tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13201304478865203872012-01-30T15:44:29.741-08:00Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.comBlogger1411100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-654076580022145382011-09-11T11:47:00.000-07:002011-09-11T11:47:39.346-07:00Better.<br /><br />A low level term that normally flies under our detection. It dresses itself in the seductive positive robes of desired terminology. Who doesn't want better?<br /><br />And yet in that ridiculously small term that we have a complex comparison. It compares a selective set of traits to another selective set of traits. Unwritten. Codefied. Secret. <br /><br />With both aspects of that equation, much of the detail is obscured when we use the term "better". Sometimes it is an ethnocentric and egocentric benign omission. At other times, the omissions may be more ulterior and obscured, for fear to catch scrutiny.<br /><br />And yet clearly a comparison, how often have we foolishly read it as an endpoint? How often have we erroneously assumed it to be a goal unto itself? <br /><br />Better is a hollow piece of trickery. Reject it in exchange for framing.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-65407658002214538?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-13481561618521091422011-08-28T15:18:00.000-07:002011-09-11T16:01:05.878-07:00<span style="font-size: x-large;"><b><br /></b></span><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Who Cares?</b></span><br /><br />I've received a large number of emails on the subject of linear light over the course of running this blog.<br /><br />I intend to break the following down into a series of blog posts if the feedback is high enough. I doubt it will be, but alas, for those that have emailed, the first installment here is dedicated to you. Whether you care or not is a question only you can answer.<br /><br />I'm willing to bet that the audience that reads this blog is either already acutely aware and does care, or does care and hasn't yet explored the issue to their satisfaction. If you fall into the latter group, I can only hope this post serves you well and leads you further along the path of exploration.<br /><br />The following is an entirely worthless piece written from an entirely delusional and dimwitted vantage. Errors, omissions, glaring idiocy, and other like details are entirely possible and expected.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Linear light? Why do I care?</b></span><br /><br />If you have been compositing images, you may have come across the following. The example is a simple full magenta color slightly blurred and composited over top of a neutral grey tone:<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-amgq9KmiBEc/TlHGdfncuUI/AAAAAAAACHY/r5emGJHn9gI/s1600/sample-sad.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-amgq9KmiBEc/TlHGdfncuUI/AAAAAAAACHY/r5emGJHn9gI/s320/sample-sad.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Exhibit A</td></tr></tbody></table>Compare against the following:<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FkX8ZWO6EB0/TlHGdEppjxI/AAAAAAAACHQ/k14ceoNhCYA/s1600/sample-happy.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FkX8ZWO6EB0/TlHGdEppjxI/AAAAAAAACHQ/k14ceoNhCYA/s320/sample-happy.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Exhibit B</td></tr></tbody></table>Now it doesn't take Leonardo Da Vinci to realize something is wrong here. While both images were composed from identical sources, Exhibit A, for some reason, has a bizarre darker fringe surrounding our object. Your eyes do not deceive you, but to understand what is going on here will take a little bit of foundational theory and thinking.<br /><br />I'll try my best to not make it too painful...<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Aliens and Audio</b></span><br /><br />Imagine if you will an alien race. Perhaps they are willowy blue things with tribal patterns or some sort of oblong shaped head with razor teeth and acid blood. It doesn't matter.<br /><br />Now imagine that these aliens live on a planet where the range of sound goes from zero to one via our SupahDupaAudacity Meter. If we were to graph the alien landscape audio range to the sound level, it might look like:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T_9ImyPzFkg/TlqbR7SSQAI/AAAAAAAACIE/YgQHodBduCU/s1600/alien-reality.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T_9ImyPzFkg/TlqbR7SSQAI/AAAAAAAACIE/YgQHodBduCU/s400/alien-reality.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alien Audio Reality</td></tr></tbody></table><br />For whatever reason, be it the quiet flapping of their food's wings or the need to listen to high fidelity rock music, the aliens have evolved in such a way that a particular range of the audible spectrum is far more sensitive to them. Away from that spectrum, the audio falls off. Heck they can't even hear levels around 0.3 and below. Above say, 0.7, the audio vibrations all sound the same.<br /><br />Their 0.4-0.5 range however, is superb! They can hear within that range like an alien dog. In fact, they have evolved in such a way that 90% of their capacity to hear audio tones is in fact dedicated to that thin little range of noise.<br /><br />If you could visualize this, it might look something like a curve, with the perception of audio falling off at around 0.3, being extremely solid in between 0.4 and 0.5, and gradually tapering off toward 0.7. Perhaps a graph of the situation would look something akin to:<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6y2zfHxL4eI/TlqbSBDJYHI/AAAAAAAACIM/TjYmbnTVErk/s1600/alien-ear.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6y2zfHxL4eI/TlqbSBDJYHI/AAAAAAAACIM/TjYmbnTVErk/s400/alien-ear.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alien Ear</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Alien Reality</b></span><br /><br />Out in the physical alien world, the audio behaves according to the laws of their alien physics. Let's say 0.1 unit of noise plus 0.1 unit of noise equals 0.2 units of noise. This is sort of the simple math behind their reality. <br /><br />However, to the aliens, this simple little bit of reality is entirely bent. They hear the world through warped ears. That teeny little bump in physical reality is actually nearly their entire quality range of hearing!<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Back to Our World</b></span><br /><br />The scenario I described above is loosely what is happening in our world regarding perception. On the one hand, our physical world behaves very uniformly and reliably. One unit of light plus one unit of light equals two units of light[1]. All is well and good.<br /><br />Within our perception system however, just like the aliens, we see things through a bent and warped set of sensors. Our eyes are in fact non linear receptors. Certain ranges of light are entirely visible to many of us and some other ranges are utterly invisible[2].<br /><br />Physical reality, however, maintains no such bias.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What the Heck Does This Have to Do With Overlaying Images?</b></span><br /><br />Well, we are getting there...<br /><br />First, we have to accept that our eyes see things in a curved and warped fashion. Second, we must also accept that our physical reality can be modeled much more easily with a non-human relative model. Where our eyes see things in a bent and warped fashion, our reality can be modeled to behave in a predictable and mathematically uniform manner.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Modelling Reality in a Computer</b></span><br /><br />In our computers, we can represent our abstract reality using any number of models. One such model might be RGB, where we mix the three channel colors to arrive at a gamut of colors. We can represent this gamut of colors using units of red, green, and blue.<br /><br />This model however, as a result of historical displays and bent views of the world, does not accurately depict reality. Why not?<br /><br />Well in our above example, the aliens have a sensitive range of hearing in between 0.4 to 0.5. If the aliens were designing an audio application, that audio application might only offer the ranges the aliens can hear[3] - between 0.3 and 0.7. The net result is that the audio application would stretch the entire 0.3 to 0.7 range and warp the range between 0.4 and 0.5 to fit within the editing application's interface ranges. After all, that's where the alien's audiophile zone is and they probably weren't too concerned with things they couldn't hear.<br /><br />In our real world dilemma regarding perception, the same is true. The digital imaging applications you have come to love have somewhat offered up a warped view of the world that appears perfectly fine. In fact however, in a large chunk of applications, those red, green, and blue channels in our color model are warped and bent just like our alien audio application.<br /><br />That however, doesn't stop a computer from needing to do plain math with our data. See, our computers and the real physical world share an interesting similarity: Their math models behave relatively consistently. One plus one in the computer's registers and memory will equal two consistently. Equally, one unit of red plus one unit of red equals always two units of red. No shocker here.<br /><br />The impact of that math, however, is radically different depending on the context. For our alien planet, 0.1 units of audio plus 0.1 units of audio is a mere 0.2 units of audio. As our aliens discovered above though, those mere 0.2 units of audio nearly covers their entire most sensitive audio range!<br /><br />Herein lies the core crux of the problem. We have two different models, and they don't play nicely together.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Over and Alpha</b></span><br /><br />To finally encapsulate this puzzle, it is probably wise to look at a simple bit of math. The fundamental math for an alpha over operation using straight alpha on a fully opaque background is[4]:<br /><br />Output.RGB = (Over.RGB * Over.Alpha) + ( Background * ( 1 - Over.Alpha) )<br /><br />If the math scares you, don't let it. It's very simple. In fact, we are only going to focus on the first portion of the formula: Over.RGB * Over.Alpha, or more simply, a number multiplied by another number.<br /><br />While the underlying values of the numbers might be stored in a unique manner, we can perceive the Over.RGB value as a series of red, green, and blue values. The Over.Alpha could be viewed as a single value that ranges from 0 to 1.<br /><br />In the case of the RGB values, we have a series of three values that are roughly akin to the alien audio application example - bent. Within our alien audio application, the values are warped according to the needs of the application and the dynamic range of the alien ears. With our RGB values, we have historical display hardware and the nature of human perception to account for the warping.<br /><br />With alpha we have a linear system. Ten percent plus ten percent always equals a uniform twenty percent.<br /><br />Mixing the two systems is where things get potentially ugly. Consider the alien audio application for example. If the aliens have recorded an awesome musical track that flutters around 0.5 in their audio application's dynamic range, the real world values might be somewhere about the middle of their bent audio perception range - somewhere between the upper limit of 0.7 and the lower limit of 0.3. Let's say it is around 0.5.<br /><br />So what happens if the aliens want to decrease the audio by about 50% in their audio system?<br /><br />The math is simple: the middle range of their audio 0.5 multiplied by 50%, which is 0.25! Simple! The final musical track has a value of 0.25 on average as opposed tot he original 0.5.<br /><br />Except it isn't quite what the aliens were hoping for.<br /><br />Sadly, this is entirely below the range of the alien's lower audible range at 0.3. This is way lower than they would like to hear, after all, they wanted a result that was around 50% less loud to their ears, not to the physical reality. Thanks to the bent audio application and simple math however, they got something radically different.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Enter Linear Light</b></span><br /><br />So what to do? Clearly the bent and warped perception in their applications isn't quite working out the way they want. If they keep the adjustments minor, they might not even realize there is a problem at all, despite the fact that the math is totally incorrect. The net sum is likely a bunch of confused alien audio artists.<br /><br />Well, let's pretend that the aliens could somehow "correct" their work so that it works in the full zero to one range as present on their planet? What if they could somehow bend their audio application's model back to the reality and do all of the math on it?<br /><br />They would somehow need to invert their audio samples to their alien planet's model, do the work, then before listening, correct it back to fit within the ranges that their ears work best in.<br /><br />This is precisely how a linear light workflow works.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Long Path to the Reason</b></span><br /><br />If you have managed to get this far, you may be able to figure out what has happened with the simple image that started it all.<br /><br />The math being performed on our magenta overlay is fundamentally broken. Our magenta value and the grey background live in the warped sRGB land, while the alpha lives in linear land. When we smash the two together in math via a multiplication, the result is very much broken when it comes to reality and how light behaves.<br /><br />There has been a large movement in rendering and imaging applications that tries to fix this. How does it do it? Well on a simple level all that is happening is that the images that come in with sRGB values are in fact "inversely bent" out of our historical bent space and flattened to a linear space. If you need to visualize this, it would be as though we started with the "Alien Ear" image above and flattened it back to the "Alien Audio Reality" model.<br /><br />This conversion to a more useful model makes the math hold up wonderfully. Then, just prior to the image being displayed, it is temporarily bent back to the warped version our eyes expect.