Disjointed thoughts brought together
This is a nice soup with great color, flavor, and texture. It would probably work both hot or cold, but I enjoy this hot. The soup is simple and can be made vegan. I enjoy this with some goat cheese and fresh baguette.
Read the rest of this entry »
New York, NY – Hundreds of protesters gathered Sunday at the wrong address in lower Manhattan to protest the building of “The Ground Zero Mosque”. The proposed building is actually a community center, and only about 15% of it will be used as a prayer space for Muslims. But it is this prayer space that has been wildly criticized by many extreme right wing media outlets, including Fox News. Protesters gathered at the World Trade Center site, just outside the Cortland Street subway station, to voice their outrage, unaware that the community center is actually planned to replace an abandoned Burlington Coat Factory store on Park Place, 3 or 4 blocks north.
Read the rest of this entry »
This recipe is for home-made pizza with prosciutto and arugula. I first had a prosciutto and arugula pizza on a date in SOHO. We were at this great little Italian place that had a brick oven for really good pizza. It’s one of my favorites.
This recipe is based on the basic bread dough recipe from Ratio by Michael Ruhlman, with the variations for pizza dough. His recipe makes enough for two 12 inch pizzas with a reasonably thick crust (not too thin, not deep dish). I also follow some of the technique instructions from The Professional Chef, which is the official textbook of the Culinary Institute of America. I didn’t bother to make the pizza sauce today, but you can find recipes for pizza sauce online easily enough. Do a google search. It’s no harder than making pasta sauce. In fact, I’ve used pasta sauce before. Read the rest of this entry »
The proposed community center is obscured from view at the WTC by multiple blocks of buildings.
Bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own. (from Dictionary.com)
I’ve read, with growing anger, several defenses of persons with legitimate concerns (to paraphrase Howard Dean) about the proposed construction of a community center and prayer space by a Muslim organization in downtown Manhattan (“Park51″). To clarify for the ignorant: Park51 is not going to be a mosque, and the building is not going to be constructed at, or within sight of, Ground Zero (the former World Trade Center site). Park51 will have more in common with a YMCA than it will with St. Paul’s Cathedral. Read the rest of this entry »
Since the middle of December I have been working on a project design and help build an educational website for doctors. The project is a collaboration between a professional organization, a consultancy, a solopreneur, and the company I work for. The project has not always proceeded without problems and I’ve spent time thinking about how my work process and client interactions will change the next time I have a similar assignment. Read the rest of this entry »
The more things change the more things stay the same.
A collection of evolving technologies for media development are bringing us backwards in time, or perhaps around to, and ultimately through, the old promise of digital design and into a new world where designers can once again be designers, leaving the production to the professionals. Read the rest of this entry »
Continuing with my review of Tufte’s “The Visual Display of Quantitative Information”, I turn my attention to an adapted theory of graphics. This part of Tufte’s thesis is delivered in several parts.
Maximize the amount of meaningful ink
This first rule in the theory of graphics is difficult to directly adapt to graphic design. The idea here is that meaningless graphic elements should be minimized or removed, clearing the visual field for “ink” that actually conveys information. In general, designers must realize that everything in the visual field contributes to the message that is conveyed by the composition. Designers, like cinematographers, must make smart choices about the items that appear in the visual field, adding or removing items to ensure that the message is not being distorted, muddied, or incorrectly conveyed. Ideally, every element in the visual field contributes to the original concept or the specific message. If there are elements that do not, the designer must ask if they are necessary and remove or replace them if they are not.
Avoid graphic junk
Often, there is a desire to “dress up” information. This kind of graphic excess generally has nothing to do with the original visual concept or the subject of the content. It is simply an artistic conceit or an effort to make something that is considered visually “boring” a little more interesting. Tufte’s theory indicates that, instead of making the content more interesting, this kind of graphic junk distracts from the content. Ultimately, there is no substitute for good content, and bad content will not be rescued by superfluous graphics. The best thing is to stick to the original concept and clearly communicate the content.
Make graphic elements perform more than one function
Graphic elements can be employed for multiple uses in a visual composition. They can simultaneously contribute to the form of the composition and the communication of the content. When constructing a composition, make the most of each graphic element. This approach improves the efficiency and effectiveness of the design.
Maximize the information density
This is perhaps the most difficult principle to generalize. You could simply translate this idea to “don’t waste space”, but the actual meaning is a bit more complicated. For data displays, this idea makes sense. The most interesting data displays deal with very large sets of data. Displays of very small sets of data are not very interesting. In a way, the principles provided above will lead to a maximum of information in the visual field.
In addition to these principles, Tufte offers a number of techniques that can be used to build data graphics. These principles should be very familiar to designers and are easily generalized from his specific concern about data graphics to the larger practice of graphic design.
Occasionally, Tufte repeats himself. I am currently working through the second of my set of four Tufte books, “Beautiful Evidence”. Many of the ideas presented in “Quantitative Displays” are echoed in this second book. However, the repetition – the reminder – is beneficial. These principles of design, particularly the design of information and data, are critically important. Designers help communicate information in a visual manner. While it is important for designers to have a talent for artistic manipulation, that talent is ineffective if successful communication is not achieved. Designers should not overlook this obligation to the audience and always remember that the work we do is a service for the audience as much as it is a service for ourselves or our clients.
