to convey a visual message to your audience. Visual designs, if done correctly, can convey a sense of emotion, whether it is euphoria, anger, or a call to action. Moreover, visual designs can convey a sense of feeling, whether it is of humor or tension. The designer’s objectives, therefore, rests on his or her ability to use visual culture as a means of communicating, to present the client’s desired message. In a historical context, the objective remains similar. Historians have an opportunity to “explore the space,” using design as a way of conveying the significance of their research in ways that a traditional book cannot.
I commented on John’s blog.
richardhardesty 
I agree with the idea that in many ways, less can be more sometimes. It seems like a symptom of modern society we want to incorporate so much complexity and diversity in something like design for instance, when in actuality, sometimes by including more you take away from the message. That’s why it’s so important to think through your project and figure out what message needs to be conveyed before one starts to build. One thing, I’m sure it will be hard to control as we learn how to incorporate more things into our sites will be to NOT add features that don’t add value. So if I know how to geolocate something, I will want to put geolocation in everything I can because I know how to do it whether it is applicable or not. I just have to keep telling myself that you can in fact perform “addition by subtraction.”
John,
I agree with your thoughts on this matter. In many cases, quality is not contingent upon complexity, but applying basic rules and guidelines exceptionally well. It will, however, be tempting to incorporate more things into a project as I become increasingly familiar and accomplished with more digital techniques. However, at the end of the day, it becomes a matter of setting boundaries. How much can I do before the audience loses sight of the message being conveyed? As Golombisky and Hagen noted, most viewers are “lazy readers,” which leads me to believe that many (though not all) will have short attention spans. Consequently, I feel that a balance between a simple, effective approach that pushes the envelope would be the way to go. I fear that too much overload would detract viewers from what I am trying to present.
Richard
Pingback: Looks DO Matter « To Luddite or Not to Luddite