<br /><br />And that brings us back full circle to arrive at Exhibit B way back at the start of this diatribe.<br /><br />In the interest of brevity and audience, this post obviously is an overly simplistic view of the issue in the name of getting the core foundation across. There are similar "bent and warped" complexities associated with things beyond the simple relative value of colours, including colour coordinates and other strange warping. This leads down the path of color management.<br /><br />Hopefully though, the rather silly introduction here has sparked your interest into those topics.<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>TL; DR</b></span><br /><br />Alpha operates on a linear model. The RGB values in the bulk of images are bent and warped. Mixing the two results in bent math that is fundamentally broken.<br /><br />If this was useful, let me know and perhaps I'll try and flesh out some other whacky things...<br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Further Reading</b></span><br /><ul><li><a href="http://www.poynton.com/notes/colour_and_gamma/GammaFAQ.html">Charles Poynton's Famous Gamma FAQ</a>.</li><li><a href="http://goo.gl/zosTu">A guide to linear light in Nuke</a>.</li><li><a href="http://www.poynton.com/notes/colour_and_gamma/ColorFAQ.html">Charles Poynton's Famous Color FAQ</a>.</li><li><a href="http://prolost.com/blog/2009/9/30/passing-the-linear-torch.html">One of the first evangelists of linear light Stu Maschwitz.</li></ul><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[1] Subject to the obvious inverse square law of light - 1/d^2</span><br /><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[2] This is further complicated by the fact that some people may have entirely different vision needs and / or differences. Some may be able to see much further than an average person, some may have a very particular sensitivity to colors or only see within certain ranges.</span><br /><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[3] In fact, there are legitimate reasons to have an application that covers the ranges you cannot see or hear, but that is the beyond the scope of this post.</span><br /><span style="font-size: xx-small;">[4] The over operation for a premultiplied alpha image is Over.RGB + (Background * (1 - Over.Alpha)). This subject is likely beyond the discussion here.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1348156161852109142?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-2971943820682339602011-08-19T18:47:00.001-07:002011-08-19T18:47:54.080-07:00<iframe width="560" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KzWwJ8mdh94?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-297194382068233960?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-58321489100263392011-08-18T12:05:00.000-07:002011-08-18T12:05:36.425-07:00I cannot but wonder how the next generation of brilliance will shift our perceptions of "genius" as we move forward.<br /><br />The next era of Da Vincis, Bergmans, Mozarts, Warhols, and Mahurins are upon us. Their entire lives will be forever recorded in digital space. Their genius will be forever entombed in ever increasing detail.<br /><br />The future generations will be able to trace their fingers over brilliant work and its creators with a resolution heretofore unseen.<br /><br />But in addition to this we will also have what the optics of revisionist history has sought to erase. Mistakes. Omissions. Glaring missteps. Moments of shame. Being wrong.<br /><br />How will this shape the notion of "genius" in the 21st century? How will the models that we accept as fact dissolve under the weight of recorded history?<br /><br />What happens when we, as a culture, acknowledge that the mythical notion of brilliance and genius is far more human? As this becomes the norm, will we learn to look at each other in a new light? Will the shared commonality of being wrong bring about a new era in social interactions?<br /><br /><br /><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5832148910026339?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-64620212396014201122011-06-02T11:41:00.000-07:002011-06-02T22:47:10.074-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lq3rvsU5lR8/TefZMa9WzLI/AAAAAAAAB3Q/aXazm50Uu38/s1600/sculpting.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lq3rvsU5lR8/TefZMa9WzLI/AAAAAAAAB3Q/aXazm50Uu38/s1600/sculpting.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Like, Do not want, +1; Perception of Data in Noise</b></span><br /><br />The number of up / down voting mechanisms in the contemporary culture are legion. They create a sense of participation. Of Value. Of merit or demerit.<br /><br />Within Eurowestern art and design, the notion of statistical analysis, averaging, and polling creeps into the cultural vernacular. "We are researching!"<br /><br />Is all research research? Can voting and polling lead to solid design decisions? Does the notion of averages yield design dividends?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Of Models and Crafting Reality</b></span><br /><br />The moment a model is applied, it implies a certain degree of buy-in. With Twitter, we create and enforce a model out of 140 character thoughts. With Reddit, we create an up and down voting mechanism that enforces a buy in of a polemical scale[1]. With +1, we buy into a slightly more complex polemic of participation versus none.<br /><br />With a ruler, we buy into an entire Arabic numeral system and orthodox procedure of measurement.<br /><br />Each of the above might seem trivial on some level, but it is the underlying, unwritten, and enforced models that are potentially troubling.<br /><br />If given a wooden ruler to measure the psychology of human anger, it is not the inability of measurement that should worry us, but rather the chance that we might succeed[2].<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Model Sculpts the Data</b></span><br /><br />We cannot underestimate <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_recognition">pattern recognition</a> as an important concept of intelligence and learning. In some instances however, this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori">a priori knowledge</a> has resulted in what appears to be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism">reductionism</a>; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division">a fallacy of division</a> from a vaguely Postmodern neglect of context and measurement model.<br /><br />Does data hold weight if we ignore the arrangements and the subtle contexts not included? When does data, when isolated and displaced from context, undermine the data itself?<br /><br /><blockquote>"[...] there is obviously a difference between us now, and us hacked up into a stew. Both contain all the same matter, but not the same pattern of arrangement. Thus, how matter and energy are patterned, arranged, within space and time is itself a defining aspect of a thing, and this pattern has causal and other distinct properties." -- <a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=oFdMzq56qyEC&amp;lpg=PP1&amp;dq=Carrier%2C%20Richard%20(2005).%20Sense%20and%20Goodness%20Without%20God%3A%20A%20Defense%20of%20Metaphysical%20Naturalism&amp;pg=PA130#v=onepage&amp;q&amp;f=false">Richard Carrier, Sense and Goodness Without God, pg 130</a></blockquote><br />Are we seeing "data" or "noise"? Are we viewing "objectivity" or under the "bias" of an invisible phenomenon[3]? Is our Eurowestern aggressive and insatiable passion for order and understanding stomping over the delicate complexities of contextual design insight?<br /><br />The goal is not not discredit the value of research and examining, but rather the skepticism brings with a hope of the contrary; to work toward a culture of contextual analysis and a questioning of implied models of measurement. A borrowing of powerful Postmodern analysis models leveraged against the contemporary culture.<br /><br />Let the design research and analysis reflect limited, constrained, and detailed context.<br /><br />This hope becomes increasingly difficult when polemical plus ones, likes, and such models become a cultural norm. Perhaps doubly so when those cultural norms are tied to extremely successful companies. The mirage of a tenuous connection between market cap and a successful model is an easy pitfall to fall into.<br /><br />After all of the metrics, all of the analysis, and all of the gluing together of the results, does such an approach do the art and craft of design justice?<br /><br />What do your measurements say?<br /><br />Thank you all for taking the time to read...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[1] With that buy in, however, we fail to ask questions. What of concepts that defy 140 characters? Does a vote up imply the author agrees with the link to "a crisis in Egypt", a funny meme within, a parallel of their moral views, or some other reason that brings them to press it?</span><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[2] It leads me to wonder what <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment">Milgram's experiment</a> would have looked like had the designed model included a "Do not desire to buzz the patient" button. The model sculpts the data, and in this case, with dire implications. How did the design of the experiment's model influence the data, and in turn the data influence the derived analysis?</span><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[3] Bias shows some interesting ties to perceptions of reality as highlighted in <a href="http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/02/07/pre-existing-bias-and-perceptions-of-reality/">this bit of data on partisan influence on perception</a>.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-6462021239601420112?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-9946374101759933242011-05-23T13:55:00.000-07:002011-05-23T14:00:16.109-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oEUypisvkyo/TdrIANSFr5I/AAAAAAAABv8/lq66yolvPOk/s1600/derrida.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oEUypisvkyo/TdrIANSFr5I/AAAAAAAABv8/lq66yolvPOk/s1600/derrida.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>If you are unfamiliar with who Derrida was, I'd heavily encourage you to at least dedicate <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derrida">a Twitterish amount of time to informing yourself</a>.<br /><br />Traditionally associated with postmodern thought, Jacques Derrida's work, as is true to the method he fleshed out to circumvent easy labeling, spans massive models and supersedes trivial classifications.<br /><br />His work is as useful as it is destabilizing.<br /><blockquote>"One of the definitions of what is called deconstruction would be the effort to take this limitless context into account, to pay the sharpest and broadest attention possible to context, and thus to an incessant movement of recontextualization." -- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derrida#Deconstruction">Jacques Derrida on Deconstruction</a>.</blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>From Powerful Thought to Powerful Design</b></span><br /><br />How does context influence design? When we make what appear simple and trivial decisions, are we not also forwarding a fabricated model? What innovation can we find by analyzing such models and focusing on the context of a given piece?<br /><br />Sadly, too often in Libre it seems people are willing to supplant that context for universality and absolutes. "User" has supplanted a real person, and "usability" has become the chic wardrobe moniker for a naked emperor.<br /><br />Bill Buxton most eloquently outlines the above ignorance of context in his book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Sketching-User-Experiences-Interactive-Technologies/dp/0123740371">Sketching User Experiences</a>. He relates an interesting design problem via navigating in a kayak.<br /><br />Do you choose a paper chart? A GPS enabled device? A laptop? The image in the header offers us a glimpse of contextual design:<br /><blockquote>"[...]a third approach, one that the Inuit have used. [...] Tactile maps of the coastline, carved out of wood. They can be carried inside your mittens, so your hands stay warm. They have infinite battery life, and can be read, even in the six months of the year that it is dark. And, if they are accidentally dropped into the water, they float. What you and I might see as a stick, for the Inuit can be an elegant design solution that is appropriate for their particular environment." -- <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Sketching-User-Experiences-Interactive-Technologies/dp/0123740371">Bill Buxton, Sketching User Experiences, pg 37</a>.</blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qhmjMpBgYMA/TdrHbjoc7kI/AAAAAAAABv4/uunfhEkQ4zM/s1600/inuit-carved-wooden-maps-of-greenland.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qhmjMpBgYMA/TdrHbjoc7kI/AAAAAAAABv4/uunfhEkQ4zM/s400/inuit-carved-wooden-maps-of-greenland.jpg" width="363" /></a></div><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Warning in Closing</b></span><br /><br />I will close this posting with a thought that seems fitting while obsessing over numerical averages and a desire for standardization of the human:<br /><br /><blockquote>"In the course of evolution nature has gone to endless trouble to see that every individual is unlike every other individual. We reproduce our kind by bringing the father's genes into contact with the mother's. These hereditary factors may be combined in an al­most infinite number of ways. Physically and mentally, each one of us is unique. Any culture which, in the interests of efficiency or in the name of some political or religious dogma, seeks to standardize the human individual, commits an outrage against man's biological nature." -- <a href="http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/index.html#overorg">Aldous Huxley, Brave New World Revisited</a>.</blockquote><br />Thank you all for reading.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;"><a href="http://www.deconcrete.org/2010/01/23/eskimos-coast-to-coast/">Original image sourced from Deconcrete</a>.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-994637410175993324?