The debate about the Flash platform has become very interesting very fast following (first) the announcement of the iPad and (second) its release. It has put a very public spotlight on a shift in media technology that goes back to the introduction of ActionScript 3.0 and the publication of numerous Javascript libraries such as jQuery, MooTools, Scriptaculous. It also highlights the common perception of Flash in relation to (my perception of) Adobe’s goal for Flash.
Flash, for a while, filled a need. For a while it was the only reasonable and reliable way to create animation, handle UI events, mix media, and generate high quality marketing materials for the web. Designers loved it because we could establish complicated layouts, use our own fonts, and stylize all the little details of the user experience. We didn’t need to solve cross browser bugs generated by the multiple flavors of the Document Object Model implementation. We didn’t have to use graphics for text or require many different media plug-ins for audio and video playback. The Flash plug-in made things work consistently on all web browsers.
Of course, there were drawbacks. To their credit, Adobe did try to address these problems. You had to perform manual checks for the Flash plug-in. The rapid advancement of the technology meant that the web was littered with many different plug-in versions. Flash was not searchable. Developers either had to expend effort to create alternate versions of content for Flash-less visitors or simply ignore a small but real percentage of their audience. Flash had performance and error-handling problems; poorly coded Flash-based websites and applications could bring down your browser. And, of course, Flash was useless for mobile browsers.
JavaScript libraries, CSS, and HTML 5 are changing all of that. JavaScript libraries greatly simplify the way in which interactivity can be achieved in web pages, cutting the time required for scripting dramatically and reducing the overhead that cumbersome code or the Flash plug-in can create. CSS has improved to give significantly more control over the appearance and layout of our web pages. A bounty of plug-ins for JavaScript libraries are now available to create all sorts of HTML page layouts, user interfaces, and visual effects.
For example, I recently reviewed the JavaScript code that enables the Panic Software home page. This page has been around for a while, but it’s simply brilliant and I don’t see a need for Panic to change it. The JavaScript for this page is a nightmare of conditional statements to address the various web browser requirements. I can write similar code using jQuery (and I did for my own home page) using less than half as much code.
HTML 5 promises to further ween developers from Flash. Video and audio playback alone could make Flash completely unnecessary on many websites. New drawing and and animation capabilities help developers liberate additional effects from Adobe’s monopoly over online mixed media and web animation.
Frankly, I think Adobe expected all of this to happen. ActionScript 2 was just a stepping stone. It was very similar to JavaScript and, for web developers, and easy adjustment. I had no problem scripting effects in Flash, going so far as to create simple arcade games. ActionScript 3 is a different beast. This is a real programming language, one that separates pretenders like me from real men with serious IDEs. ActionScript 3 signaled a shift in the target for Flash media development: it’s no longer a tool for creating neat-0 web pages. Flash is now a powerful tool for building Internet-enabled applications with high-end user experiences. At least that’s the rumor.
Most of your consumer-level users don’t see that. The look at the iPad and think about how they can’t use it to watch Bones on Hulu.com. Let’s just get this out of the way now: Flash ain’t gonna be used to play video much longer. Like I said before: Flash, for a while, filled a need. That time is coming to and end. It’s a waste of time and effort to be using Flash to play audio and video, but for a while it was the only reliable way. That’s going to end.
I’m less certain about online games. This is one place where Flash has been very useful to companies. Online games, particularly on Facebook, have become huge business. I find them to be buggy and annoying and would not miss them if they disappeared, but lots of people play them. Not being able to do so on your phone is not a big deal. I can’t imaging playing a game like that on a tiny screen, I don’t care what the resolution is. The iPad is a different story. Users do lose out there.
Adobe could care less about whether or not YouTube continues to serve video using some Flash-based player. I’m not even sure their too worried about Facebook games being recoded in HTML5. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see it happening. What gets their goat more than anything is the fact that Flash can’t be used to build apps for Apple products. Because that’s their bread and butter. That’s why they are pissed off. And it has nothing to do with Flash support for the mobile version of Safari. This is a level above that. Their gripe is with the rules that Apple established for allowing applications on the iPhone and the iPad. The rule excludes any applications that were not build using Apple’s approved methods. Those methods to not include Flash.
I understand Apple’s position. The iPhone and the iPad have great user experiences. As with all of their products, Apple creates and insures that superior user experience by controlling the things that become part of the user experience – and on the iPhone and iPad, those things are apps. I’ve never actually seen a Flash app that I thought was any good. Most of them suck, even the Media Player that Adobe ships with CS4.
Apple is also trying to avoid a tremendous resource drain. By constraining the user experience on their mobile devices, they limit the possible ways in which the user experience could be negatively affected. When users have a problem, they ask for help. Apple’s limitations help limit the possible problems, keeping the support requests to what could be considered a small amount. Excluding apps built with Flash prevents potential problems and keeps Apple support from having to deal with them.
