Avatar
HoloKat 2y ago

A common pattern in UI design is to create systems for everything - font sizes, padding, margins, radius etc…

While this is a better strategy that making it up as you go, it is not imperfect.

Nature is imperfect, yet it feels natural and beautiful. You won’t find precise systems of defined proportions in nature, yet it works.

Consistency is a quality of a great designer. Imperfection is a quality of a world-class designer.

The trick is having just the right amount of imperfection. Too much and it looks out of place. A little could feel beautiful, unconstrained and alive.

I still struggle with this concept in practice.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
HoloKat 2y ago

Meant to say it is not perfect*

Avatar
iefan 🕊️ 2y ago

Thank you for sharing this. I don't think I fully understand it, but I can see the direction.

Avatar
HoloKat 2y ago

Apple designs are a good example. If you look at their marketing materials, they break many “deign rules” yet the end result is remarkable. It’s a trademark of a world class designer and it’s super hard to mimic.

72
nobody 2y ago

They also got a few things right that nobody else did, or got it right first. There’s a lot to be said about priorities.

The menu bar on macOS comes to mind…

Avatar
iefan 🕊️ 2y ago

Good example, thank you

dd
dd0fccd8... 2y ago

A systemic approach might not be the most feasible or efficient policy to take on certain projects. However, I believe appealing to nature generally is not the way. It might "feel natural and beautiful" due to evolutionary biases. These biases have to be approached when designing, otherwise the imperfections are not going to seize on intuitions.

I noticed an "imperfect/organic" approach some designers take, such as adding natural elements into the UI/UX, non-polygon art to make things feel lively, and more. I believe these are examples of taking advantage of human intuitions.

Avatar
Nathan Day 2y ago

I remember seeing something related to this a while back re pixel perfect layouts looking odd sometimes.

Designers need the courage and experience to push past this mathematical perfection to get to the promised land.

Avatar
HoloKat 2y ago

Imperfect perfection 👌

Avatar
Nathan Day 2y ago

Perfect imperfection. 😂

Avatar
mike 2y ago

Think I’ve always tried to find ways to not separate my approaches to visual and spatial design too much, for example. The situational/spatial stuff is inevitably complex in a few useful directions, and navigated bodily, and there are always things there that end up feeling most ‘right’ and ‘alive’ when configured in what you might assume to be the ‘wrong’ ways… or simply left as undefined as other bits of life…

Not sure I’d even attempt a UI. But I’m aware, for reasons I think you’re talking about here, how much I engage and trust my physical understandings and structural intuitions in the visual and layout work I do. And also in the sound work. Maybe I’m just always working with them all as objects, events and places… even when it’s about the way a graphic works on screen…

I appreciate its largely a personal aesthetic thing, but there’s often a point where it seems like it’s the right small lack of ‘balance’ or ‘resolve’, a sense of slight inherent ‘awkwardness’, that makes something start to feel credible and ‘natural’ enough to work for others.