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-56209507272051414042011-04-29T15:09:00.000-07:002011-04-29T15:34:21.118-07:00This is somewhat of a corollary to my previous thoughts encapsulated in <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/12/why.html">Why</a>. As a side note, I've also been wanting to read more writing out of some of the folks I frequently read, and as such, this is a step to maybe try and walk the walk myself.<br /><br />What strikes me is that our Eurowestern culture has succumbed to <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/439">a certain tribalism that Mark Shuttleworth alluded to, albeit in a different context</a>.<br /><br />The diatribe goes something like Apple versus everything and everyone else. Android pops up. Windows pops up. And on and on. Other versus Same divided and classified in the very first sentence with no room for subtlety and complexity.<br /><br />In all of that worthless and petty discourse, I see a glaring lack of skepticism. A glaring disrespect for many of the ethics and ideals that some of our countries were founded upon. Those nebulous and dark things known as rights and freedoms that we only talk about with grandma and grandpa as they wax lyrical about times of war.<br /><br />Pick a tribe. Fight the other.<br /><br />It seems that fanboyism has supplanted the vigilance and skepticism in our minds. The traditional vanguards have succumbed to the disease for the very reason that their work, their play, and their lives have come to depend on the piece of technology they engage in the discourse with.<br /><br />To attack and challenge that is to attack and challenge their very being in an apparently self destructive manner.<br /><br />I cannot see the future. I cannot predict the needs of the next earth shaking and tumultuous hour, let alone tomorrow.<br /><br />When you prevent software from being installed at will upon a device, through approved or alternate means, you are pretending to predict the future. You are pretending to predict need. You are pretending to know what the next hour or next day will bring or require.<br /><br />When a culture accepts such a system, nay celebrates and endorses, that enforces a strict cathedral-like approach to your software choices, it is erodes the future. Your future. Our future.<br /><br />Does that ability and freedom bring complexity? Yes. Does it bring difficulty and complex issues? Yes.<br /><br />But are you willing to give up those legally endorsed freedoms in your real life culture?<br /><br />Now draw the line between your real life and the part that is wrapped up with computing.<br /><br />I dare you.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5620950727205141404?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-2253386859070867472011-04-23T21:05:00.000-07:002011-04-23T21:05:58.820-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-c5neO6Vd3Zk/TbOgq3R5IjI/AAAAAAAABuE/ndupPQa0vx4/s1600/disco.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ij2Cw1W4hFE/TbOhNLpJmBI/AAAAAAAABuI/VgIWDuFf0IU/s640/disco-sample.jpg" width="436" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-225338685907086747?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-62916237828205549862011-04-21T11:44:00.000-07:002011-04-21T11:57:43.697-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zctGBtiJtd4/TbB61qSuKzI/AAAAAAAABt8/ff2E21iwlQc/s1600/embrace.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zctGBtiJtd4/TbB61qSuKzI/AAAAAAAABt8/ff2E21iwlQc/s400/embrace.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>From Hand Wringing to Writing</b></span><br /><br />Reading over Google Reader today, <a href="http://mystilleef.blogspot.com/2011/04/emotional-engineering-vs-software.html">a share came up</a> from <a href="http://dylanmccall.blogspot.com/">Dylan McCall</a>. It troubled me deeply as I found the conclusions to be somewhat reckless.<br /><br />After a bit of teeth grinding, I pondered <a href="http://mystilleef.blogspot.com/2011/04/emotional-engineering-vs-software.html">the posting by Mystilleef</a> a little more. While my initial reaction was quite adversarial, I gave it a little more time to stew. Being Libre software, we need more darn communication and less confrontational approaches, so I thought I'd stick a quill in my closed hand and try to get an alternate side to the discourse started.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b><a href="http://mystilleef.blogspot.com/2011/04/emotional-engineering-vs-software.html">Emotional Engineering Vs Software Engineering</a></b></span><br /><blockquote>The argument goes that software should adapt and bend to users preferences and not the other way round. As such, "good" and "powerful" software should be configurable and littered with plentiful options to accommodate all known and unforeseen needs of users.</blockquote>Here the premise starts. While there is a clear polemical model being established, this was not my issue. Had the post solely focused on the belief that multiple preferences and options were poor design, I likely would have agreed and moved along. However, it did not.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Bone of Contention</b></span><br /><blockquote>Human preferences are affected by too many variables most of which are subjective, cultural and emotional. In contrast, the most efficient and effective way to accomplish a task is a purely engineering feat. It is measurable, quantifiable and observable. Somehow, many people have missed this important point.</blockquote>And here begins the problem.<br /><br />As anyone that is familiar with this blog would attest, the subject of audience and context crops up time and time again. Who is the audience? What are their needs? What is their background?<br /><br />The above quote nicely rounds out a good number of pitfalls associated with Libre design. Even though the quote looks quite simple, there are hidden assumptions and, as Foucault would suggest, buys into a very particular <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episteme">épisteme</a>. It is one that I believe permeates Libre culture.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Human Preferences are Complex</b></span><br /><br />True. One hundred percent agreement.<br /><br />Sadly however, this is no excuse to cash out and leave design at the door. Do we give up because something is apparently complex to a given person? Is that complexity necessarily insurmountable by another person? Are we to assume that an averaging is an optimal solution?<br /><br />Try to remember the last time you saw a wonderful magic trick.<br /><br />Many magic tricks defy explanation. And yet, to the performer, that magic trick is nothing more than the result of solid design work and thought. To you, the audience, it results in a wonderful experience when executed properly. To the magician, it is often more about complex work and execution.<br /><br />I will give Mystilleef full credit for being one of the few to see that there is in fact a cultural component to this. Aesthetics and visual perception are very deeply rooted in cultural starting points. In fact, the Eurowestern belief that there is a physiological consistency across all humans is in fact challenged by some seminal anthropological tomes on the subject[1].<br /><br />So, in short, my first point would be to not avoid the subject of solid design merely because "human preferences are affected by too many variables." Rather, I'd encourage everyone involved in Libre software to begin to examine those variables and pay strict attention to them.<br /><br />Avoiding the complexities has led us to the precise blight of design we see today in Libre software. Bad guessing. Poor judgement. Awful pursuit of mythical universality.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Most Efficient and Effective</b></span><br /><br />In the second sentence we can immediately see two trap words. "Efficiency" and "effective" must always be evaluated within contextual information, even more so when we add "most" into the mix. If we were going to suggest how a graphical user interface is the "most efficient and effective" interface to control a computer, we have effectively ignored the context and circumstance as design considerations[2].<br /><br /><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/abhorrent-absolutism.html">Absolutism</a> has no place in design.<br /><br />So on my second point, the presence of attractive trap words leads us away from the hard nitty-gritty of design. Context. Questions. Audience.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Purely Engineering</b></span><br /><br />Thus far in our human history, the desire to see mathematical rigor in the fields of aesthetics and design has yet to come to pass. Even if we were able to fully quantify and qualify this complex interaction, we would likely find that the results would be extremely varied based on the complexities of the situations[3].<br /><br />This isn't comforting for many. This is likely especially not comforting for a large portion of the brilliant minds that are attracted to Libre software.<br /><br />At risk of horribly oversimplifying a culture, Libre software culture seems to have taken its current cultural trajectory from the historical minds that founded it; mathematicians, engineers, software programmers.<br /><br />Those fields are moored in a heavy context of right and wrong. Yin and yang. Compiles or not compiles.<br /><br />Design, aesthetics, and other such things are nebulous and subjective. They are specific to people, their environments, and their historical contexts. In a world that worships right and wrong, design is an awkward and sinister beast.<br /><br />Design, aesthetics, emotion, and experience are all valid and powerful traits of a piece. There is no simple measurement or secret formula that deliver them. It isn't always simple to observe nor quantify the machinations and ramifications of such facets. They are not subject to the traditional engineering rules established by the harder sciences. They are the subject of emotional engineering.<br /><br />On my third point, I'd likely agree with Mystilleef but perhaps in a slightly different way; it <i>is</i> all purely engineering. But let's not be too hasty to dismiss emotion and experience as vital parts of a Libre software project's architecture to be engineered.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Wandering off into Postmodernism and Foucault</b></span><br /><blockquote>However, these reasons should hive around usability and accessibility and again not individual preferences.</blockquote>The attitudes and priorities of a given culture are reflected in their words[4]. The constructs. The accepted and unwritten knowledge. Who wouldn't want something to be "usable"? Another horribly appealing trap word.<br /><br />Usability, when cast adrift alone, is a blind pig of a term. It presupposes context. It makes grotesque assumptions. And it dissolves in the face of diversity and snaps under the weight of scrutiny.<br /><br />It is as vacuous as the term "beautiful" or "delicious".<br /><br />If ever there were a purely mathematical approach to this magical word, it would be leveraged the world over and everyone would agree. But, in practice, this isn't the case.<br /><br />If we can avoid pretending the word holds value and quit chasing the dragons it paints, we might stand to make some truly compelling software in Libre.<br /><br />Let's cast out "usability" and let "people" stand where it rested.<br /><br />Who are they? What are their desires? What are they attempting to accomplish? What are their cultural needs? What excites them? What engages them emotionally? Where and when are they living and what is relevant to them?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why Bother?</b></span><br /><br />For some, there is little passion or fascination for design and the emotion it brings. I'd like to believe that the majority of the audience that reads this blog is of a different temperament.<br /><br />I'd sum up the answer as to why we should focus on individuals with a number:&nbsp;18.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Gladwell">Malcom Gladwell</a> makes a case for the number 18 in his presentation <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html">Malcom Gladwell on Spaghetti Sauce</a>. I would heavily encourage all readers of this blog to watch it. It is entirely topical to this discussion of "usability" and other universals. I'll leave you with an intriguing quote so that you might go and watch it yourself. The number 18 comes from the difference of a coffee rating among averages and groups. It is tied in with the rejection of universals and the embracing of diversity.<br /><blockquote>"The difference between coffee at 60 and coffee at 78 is the difference between coffee that makes you wince and coffee that makes you deliriously happy." -- <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html">Malcom Gladwell on Spaghetti Sauce</a></blockquote>The emotional and experiential realm is upon us in technological design. It cannot and should not be avoided simply because the art and craft of tickling those nerves is radically different from the art and craft of the lower level software code.<br /><br />It is my firmest belief that until we accept and embrace the need for emotional design, we will never get those magical 18 points of difference that Mr. Gladwell references. We will forever repeat the horrible and unfortunate mistake of aiming at the average between two targets and hitting neither.<br /><br />We must embrace and focus on crafting subjective emotions and reject the notion of idealized universals.<br /><br />To suggest for a moment that emotions cannot be crafted or engineered of course, is to suggest that a tear or a smile has never been shed over prose, during a movie, or while listening to a song.<br /><br />It is still engineering.<br /><br />Just of a different sort.<br /><br />Once again, thank you immensely for taking the time to read. Thank you to Mystilleef for stirring the brain...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[1] <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Culture-Visual-Perception/dp/0672608251">The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Dimension-Edward-T-Hall/dp/0385084765">The Hidden Dimension</a> might be worthy reads if you are interested in the subject.