Apple now faces a serious challenge from the Android mobile platform. I expect Android’s support for Flash in the web browser to be a liability for Android. My guess its it will cause more problems for users than it will actually solve. However, apps for Android created using Flash could be a big deal. One of Apple’s biggest advantages right now is the richness (overabundance?) of apps available in the App Store. The Android market is a sad little place by comparison. However, since Android will be open to apps built using Flash and the iPhone OS will not, Flash support could help the Android Market close the gap with the App Store. That could be the biggest threat to the iPhone – even bigger than all the new hardware that keeps getting released from Motorola and HTC.
It’s almost too good to be true. Part of my mind has still not accepted it and probably won’t accept it until the delivery arrives. FreshDirect extended their delivery area to our neighborhood. I can now have quality groceries delivered again. Believe me, this is a big thing. The grocery stores around here are not very good. They carry no almost no seafood, almost no organic ingredients, and the produce is both limited and low quality. The only time we get good produce around here is at the green market on the weekend (assuming we wake up early enough to beat the old Asian ladies to the spot).
I’m using this new and welcome development as motivation for putting Monica and I back on a menu. I think of it as being on a budget, except in this case we plan what we’ll eat rather than what we’ll spend. Of course, this is just our dinners and not every meal, but I still think this is a better way to live. I have two reasons supporting this position. First, it provides an opportunity for creative thinking. Just like everyone else, I look too see what food items are on sale, available, and in season. From there, I begin figuring out interesting ways to use those starting items. Sometimes I rely on old favorites but I also try to include variations or entirely new recipes. The second reason is health. Too often in the last few months, Monica and I have had this phone conversation:
“So, have you thought about dinner?”
“No, not really. Any ideas?”
“No. What do you think?”
“I don’t know.”
I’m sure we’re not the only couple that has this conversation. For folks like us who believe in having our dinner together/as a family, this kind of indecision can lead to expensive or less healthy eating options like dining out, fast food, or take-out food. For us, take-out usually involves fried chicken from the local Chinese place. I don’t know how they do it, but their fried chicken is fantastic.
Planning a weekly menu in advance allows us to ensure variation and nutritional balance. It also allows us to make our purchases when we have time to think about the type (organic?) or quality of ingredients we intend to use in our dishes. When you shop last minute, after work during a busy week, you are often at the mercy of what’s convenient. Planning ahead can also make sure that any ingredients you purchase in large quantity (cilantro, anyone?) can be put to multiple uses, making sure they are fully consumed before they rot in the fridge.
Of course, putting yourself on a menu takes some work and some dedication. You don’t want to skip a planned meal when you’ve already purchased the ingredients. It can be tempting to do that on a really busy day when you just want to relax instead of cook. But for all the time we waste in our lives watching television or surfing the internet, there’s no excuse not to have the time or energy to cook. As Ruhlman says, the food doesn’t have to be complicated, but it should be home made.
Planning also takes some work. You need to think about what you are going to do. Surf Epicurious.com for recipes. Break out the cookbooks or the latest issue of Saveur and try that new thing. And in our household, it often means a trip to the Asian market to find that odd spice, strange vegetable, or unique sauce that you cannot find any other place. But I have to admit that, in retrospect, the effort is almost always worth the result.
I recently finished reading Tufte’s “Visual Display of Quantitative Information”. As the title suggests, the book is concerned primarily with the design of data graphics. However, while reading the book I could not help but think of my first few design classes at Pratt. These foundational classes provided a forum for exploring the basic principles of visual communication and graphic design. The principles of graphic excellence for data displays that Tufte promotes in his writing mirror or are analogous to the principles of general visual communication. From this perspective, I found his book to be a wonderful reminder. There are so many things a designer must be aware of in the creative process. It can be overwhelming. I think good graphic designers have practiced enough to have made this awareness part of their nature. Alas, I still need to be reminded. Often.
In this book, Tufte presents three distinct ideas which can be generalized for graphic design:
I’ve paraphrased/rewritten Tufte’s three ideas in a generalized form that is applicable for all graphic design.
The principles of graphical excellence
Graphical excellence is the well-designed presentation of interesting information – a matter of substance and design. Graphical excellence communicates ideas with clarity, precision, and efficiency. And graphical excellence requires telling the truth. (from page 51)
It is this last part that I find most compelling. There is a consistent and prominent moral component to Tufte’s analysis of data graphics and his theory of data graphics. He is concerned with honesty and avoiding both lies and deception. This is something that designers don’t often think about (or don’t really need to think about) as we are so often not in control of the content. But as creators of the media that communicates to large audiences, it is, I think, good to remember that there is an ethical component to our work.
The source of graphical integrity
Graphical competence demands different skills: substantive and artistic. Substantive expertise must participate in the design of visual communication if the integrity of the content is to be preserved and graphical sophistication is to be achieved. (from page 87)
Information will be most effectively communicated if the designer understands the content or works closely with a subject matter expert. If, as a designer, you do not understand the information, how can you possibly create a graphic design that communicates that information in an effective way. It would be like giving an English-speaking designer text in traditional Chinese and asking that person to create a page layout with that content. Designers need to work closely with their clients to understand the information and create effective and sophisticated graphic designs.
To be continued…