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[2] If a person were administering a computer half a world away via a slow bitrate connection such as dialup, it is possible to suggest that a command line interface may be the most efficient and effective. In short, there is never an absolutist definition of "efficient" or "effective" without examining the contextual elements.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[3] <a href="http://hassenzahl.wordpress.com/">Marc Hassenzahl</a> has done a wonderful job of assigning a numerical model to some of these more nebulous concepts, but even then, it is a model. It may work in some instances, it may break in others.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[4] If you have issue with this claim or find it interesting, it is perhaps worth reading Michel Foucault's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Order-Things-Archaeology-Human-Sciences/dp/0679753354">The Order of Things</a>.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-6291623782820554986?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-73875653803508974262011-04-03T22:06:00.000-07:002011-04-03T22:11:18.617-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Kf1ZJWXU_Kg/TZlSwKhZDuI/AAAAAAAABtI/7jMhDSPYsaU/s1600/blasphemer.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6rerPxHX4cE/TZlRCFA-TmI/AAAAAAAABs0/63ziie1kKWA/s640/blasphemer-sample.jpg" width="452" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7387565380350897426?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-52114865461341282232011-03-27T15:16:00.000-07:002011-03-27T15:16:59.623-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OML3oEDfe7o/TY-2saLcXJI/AAAAAAAABsI/i0sh1Gl1ktE/s1600/heretic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-l5tvmWOmiOs/TY-2slHQ4hI/AAAAAAAABsQ/67TZJMDlZg8/s640/heretic-slice.jpg" width="416" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5211486546134128223?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-2967802318871450312011-02-17T22:04:00.000-08:002011-02-17T22:08:46.973-08:00This message goes out to you, the thirteen year old. For many of my generation, there is likely a twinge of insanity that I am directing this message to you.<br /><br />When we look at you, we see nothing but the frail and weak thirteen year olds that we were.<br /><br />But you, you are different. You are a new breed. You live and breathe in technology as a fish lives and breathes in water. You take it for granted, as you should, because for you the tapestry of your life will be eternally woven from it. You are forever changed and see this world differently.<br /><br />Sadly though, your sense of history is as short as your precious years of life.<br /><br />Look at the device on which you are reading this. Can you control it? Who does? Can you install lifeware of your choosing upon it? Can you create lifeware of your own design and share it with your peers as you see fit? Can you create on <i>your</i> terms subject to the needs of <i>your</i> future?<br /><br />Why do I ask this?<br /><br />Because these are dangerous and frightening times for some of us old people. Some of us see these historic moments as turning points. Moments that our collective cultures are tested. These are the times that <i>our</i> mothers and fathers referred to later as "Those were the days."<br /><br />These are times that only old people like myself are just barely able to see in the context of a more distant history.<br /><br />Look around you and see Egypt and <a href="http://www.americablog.com/2011/02/mubarak-ordered-tiananmen-style.html">what may have been</a> were it not for technology. Look around you and see Bahrain and <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/02/17/the-price-of-protest-demonstrations-turn-violent/">what is happening at the speed of technology</a>.<br /><br />All of this, the thirteen year old of my generation would never have seen. For some of us older people, we see these recent moments in the light of similar moments from our past, with one vast and monumental difference - the colossal power that this new technology has afforded us.<br /><br />Now think about that device you are using. Think about what it means to be able to control it. Think about the importance of the ubiquitous internet and think about how a government is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/27/egypt-internet-goes-down-_n_815156.html">able to snap off the blood of this new technology at whim</a>. Think about how some of <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/01/kill-switch-legislation/">your own governments operate in like areas</a> and the means you have to struggle against it.<br /><br />Now think about who the powerful piece of technology in front of you empowers.<br /><br />So this is my plea. You see, my generation and the generation after have succumbed and lost. Our flabby water logged flesh can barely lift its computer literacy off of the evolutionary floor with our atrophied intellects. We are no more well equipped to teach you about your technology than a three year old is equipped to teach us how to read and write.<br /><br />We have traded our liberty and power to create for convenience and consumption. We have bitten upon the bait that things must Just Work(TM) and Be Simple(TM) in order to be valuable.<br /><br />We have accepted the charlatans of chic and trendy as surrogates for importance and complexity.<br /><br />The technological aristocracy and monarchies of birthright listen to no one. Despite the profound unfolding of&nbsp;events and our unforeseeable interactions with the computing technology around us, those unelected technological regimes are limiting your rights and freedoms. They are casting forth lifeware restrictions of tremendous <a href="http://www.osnews.com/story/24433/GPL-like_Licenses_Explicitly_Banned_from_WP7_Marketplace">breadth</a> and <a href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/more-about-the-app-store-gpl-enforcement">depth</a>. For these kings and queens, computing is nothing more than a trivial and mass produced&nbsp;privilege granted to you, the peasants.<br /><br />They are the unfortunate architects of a radically restrictive future under the guise of a clairvoyant professing to see and know <i>your</i> future.<br /><br />So please, I implore you, accept that <i>you</i> are our future, not <i>them</i>.<br /><br />While it saddens me that we have burdened you with the legacy of this tribal technological myopia, it inspires me that you are the very minds that are most capable to fix things.<br /><br />You can see the things that we cannot.<br /><br />Bleed with emotion. Write with passion. Speak with the power and force that is required of you. Embrace the knowledge and power and create where their systems prevent you.<br /><br />And, in those rare instances where they will not listen or permit you, make them.<br /><br />Harness the technology in ways that they may not have seen nor approve.<br /><br />If you do not, it is very likely that this awe&nbsp;inspiring and&nbsp;powerful thing known as computing freedom will gradually be taken away from you and the generations to follow you.<br /><blockquote>"They may say 'Those were the days,' but in a way, you know for us these are the days. Yes, for us these are the days." -- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane's_Addiction">Jane's Addiction</a> Classic Girl</blockquote>Teach.<br /><br />Us.<br /><br />Please.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-296780231887145031?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-87311312596068177582011-02-06T18:23:00.000-08:002011-03-20T10:02:39.135-07:00There is a list of people that need special and significant thanks for <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/02/control.html">the last post of a music video.</a> If it were not for their dedication and commitment, the result would not have been possible.<br /><br />Without further ado...<br /><br /><a href="http://mke3.net/">Matt Ebb</a>, for linear color complexities, help desking, and other critically important things.<br />Joshua Leung for a resilient animation infrastructure.<br /><a href="http://peter.schlaile.de/blog/">Peter Schlaile</a> for being the overlord of sequencers and patient answerer of questions.<br /><a href="http://jahka.blogspot.com/">Janne Karhu</a> and the particles.<br /><a href="http://www.blender.org/community/blender-conference/blender-conference-2007/conference-proceedings/campbell-barton/">Campbell Barton</a> for pushing a massive chunk of code around that is too long to list here.<br />Xavier Thomas for deeper wisdom pertaining to YCbCr transforms and other useful deep colour alchemy at the code level.<br /><br />And of course, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton_Roosendaal">Ton Roosendaal</a> for being strong enough to maintain an artist-centric design vision and humble enough to evolve that vision beyond where he originally believed it should be.<br /><br />I prefer to let work speak for itself, in another room a ways away from the tools used to create it. In this instance however, credit should go where credit is due. With a little more secret and stealthy effort, who knows what other things might hit the broadcast waves...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-8731131259606817758?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-2044408117932183362011-02-03T21:38:00.000-08:002011-06-22T20:06:33.039-07:00Full thanks go to:<br /><br />Left Spine Down - Kaine Delay, Jeremy Inkel, and Matt Girvan.<br />Mark Sommer, Synthetic Entertainment.<br />Neil McBride, producer and juggler.<br />Nav Degun, Paramount Production Services.<br />Erica McLean, Paramount Production Services.<br />and, of course,<br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She's_Lost_Control">Joy Division for seeding this so many years ago</a>.<br /><br />The rest of the camera pointing, light pointing, mouse pointing, and finger pointing is some buffoon who shall remain nameless.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/t_G3Ecd9w3k?hd=1" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe><br /><br />This was finished quite some time ago, but I haven't been able to put it up here thanks to music video channels and other site exclusivity. It has received over 400,000 views at VampireFreaks, which is a nice touch. Surprisingly, it still features on the splash pages at Much Music for rock and alternative and is getting some rotational airplay.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-204440811793218336?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-70821665971454425002011-01-12T14:48:00.000-08:002011-01-14T13:44:23.609-08:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TS4p5bsdaPI/AAAAAAAABkk/zOMvRLQif3Y/s1600/confusion.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TS4p5bsdaPI/AAAAAAAABkk/zOMvRLQif3Y/s400/confusion.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />As some may know, the last post went postal.<br /><br />A total count of around 37,000 views and climbing on a subject that was aimed at about 250 daily readers.<br /><br />In the furor that arose, there has been a colossal depth and diversity of discussions. <a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/422409/">Some utterly positive, productive, and explanatory</a>, and <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/why-gimp-is-inadequate.html">some utterly off topic, tangential, and otherwise</a>.<br /><br />There is likely much to discuss from the output.<br /><br />This post focuses on one specific aspect of the last post, that, as a result of the information and insight from some of the powerful minds over at LWN, helps to clarify the grossly misunderstood area of bit depth[1].<br /><br />I can only hope this doesn't erupt into a flame war. These are real world examples with real world data and now, thankfully, some real world developers speaking up and offering further insight. That interaction is a core strength of Libre software.<br /><br />If there is a weakness out there, it is the result of voting up commentary that ranges from inaccurate to completely incorrect. This is not an attempt to vilify those postings, but rather shed some light onto the issue in a practical way. It is hoped that the examples found at <a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/422409/">LWN</a>&nbsp;and <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2091194">Hacker News</a> provide compelling evidence of the importance of bit depth to even the most casual reader.<br /><br />This discussion strictly pertains to the manipulations performed on images. In particular, it seeks to dismantle the notion that high bit depth calculations are only relevant on high bit depth imaging devices. This is simply and fundamentally untrue.<br /><br />This post builds upon and heavily relies on the strength of minds over at <a href="http://lwn.net/">LWN</a>, <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/">Hacker News</a>, and some very bright developers in the Libre community. It is hoped that further input can help to flesh this issue into a far more comprehensible subject than it currently is.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Q: What is Bit Depth?</span></b><br /><br />Bit depth is the amount of information used to store a color value in a color system[2]. In an RGB additive light system such as what you are likely looking at now, each component of red, green, and blue is modeled into numbers.<br /><br />A common format is eight bits per channel. This yields a scale of 0-255 for each red, green, and blue component in a typical image.<br /><br />Perhaps the most prevalent system is a 24 bit per pixel representation. This are simply three channels of eight bits each of color accuracy[3].<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Q: My Monitor is only Eight Bits Per Channel? Why Do I Care?</b></span><br /><br />The monitor is an end point. It is an output device.<br /><br />As soon as we begin to discuss the area of manipulation of images, we engage the issue of bit depth. In particular, we are speaking of bit depth accuracy. While the pipeline looks consistent at eight bits per channel from a starting eight bit JPG image to an eight bit per channel display device, we must also remember that the result of any and all manipulations are also constrained to the eight bit scale.<br /><br />This results in intermediate values being rounded to fit within that scale. Many of these will end up being visible on an eight bit per channel monitor.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Q: These are microscopic theoretical differences aren't they? Why do I care?</b></span><br /><br />You might not.<br /><br />There is a good chance though, if you are an audience using an image manipulation program, you have at least a passing interest in output image quality. And if you do indeed care, bit depth calculation accuracy comes into the mix and brings with it visible output implications.<br /><br />Remember that consecutive image manipulations are commonplace in an imaging editing system. Within a limited bit depth scale, those consecutive operations compound and conspire against each other and compound. Repeated rounding accuracy is cumulative in many instances.<br /><br />The result is an output image that can be seriously degraded.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Q: There are some people that say this is all a myth and some that say it isn't, though. Is this real?</b></span><br /><br />At risk of being inflammatory, anyone that suggests that the issue of bit depth only applies to deep outputs formats such as printing or deep professional grade sources, is <i>unequivocally wrong</i>.<br /><br />For this however, we should turn to some demonstrations.<br /><br />The first case study would be from <a href="http://mypaint.intilinux.com/">the MyPaint application</a>. MyPaint is a digital painting application. A good deal of design focus goes into focusing on digital painting and display output. The curator of MyPaint is Martin Reynolds and his exemplary mind has taken these sorts of mythical concepts to task in code.<br /><br />Note that this is a scenario where many would suggest bit depth does not matter as we are trapped within the eight bit digital output of a typical display.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://mypaint.info/misc/8bit_vs_16bit.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="228" src="http://mypaint.info/misc/8bit_vs_16bit.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />It should be clear from this image alone that in fact, there is a striking visible difference between eight bits and fifteen bits per channel representations. Even though the output source is identical in both scenarios, the internal math gives entirely different results.<br /><br />From Martin Reynolds's example here deeper bit depth during computation has a visible and distinct impact on image quality.<br /><br />The <a href="http://mypaint.intilinux.com/?p=19">full article can be found at the MyPaint site</a>. Full credit goes to <a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/422434/">Boudewijn Rempt at LWN for this citation and discussion</a>. Boudewijn Rempt is a remarkable mind also contributing to the <a href="http://krita.org/">Krita project</a>, so his opinions and expertise are backed up with a good deal of practical reference.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Q: Are there examples of differing bit depth sources that highlight the issue?</b></span><br /><br />Yes.<br /><br />A higher bit per channel input image holds more steps of data than a reduced eight bit channel image. This yields more granularity within the information.<br /><br />A single image manipulation is provided in the following example. Notice how there is quite radical posterization, or color banding, in the image after only a single manipulation.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TS4lmPkFv5I/AAAAAAAABkY/NAAGS6VNW14/s1600/source-depths.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="245" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TS4lmPkFv5I/AAAAAAAABkY/NAAGS6VNW14/s400/source-depths.png" width="400" /></a></div><br />This sample is a crop from an existing article. The&nbsp;<a href="http://www.photoshopessentials.com/essentials/16-bit/page-3.php">full article (author unknown) can be found PhotoshopEssentials</a>. Full credit goes to <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2091389">julian37 at Hacker News for discussing and providing this example</a>.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Q: So, limited eight bit working space influences all image manipulations even if the output is only destined for eight bit or less displays?</b></span><br /><br />Yes.<br /><br />In summary, strictly eight bit images operated on in an eight bit workspace will yield rounding errors that result in degraded image quality.<br /><br />A simple way of expressing this is to consider a value of 127 red. It is fundamentally impossible to divide such a value in half without throwing out a degree of information.&nbsp;When we throw out that data, we are degrading the image in visibly noticeable ways. Greater bit depth work spaces provide significantly more accuracy and hence reduces the visual impact of this issue.<br /><br />The limited range of 256 total steps per channel is obviously important. How important? What is the threshold for error?<br /><br /><blockquote>"The magnitude of these errors is surprising. The brightest spots in the difference image correspond to a difference of only 2 pixel values!" -- <a href="http://enblend.sourceforge.net/banding.htm">Andrew Mihal experimenting with code on Enblend</a>.</blockquote><br />Martin Reynold's MyPaint example above beautifully illustrates this.<br /><br />The issue becomes even more noticeable when we compare it against an image of deeper bit depth as in the second example.<br /><br />Whether you are doing photographic or pure shape based imaging, the moment that we enter into a limited bit depth space such as eight bits per channel, we are discarding data accuracy when manipulating. Blurs, colour manipulations, compositing, and even simple anti-aliasing is impacted.<br /><br />There is no magic here. There is no hypothesis or hyperbole. In the end, this is simple and fundamental math and rounding.<br /><br />There is no question that this is a critically misunderstood issue surrounded in confusion and misinformation.<br /><br />Whether this difference is noticeable and meaningful to the reader is a personal and subjective thought that shall remain open. For those more heavily involved with image manipulations and output thereof, this is a well documented and core issue.<br /><br />Thank you all for reading...<br /><br />Further reading:<br /><br /><a href="http://lwn.net/Articles/422409/">The LWN thread regarding the implications of eight bit rounding</a>.<br /><a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2091321">The Hacker News thread regarding bit depth</a>.<br /><a href="http://enblend.sourceforge.net/banding.htm">Andrew Mihal talks about precision and rounding errors</a>.<br /><br /><br />If there are any inaccuracies or articles of further relevance, please comment and all efforts will be made to integrate them where appropriate.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] That includes anything to do with&nbsp;<a href="http://gegl.org/">GEGL</a>&nbsp;and what it brings to GIMP etc.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[2] This avoids the complications of color space transformations and like areas. It would likely only serve to confuse the issue without bringing much additional value to the discussion.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[3] It should also be noted that despite a huge number of graphics cards offering 32 bit in their titles, they offer only eight bits per RGB channel with an additional eight bit transparency layer. It is current convention that true ten bit per channel video cards are presented as 30 bit cards to avoid this confusing piece of historical legacy.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7082166597145442500?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-83358752375648393982011-01-10T11:30:00.000-08:002011-09-26T13:57:14.813-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TStlf4sQ22I/AAAAAAAABj4/nD17Z5vhSbw/s1600/gimp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TStlf4sQ22I/AAAAAAAABj4/nD17Z5vhSbw/s400/gimp.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><b style="font-size: xx-large;">Famous or Infamous?</b><br /><br />GIMP is perhaps one of the most well known imaging apps available in Libre software. Its virtues are endorsed by many in the Libre software community. In a practical sense however, within North American art and design circles, its uptake is effectively zero.<br /><br />There are reasons behind this, although any attempts to tackle the issues have a tendency to erupt into nothing more than hyperbole and animosity, leaving behind the core issues at hand.<br /><br />This is an attempt to outline three key reasons why some graphic artists and designers perceive GIMP as inadequate when it comes to its suitability in their imaging pipelines[1].<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Precision</span></b><br />Update: There appears to be quite a bit of confusion regarding bit depth both for ingestion and for calculations. To this end, <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2011/01/bit-depth-and-confusion.html">a follow up article was crafted to specifically explore some of the issues regarding bit depth</a>.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=74224">Public bug reported in 2002 and covers deeper than 16bpc</a>.</span><br /><br />Pixels are stored in discrete units of bits. GIMP has a hard limit of eight bits per channel at its highest depth. This means that all colour is locked into 0 to 255 steps.<br /><br />Why is this an issue?<br /><br />Ultimately this is a question of quality. There is no arguing that insufficient bit depth will always lead to a degradation of image quality. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterization">Posterization</a> is the most obvious impact of restricted bit depths.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TStarN5ZtKI/AAAAAAAABjw/HyigIkTlfjM/s1600/depth.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TStarN5ZtKI/AAAAAAAABjw/HyigIkTlfjM/s1600/depth.png" /></a></div><br />Every action in GIMP throws data out. Import an inexpensive camera's output in RAW format and you throw out data, irreversibly forcing the 12-14 bit per channel data into 8 bit per channel internal resolution. Color selections, blurs, and every data related manipulation will be fundamentally restricted.<br /><br />Pundits that suggest this is negotiable are simply and flagrantly incorrect[2]. Quality is quality. Good enough is not good enough given these constraints.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Performance</span></b><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=304798">Related to this bug report from 2005</a>, but likely covers a little more as it applies to purely round brushes as well.</span><br /><br />Print work operates at a high DPI count. If we assume 300DPI as a baseline for work, we can quickly see how the numbers grow as our dimensions increase. A standard letter sized print at 8.5"x11" would yield dimensions of 2550x3300[3].<br /><br />At those dimensions, large brushes are required. Setting a brush to a radius of 50 and working at a 1:1 resolution yields performance that is well beyond sub-optimal.<br /><br />All manipulations on this size suffer. Multi-core processing may help, but ultimately this is the domain of less-than-glamorous profiling and optimizing. Graphics processor acceleration is device dependent and can yield inconsistencies across platforms or graphics cards[4].<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Linear Light</b></span><br /><br />As a result of cathode ray tubes and other legacy alchemy, the images you view on your computer monitor come preset and "baked" with various imaging variables. One of which is known as <a href="http://www.poynton.com/notes/colour_and_gamma/GammaFAQ.html">gamma</a>.<br /><br />When doing manipulations on images within this preset world, the math falls apart. You cannot simply add one unit of red to one unit of red and get to two units of red.<br /><br />Linear light solves this by reversing the gamma present in images and formatting all of the pixels into a linear space. Certain image manipulations involving light based concepts such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_leak">light leaks</a> are much more efficient to <a href="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:oyNyg2YEL_UJ:www.artbeats.com/assets/written_tutorials/pdfs/linear_light.pdf+linear+light+example&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=ca&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESjiehYc1iVqgNIXadHp6u3TqTeHxXJV0aXuwei_5sJ4_HabkfVGRXkP20sIOMKSXkmXahazFF6kw98LRSE79mJ-HEZTaHcagq2Pwa9A8ZpQ7h6i-d2394FMKu8PwMnSI5F8_gWh&amp;sig=AHIEtbSq4CQUzrNqa3do1ZsGQbl5Aq7CYg&amp;pli=1">achieve using a linear light model</a>.<br /><br />In addition to this, a linear light option allows imaging pipelines to integrate with the system, as many <a href="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:30-vWaL6s3QJ:www.swdfx.com/PDF/Nuke_Color_Management_Wright.pdf+linear+light+nuke&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=ca&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESgpHfQ5PAU3riLsreIqd0QJ64yytpTJN40ZU4ZK_mk9sHzOMzSVQaWL2kzeL5EMmXcJHLDQdN5WawnaW2wgAxe2Swzw8Z7ABlQ0YaoZT4nPiGid76EtGEJcQVkNH7orqOX8C__2&amp;sig=AHIEtbQY3-zFOQDe1MTXEdN1HajLQfhAdg">higher end pipelines rely on linear light models</a>.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">The Long Road</span></b><br /><br />GIMP is a valuable tool to hobby imaging. In its current incarnation, GIMP has many shortcomings that inhibit its usage by many talented artists. There are certainly an extremely rare and dedicated few that have created <a href="http://www.davidrevoy.com/?article36/alice-in-wonderland">spectacular work using the GIMP</a>, and those people are indispensable to increasing GIMP's credibility and acceptance. Unfortunately, personal and ethical software choices cannot alone create and evolve artist tools within a project.<br /><br />With its inherent low ability ceilings, lack of industry support, and fundamental core issues, aspiring graphics arts individuals often simply skip over GIMP and move onto alternate options.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is Wrong?</b></span><br /><br />If we read and accept the current state of <a href="http://libregraphicsworld.org/articles.php?article_id=26">GIMP's development to be dire with only two principal developers left</a>, we can see that the project might have a rough road ahead.<br /><br />How is it that the flagship imaging application struggles along with only two principal developers working on it and an alternate project such as Blender is absolutely thriving in Libre software? To an outsider, this might be interpreted as a symptom of a lower level dysfunction.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Back to Audience</b></span><br /><br />Are there any solutions out there for the GIMP dilemma?<br /><br />It would seem logical that with GIMP's currently suffocating level of principal developers that an investment in priorities would be well spent.<br /><br />Is GIMP seeking to be an advanced or professional grade imaging tool or is it a hobby grade application?<br /><br />In a private discussion, <a href="http://hci.uwaterloo.ca/faculty/mterry/">Michael Terry of the University of Waterloo</a> offered that the largest percentage of GIMP's user base was amateur and hobby individuals. Should GIMP perhaps alter its course to focus and elevate its usefulness to this audience? Even acknowledging an amateur imaging audience doesn't eradicate the above issues either, as it is more likely that an amateur photographer will require exposure correction that uses the deeper bit depth than a seasoned veteran.<br /><br />If GIMP has aspirations to be a professional grade tool, then it indeed needs to prioritize the needs of the artists and technicians in those environments above all else. Is single window mode a priority over deep bit depths when the vast bulk of professional artists are working in a multi window Photoshop on an Apple Macintosh product environment?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Future?</b></span><br /><br />It is a sincere hope that GIMP finds itself in the near future. Current and, more importantly, future Libre artists rely on it extensively.<br /><br />All that we can do is ask questions. Is there something wrong with the GIMP development model that prevents growth? Is there anything that could be done to help GIMP achieve the dedicated and passionate developer core that Blender currently has? What can we do as a community to ensure that Libre raster imaging software is a growth area?<br /><br />GIMP's situation is troubling.<br /><br />GIMP has factual and easily verifiable shortcomings as an imaging app. Arguing that fact is simply in the realm of delusion. This post has attempted to outline three potential show stoppers for digital artists.<br /><br />Does GIMP have an identity crisis between the desire to be an advanced imaging editor and the practical reality of its ability? What would sharp and deliberate decisions about audience do to the project[5]?<br /><br />Does GIMP have an eroding development model? Is there a similarity between GIMP and the erosion that happened at Open Office?<br /><br />Is there anything that can be done to rectify this situation[6]?<br /><br />Thank you all for reading...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[1] Interface elements have been left out. Indeed, some of the recent pursuits over single window mode seem glaringly strange given the lack of software ability. It also leaves out some obvious complicating deficiencies in the performance section regarding CMYK subtractive colour modelling for print.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[2] You cannot sandwich images together. Anyone that suggests this as a workaround is about as far away from a credible opinion as you could ask. Also, it still fails to address manipulations within the application such as masking, blurring, scaling, rotating, and other such tools beyond the scope of a RAW image editor.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[3] This obviously is a very basic value as you would most certainly have to include bleeds and like details in a pre-press image.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[4] This doesn't even begin to discuss the complexities of closed and open graphics card driver dilemmas.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[5] <a href="http://blog.cberger.net/2010/03/02/the-difficult-choice-of-removing-features/">Krita recently has made this difficult decision</a> and has been making what appears to be solid progress with a fresh and refined perspective.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[6] Please resist suggesting funding as this appears to be a community based issue. There are countless examples of funding that yields nothing, let alone the practical cost / benefit example of simply purchasing proprietary software. It is, in this context, a completely tangential discussion.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-8335875237564839398?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com172tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-72405766817943953042010-12-11T03:20:00.000-08:002010-12-12T13:47:37.137-08:00Recently I received a thought provoking response <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/10/spec-work-and-contests-part-two.html?showComment=1291673669602#c6105040980828583667">from Vishnoo</a>. I'd rattle off some of Vish's contributions to Libre software, but it is likely easier to provide you with <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/vish">a link or two</a> to some <a href="https://launchpad.net/~vish">of his information pages</a>.<br /><br />I believe Vish is located in India and, as such, he is one of those figures that I believe the Eurowesterner crowd might stand to learn plenty from. Perhaps if you prod Vish as I have been doing, we might be treated to some blogging regarding his thoughts and perspectives on Libre software, art, design, and other areas.<br /><br />Having a good deal of respect for Vish, I thought answering his comment with a follow up comment wouldn't quite do it justice. Further, I believe some of his concerns are echoed in the minds of others.<br /><br />To this end, I've chosen to escape the four megabyte boundary and answer his comment here. While I hope it serves to further flesh out my concerns with contests and requested speculative work in the Free Software / Libre design community, I also hope it hints at a much greater concern.<br /><br /><blockquote>Reading through the post I was hoping,at the end, you would be offering some suggestions as to how to fix this problem. Throwing stones at a glass home to illustrate the bad design is good, but who is going to rebuild it? How?</blockquote><br />I tend to think that far too many of the vocal folks in Libre software profess to have solutions. Upon examination, however, most of the solutions I have been privy to appear a little shallow in substance and grossly oversimplified for the scope of the problem.<br /><br />For example, I find the obsession with collaborative art and design software the stuff of myth. Wikis, mailing lists, dreamy collaborative art sites, galleries, etc. are all avoiding the core issue in my mind.<br /><br /><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/abhorrent-absolutism.html">If we can frame a problem</a>, I do believe we can make some success. Indeed it seems that some don't even see a problem at all. My first desire is for those around this community to at least offer a concern for the practice of contests and speculative driven art / design requests.<br /><br /><blockquote>Is there a team of artists/designers who support 'No Spec work' and boldly say that they would do the work?</blockquote><br />If we speak of mainstream contracted graphic artists, designers, and such, then yes there is a core of people that express a negative feeling toward speculative contest driven work. Such is not the issue here however[1].<br /><br />I would ask a question in place of an answer: How many people involved in Libre artwork are approached by projects to become involved? How many Libre software projects feel they even require an artist, designer, musician, experience engineer, etc.? I strongly suspect the issue is one that precedes your question. How can we educate projects of the benefits and gains of involving a particular class of creative?<br /><br /><blockquote>How do you suggest people in FOSS get designers to do the work? Contact each and every designer they can imagine and ask them if they are available to do some pro-bono work?</blockquote><br />Let's face it, the hopes of involving a mainstream commercial graphic artist, illustrator, designer, etc. are extremely slim to none. There are two issues dragging this down.<br /><br />The first, is the simple fact that many of those individuals are supporting their families with their work. As such, hoping that they would take on a pro bono project is probably slight[2].<br /><br />The second is far more menacing. The culture of Libre software has a negative stigma attached to it with regards to creative individuals. I'd hope you have already seen the derogatory stance in threads at Typophile or other such mainstream creative watering holes.<br /><br />It is very real. It is very ugly.<br /><br />So when you add the first issue to the second, the chances of a mainstream established individual being attracted to a project is... well you can speculate.<br /><br />If we avoid the whole mainstream issue altogether, I'd return to the previous question: How many projects have actively sought out a creative? How many value their participation in a project? How many view the role of the creative as anything more than a passing need for a 22 pixel icon?<br /><br />Challenging questions for certain, and likely tied into the mainstream creative perception of Libre software.<br /><br /><blockquote>How many designers should they contact? Can this be feasible? If every designer they knew was busy at the moment, what do they do next?</blockquote><br />This one is easy.<br /><br />Treat the involvement of a creative as any human resources department would. Figure out who you would like to involve and why. Why do you want them? What about their work makes you believe they would be a good fit for the project?<br /><br />If you create a short list of people, simply start at the top of your projects list and work down. A little mutual respect and a hint of passion goes a long, long way.<br /><br />In short, yes I believe it is feasible.<br /><br /><blockquote>Also, AFAIK, almost all the famous skyscrapers in the world first request design proposals and then they decide on the final design. [...] If not, how is it that 'Spec work' works for architecture but not in FOSS?</blockquote><br />Well beyond my ability to comment with any degree of credibility outside of a loose understanding of the contracting process. Don't confuse speculative work with budgeting and bidding on a project.<br /><br />To the best of my knowledge, most contract work in this area is pitched with a proposal and budget laid out before the work is commenced. Who gets hired? The lowest bid? Or does track record and previous development play into the decision? Is there prestige associated with hiring a given architect?<br /><br />Remember, the focus here is speculative or contest driven work as a process. This means that speculative work is <i>solicited</i> from a group. Offer up the work and then someone will judge it. One individual "wins" and the entire community loses.<br /><br />The weakness, again, comes on a few fronts.<br /><br />First, the decision makers. All of the top work is moot if the person in charge of the creative decision is shy on ability. The art director is effectively the person making the judgement calls. With most of what I have seen, the people choosing work are so poorly equipped to be doing so that it is almost shameful. A brilliant kernel hacker or space traveler does not a wise art director make.<br /><br />Second, the work skips out on process. There is no iteration. There is no brainstorming. There is no questions with answers. There is just some often ridiculous design brief filled up with cliches and horrible simplifications.<br /><br />Third, the minds attracted are of questionable merit. Most folks involved in the creative world tend to have a valued view of their craft. They may have studied their field for four or more years. They may continue to practice and educate themselves. They are unlikely to be attracted to the blatant trivializing of their trade or craft. When those people exclude themselves from such efforts, who is left in your talent pool? What long term benefits to the project are they likely to contribute?<br /><br /><blockquote>I would probably first expect the 'No Spec Work' evangelizing designers/artists to join together and form a community. And only then can someone get the ball rolling. Otherwise, everyone will keep talking in their own private blogs and nothing will ever change anything.</blockquote><br />If the sole issue here was banding together as a community, I doubt there would be much issue.<br /><br />How many among us are so delusional as to believe there is a wealth of skilled creatives in our culture? Would such joining together amount to anything? Is <i>that</i> the issue?<br /><br />And returning to an earlier point, ask ourselves what projects appear to be actively attempting to develop a creative core mindset within them? Is that even remotely in view?<br /><br /><blockquote>If this who or how ground-work is not done by the knowledgeable? How do you expect the powers that be,who as you mention clearly don't understand, to fix it?</blockquote><br />I suppose this leads to my own personal and subjective opinions on this matter. I make no assurances or assertions to their validity.<br /><br /><ol><li>I believe there <i>is</i> in fact a problem with our creative culture. I don't believe we have one. I don't believe we are passionate about cultivating one. I believe this creative culture neglect to be core issue number one.</li><li>I believe, as a result of historical origins, the realm of the creative was even in view until it was so flagrantly exploited by the mainstream world recently. Design thinking, artists, industrial designers, and other creatives are all words that skulked about in the shadows until a large gorilla put them centre stage. I believe the origins of Libre software set forth a trajectory that will require aggressive counter-energy to alter. I believe this problem of origin to be core issue two.</li><li>As a result of a long track record of poorly executed visual and experience design, I believe we are struggling uphill against our own momentum. That is, core issue one and core issue two have managed to create not only apathy toward compelling creative work but also conspire against it. We in Libre culture have established and cultivated an anti-aesthetic and creative mindset that, in our unfortunate cycle, reciprocally reinforces it. Solid artistically relevant work stands very little chance of support in this culture. I believe the stigma and conspiring anti-creative-culture that has resulted is core issue three.</li></ol><br /><blockquote>It's not an easy task to make the change, but a few people need to walk the talk, get their feet bruised, to let it be known that there is an alternate path.</blockquote><br />I agree 100% that the task is not easy.<br /><br />So what are some things we can do to make some progress?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Core Issue One: Cultivate a Culture</b></span><br /><br />If one accepts that core issue one has some validity, we need to focus on watering and growing a creative culture. At the very least, this should start with avoiding the inadvertent creation of an atmosphere of creative repulsion.<br /><br />Speculative group sourcing and contests are beacons to a creative audience. Speculative group sourcing and contests offer no long-term upsides to projects nor enrich a community. Speculative group sourcing and contests deliver underwhelming results that stand long after the contest has ended as a blinking neon sign of poor craftsmanship.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Core Issue Two: The Problem of Origin</b></span><br /><br />Scratching one's own itch has evolved. We have migrated into a new realm where we are beginning to desire greater breadth and scope. This means evolving past the shallow self indulgence into the scratching of other's itches[3]. Emotions, visual design, art, and the rest of it is all resting in the subjective world.<br /><br />By recognizing that our circumstances have changed, so too might our processes. We should be far more proactive in team work and, as such, realize that we require different positions to be played. If the old process is indeed failing, we would be truly foolish to expect a different outcome by adhering to it.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Core Issue Three: The Problem of Anti-Culture</b></span><br /><br />If we can consider that there is at least a glimmer of a negative stigma that creatives view our culture with, we need to shift that[4].<br /><br />We could go a long way to helping this by letting the proper minds make appropriate decisions. David Revoy is an established artist that already is using Libre software tools. His unique vision would almost overnight benefit a project regarding visual design far more than allowing a customer support person with very little passion about art and design that decided to self label himself as an artist[5].<br /><br />Slowly, if we begin to applaud and endorse solid creative work through proper appointment of art and creative directors, our landscape will change. With patience, the bleak and empty creative landscape generated from carelessness and neglect may begin to sprout a new direction.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>In Closing</b></span><br /><br />How to 'fix' this? In short, the problem of not perceiving a problem at all likely makes it extremely difficult to 'fix' anything. Any such 'fix', in the true nature of Libre software, must be desired and created from within the greater community itself.<br /><br />That community is the "powers that be" and always will be. That community exceeds any singular company or tribe. That community, while currently potentially weak in the soul, is also a fount of absolute strength should we exert the effort. That community forms the core of the issue and holds the key to the solution.<br /><br />Objects in motion attempt to carry on in that motion. Our culture is no different. As a result of momentum set forth long ago, our culture has spiraled away from the creative culture we so desperately need.<br /><br />As with objects in motion, additional energy must be applied to overcome a given trajectory. If we fail, we risk ending up further along the trajectory and further isolating ourselves from the creative culture.<br /><br />If we succeed however, we become a culture that creative minds desperately desire to be a part of. A world where other passionate and dedicated creatives thrive.<br /><br />And from there, the rewards might just lead onto bigger and better things.<br /><br />Thank you all for reading.<br /><br />Back at you Vish...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[1] See The Gap debacle as a case in point. It was a near unanimous vocal outcry. <a href="http://creativity-online.com/news/what-the-gap-did-wrong/146393">A few articles make some valuable points on it</a>.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[2] But it would never hurt to attempt and make a passionate case for your project. You never know. Remember, pro-bono work is in an entirely different class to contest and speculative driven attempts.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[3] While some may believe that we cannot escape the need to scratch one's own itch, <a href="http://hci.uwaterloo.ca/faculty/mterry/">Michael Terry at the University of Waterloo</a> has suggested that <a href="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:7JeOW_KY7S4J:hackingusability.org/images/f/f9/Ubuntu_developer_summit_full_2009.pdf+michael+terry+ubuntu+slides&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=ca&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESh1DxwuUHBbzuEpnDY2RI2J4voQVP5iFr2pdrKuIPGwWv-ae0nXsJu6n-b_UHQrRKAIiZoCrcQXtBTHK6cs7Z1VnCewEBKUHEWM17ojMpe7OTmJv_QRP792yqKATJfEFWB9BXcn&amp;sig=AHIEtbT1fvN-4oLrGZWE7AkNMQ-swdjdoQ&amp;pli=1">positive feedback creates intrinsic motivation</a>.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[4] Search Typophile for a sadly poignant thread. It shames me too much to read it. Whether true in fact is irrelevant, as the almost unanimous voice clearly illustrates there is ill will there.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: xx-small;">[5] I treat terms such as artist with a great respect. I equate the usage of those terms with others such as intelligent, beautiful, or the like. I question the people that self label themselves accordingly. Struggle like mad to do good work and let others do the labeling.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7240576681794395304?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-51270096692569844242010-12-06T13:54:00.000-08:002011-01-23T21:56:29.521-08:00There exists a mighty candle of a great divide that we keep burning. We feed a steady stream of fuel to support a division between the Computing Life and Real Life. As the debate between Mind and Body passes, we forge a new polemic between Real Life and Computing Life.<br /><br />In the case of the former, many have accepted that the division between Mind and Body is purely a model created by humans. Practically, we know that the mind and body are inexplicably linked. There is no duality. There is no division. The byproduct of the brain organ is no more isolated than the byproduct of the heart organ.<br /><br />In the case of the latter, there seems a reoccurring thematic to keep a division between Real Life and Computing Life. There is the Real World and then there is the Computing World. We, as a culture, introduced this technology and damned be us if we will accept Computing has merged into Real Life. We need those divisions.<br /><br />Computing is no different than an automobile. It is no different than a desk. It is no different than a tool in your work shed.<br /><br />It is separate. It is isolated. It can always be turned off.<br /><br />Correct?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Ubiquity</b></span><br /><br />Computing is clearly ubiquitous. What seemed inevitable in the 80s has become reality for Eurowesterners living in 2010 and beyond. If fifteen years ago someone had told you that you would be connected to the internet 24/7, you may have balked in disbelief.<br /><br />Now take a look around you.<br /><br />The nature of the ubiquity of computing devices has, in turn, created long term impacts on our daily living. A few companies have forever altered the course of our futures, and few are paying attention to that drastic change it seems.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Musical Example</b></span><br /><br />CDs supplanted Cassette Tapes and Cassette Tapes supplanted Vinyl and Eight Tracks. So goes technology. No different than what is happening now, right?<br /><br />Technology will become extinct as it is replaced by newer technology. We accept that. <br /><br />Have you tried to go out and purchase a CD in North America? Have you noticed how only a select few shops are left selling them, and even then, their selections have dwindled?<br /><br />This is the natural progression of technology supplanting itself, correct?<br /><br />Now think back to the CD. When CDs came to market, all of the traditional outlets sold them. There wasn't some strange government mandate that only store X could sell them. There wasn't a technological twist that prevented manufacturers from creating CD players to play the disks or preventing certain disks from playing in certain players.<br /><br />The first generation digital music players prior to the iPod allowed you to take your music and play it on any device. Then came the iPod with its studio sanctioned digital rights management system known as Fairplay, and the system changed forever.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_music#Legal_issues">Now the music sold could only play on one system</a>. But that is acceptable in a free market. To each their own. Don't support them if you don't want to. Entirely logical.<br /><br />Cut to now. What had begun as music software has rolled its tendrils out as a near ubiquitous iDistribution system. Through well executed design and marketing, iDistribution is all around us.<br /><br />I, as a Canadian, have trouble finding CDs anywhere, let alone the titles I'd want to purchase. Digital downloads are always an option, correct? Alas...<br /><br />Amazon, the only other provider with a large library offering non DRM music, isn't available in Canada. The remaining digital music distribution system? iTunes.&nbsp;So why not buy there then? It is what the free market has dictated, is it not?<br /><br />iTunes isn't just a music sales site. It requires signing onto the iDistribution system in full. I cannot just purchase music. Nay, instead, I must sign onto an entire "approved" computing platform in order to run the iDistribution software. <br /><br />That sounds like Fair Play doesn't it?<br /><br />So through a system of ulterior motive DRM at first, iTunes forced the hand of every digital downloader. In turn, thanks to successful industrial, software, and marketing design, that ubiquity has impacted many others that want nothing to do with the iDistribution system.<br /><br />Much like second hand smoke, the activities of some impact the lives of others.<br /><br />A full circle that this mythical "free market" endorsed.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Then and Now</b></span><br /><br />Now we have a new world. Steve Jobs stripped DRM from newer music in iTunes, but it remained a fee driven removal for existing songs one may own. So if one has a sizable library bought from that early era, they&nbsp;<i>still</i> must use an iDevice to play the music.<br /><br />Now think about iBooks and the Kindle. The Kindle's and iBooks' digital downloads are laced with DRM just as the early era of the digital music offerings in precisely the same technique that the early iPod harnessed DRM.<br /><br />What happens if one system becomes as ubiquitous as iTunes was for music? What happens when a particular version of DRM reaches monopolistic proportions? Would removal of said DRM suddenly shift the balance of power back to a more neutral state?<br /><br />I'd ask you to let your mind wander and draw a perfect parallel to the music store analogy taking place in North America. What happens when our book stores begin to disappear? Is that possible?<br /><br />Could the brick and mortar book store disappear in much the same way that the mega book store displaced the smaller shops? Could the mega book stores dissolve to the digital book store?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Great Huge Worry</b></span><br /><br />When we start talking about these things, we aren't talking about individual things anymore. We are talking about systems.<br /><br />One cannot get digital music downloads in Canada unless you sign onto an entire iDistribution system. That means choosing an "approved" operating system and being forced to run a particular piece of software.<br /><br />We see this identical trend forming around books. Kindle and iBooks both force you to again subscribe to an "approved" operating system and again are forced to run particular breeds of software.<br /><br />What happens when you have mega companies deciding what books they are going to stock? What happens when <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/02/why-i-wont-buy-an-ipad-and-think-you-shouldnt-either.html">a Canadian and New York Times bestseller can't put their books in a distribution system as a result of the artist's chosen license</a>?<br /><br />What happens when there are even more radical and politically charged pieces? Does the law of the land govern their dissemination or does the power of ubiquity via the mythical free market dictate how loudly the voices will be heard?<br /><br />Clearly, if we look to what is happening to the brick and mortar CD stores and how difficult it is to purchase digital music in Canada, we can see that the "let the free market decide" is unfolding as a myth. It certainly does not appear to be ensuring that a culture's content is unfettered.<br /><br />The free market is only as as strong as the culture's government is willing to enforce the core freedoms. In many instances, the various governments appear to be woefully inadequate both in education and perhaps in motivation.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Politically Charged Context</b></span><br /><br />Looking around us now, we can see a perfect example as to why maintaining an unfettered system is of critical importance. The world's first information war is upon us.<br /><br />Wherever you stand on the issue, it should be clear that there is a culture war going on as well. Some cultures want to deal with the issue in one fashion. Others another way. It is a cultural discourse. It is a debate amongst countries.<br /><br />The stakes are extremely high.<br /><br />As part of the WikiLeaks turmoil is an "insurance file" that is encrypted with 256 bit AES encryption. By today's standards, it is uncrackable.<br /><br />Already, the closed distribution system clearly prevents certain software from landing in the hands of an end audience member. The GNU Public License agreement is in direct opposition to the Apple App Store policy. As such, Libre software cannot be published in the App Store, as <a href="http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2010-October/077325.html">the VLC media player application appears to be illustrating</a>.<br /><br />Of course, this means that you cannot install GPL software from within the convenience of the App Store. It also means that as a result of the closed distribution system and its set of licenses, GPL software can <i>never</i> be installed on iOS because it is <i>prohibited</i> to install software via any method other than the App Store.<br /><br />Imagine that: Software that ensures and protects the end audience's rights and freedoms is in direct opposition to the end user license agreement terms of the platform.<br /><br />This too, is still completely acceptable in this mythical free market.<br /><br />What happens when it comes to encryption though? What happens when certain forms of encryption, either via license or via government agreements with companies, that high grade encryption is prohibited on devices?<br /><br />What about new software technology that we can't quite see just yet?<br /><br />Does it seem the stuff of science fiction and tin foil hats? Remember that <a href="http://www.openbsd.org/crypto.html">the OpenBSD project located itself in Canada because of the exportation of cryptography laws in the United States</a>. Encryption is a very hot topic, and certainly after the WikiLeaks scenario it will not be going away soon.<br /><br />If anything, WikiLeaks has brought the issue of publicly available encryption to the forefront of our North American culture again.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Back to Libre Software</b></span><br /><br />As a result of ignorant or lobbied government legislation, we may soon be unable to alter our computing devices. In fact, there are digital lock provisions being debated today that would prevent you from manipulating the digital locks on not only content but the systems themselves.<br /><br />What many didn't likely know is that in the United States it was illegal to apply the happy euphemism of jailbreaking to their iDevices. Recently, <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/">the courts overruled that decision</a>, but the era is far from over.<br /><br />What happens when a system prevents you from installing certain content? What happens when the <a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/lion/">closed distribution systems land on your desktops</a>?<br /><br />What happens when a system prevents you from applying certain technology such as encryption? Is this the stuff of fiction or might a software licence be in direct opposition to a distribution platform?<br /><br />What happens when a culture cedes all of its constitutional freedom of speech into the hands of <a href="http://newinapple.com/itunes/apple-censors-dalai-lama-iphone-apps-in-china/">companies that appear to hold censorship as acceptable?</a><br /><br />When is it a culture's right to demand that products such as automobile computing brake systems be compelled to open up the source code to examine for negligence?<br /><br />What happens when a culture's government sits on its hands long enough to let monopolies drive an entire future generation of content and culture? What happens to marginalized countries?&nbsp;Is there agency to participate in culture or is it being subversively silenced? Who gets to decide? The mythical free market?<br /><br />Within the limits of freedom and democracy that free and democratic systems provide, there is only one computing system that appears to reflect those core values. At the same time, it appears that the ability to participate in the culture and maintain relevance is being quietly and slowly snuffed out for those that stand behind such systems.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>In Closing</b></span><br /><br />It is common to hear that no one cares about the human readable computer code behind their systems. So few can understand it. So few can write new code. So few can participate in that aspect of the system that it is irrelevant to be able to read it.<br /><br />In the Eurowestern system, we have laws. Those laws are visible to the public at all times. The democratic systems that are built on those laws mandate that the laws shall always remain open.<br /><br />Those laws are complex. Very few can understand much of them. Very few can participate in law creation or modification. Those that live under those laws however, would likely be willing to shed blood to keep the laws open and available.<br /><br />There is no better time than now to take a look around you and examine your computing world. When a free market creates a $290 billion dollar "success", you can be certain that more will follow their patterns and process.<br /><br />In our shallow consumerism we have traded convenience for liberty. We accept, without grounds and examination of our contemporary world, that computing is a privilege as opposed to a right.<br /><br />Real Life and Computing Life is a convenient fictional model as is suggesting a divide between Mind and Body.<br /><br />Here's to the hope that we, within our own cultures, begin to start treating computing less as a commodity and more as a critical aspect of human living, subject to the same laws and governance that so many have died for.<br /><br />Thank you for spending your valuable time reading...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5127009669256984424?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-26665887613133064682010-11-03T20:31:00.000-07:002010-11-03T20:31:44.164-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInatFTXWI/AAAAAAAABho/rx1apfkHwmU/s1600/sample-00.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInatFTXWI/AAAAAAAABho/rx1apfkHwmU/s400/sample-00.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInknmfxRI/AAAAAAAABh0/svBSfrZ4Kk0/s1600/sample-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInknmfxRI/AAAAAAAABh0/svBSfrZ4Kk0/s400/sample-01.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNIng72FL8I/AAAAAAAABhw/08Af1RXxf6c/s1600/standards-cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNIng72FL8I/AAAAAAAABhw/08Af1RXxf6c/s400/standards-cover.jpg" width="308" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInq595fHI/AAAAAAAABh4/qCYDTnjp7D8/s1600/ubuntu-women.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNInq595fHI/AAAAAAAABh4/qCYDTnjp7D8/s320/ubuntu-women.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><a href="http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~troy-sobotka/+junk/ubuntu-women-community-identity/annotate/head:/ubuntu-women-standards.pdf">PDF Standards Manual</a><br /><a href="https://code.launchpad.net/~troy-sobotka/+junk/ubuntu-women-community-identity">Full sources</a><br /><br />It should be duly noted that this is obviously based off of the Canonical work for <a href="http://ubuntu.com">Ubuntu</a> proper.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-2666588761313306468?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-44593047498847994042010-11-02T20:10:00.000-07:002010-11-02T20:10:03.128-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNDSP-1S7jI/AAAAAAAABhg/OXefTj8NkS8/s1600/chart.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TNDSP-1S7jI/AAAAAAAABhg/OXefTj8NkS8/s400/chart.png" width="400" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4459304749884799404?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-11466426661429643122010-10-31T15:38:00.000-07:002010-11-05T17:39:16.672-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TM3t-4OBKAI/AAAAAAAABhY/imjGQQXvGHE/s1600/spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TM3t-4OBKAI/AAAAAAAABhY/imjGQQXvGHE/s400/spec.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Misunderstanding</b></span><br /><br />I recently watched <a href="http://blip.tv/file/4309066">the open design session at the Ubuntu Developer Summit for Ubuntu version 11.04 Natty Narwhal</a>.<br /><br />I won't pass judgement on the session here, as it is likely the subject of another blog post. What I would like to do is specifically address what appears to be a very clear and deep misunderstanding regarding spec work and contests in our culture. There is <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/01/specs-and-contests-we-all-lose.html">another post in a similar vein</a>, but perhaps greater fleshing out is in order.<br /><br />While it appears that <a href="https://launchpad.net/~mpt">Matthew Paul Thomas</a> and one of the fellows in the back[1] showed a little bit of sensitivity and insight regarding the issue, the powers that be clearly didn't understand what is at stake.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Culture</b></span><br /><br />This again, takes me back to the notion that <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/07/allure-of-culture.html">the number one most important and critical aspect to the whole discussion is a question of culture</a>.<br /><br />What is the value in a creative culture? It speaks of a community that values diversity and craftsmanship. It values aesthetic judgement. It understands not just the what but the how and the why. It understands the value of creative context.<br /><br />It is a culture that values people. Not users. Not APIs. Not electronic componentry.<br /><br />People.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is Spec Work?</b></span><br /><br />Again, this is apparently not clear. Spec work is short for speculative work. This is generally work that is solicited from a vast number of people with some sort of petty gain implied. <br /><br />"Greetings community. We need an icon. Please submit and we will judge which one we want and we will use it on xxx site."<br /><br />"Your work will be seen by millions."<br /><br />"The winning entry gets 1000$!!!"<br /><br />The above are examples of speculative work. <br /><br />Some would like to make this a discussion about money. It has absolutely nothing to do with working for free / pro-bono. <br /><br />Read that again: The discussion has nothing to do with working for free / pro-bono.<br /><br />It has everything to do with valuing and commotiditizing the pixels output over the culture and people that it comes from.<br /><br />How can one suggest that the value of the culture is higher than the value of the work? <br /><br />Because it is only from a strong creative culture with diverse and ecclectic ability that brilliant work can develop. It has nothing to do with randomly throwing crap at a wall and hoping. It has everything to do with process. If you don't believe me, have a look around. Look at our own culture. Look at any of the long spec / contest / monetary reward 'design' sites.<br /><br />Better still, look at the leading design-centric companies out there and try to figure out why BMW, Ferrari, Nintendo, B&amp;W Audio, etc. aren't seriously engaging this wonderful technique?<br /><br />Brilliant minds beget brilliant minds. It is the byproduct of those brilliant minds that we seek. Not the irrelevant mental masturbation offered up from some ego seeking self-promotional facade.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What Does a Culture Say When it Promotes Contests and Spec Work?</b></span><br /><br />By promoting a contest driven and spec work culture, you are shouting out a very clear communication.<br /><br />You don't value art. You don't value design. You don't value music. You don't value prose. You don't value illustration. You don't value craftsmanship.<br /><br />In short, you don't value precisely what every single artist, musician, designer, illustrator, writer, and like creative archetype holds extremely dear. The very thing you are rejecting is in fact precisely what the creative culture worships.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Who Gives a Crap. Someone Else Will Do It Then.</b></span><br /><blockquote>"There will be people that recognize the portfolio building aspect of it." -- <a href="http://blip.tv/file/4309066">Ivanka Majic 26:45</a></blockquote>Will they?<br /><br />Is that personality your intended audience?<br /><br />If you believe this for a moment, you have been fooled. Such a view is spoken from a place that, even if erroneously, appears to know exceptionally little about creative types.<br /><br />One could make a strong case that anyone choosing to stick with their core creative belief structure over a lifetime's journey will not be likely to make concessions. They have honed their craft. They have studied it. They are a constantly swirling ball of input and output, constantly interacting and examining their environment.<br /><br />More importantly, they associate. They talk. They discuss. They suggest. They debate.<br /><br />With whom? Others like them.<br /><br />So when The Gap implodes and offers up a speculative contest scenario, what is the byproduct? Is it an entire community of artists and designers that join and unite against the cause? If you don't think this was a real phenomenon, <a href="http://ianstormtaylor.com/discussed/spec-work-or-dialogue">perhaps</a> you should <a href="http://yourlogomakesmebarf.com/2010/10/07/tell-gap-to-take-their-spec-and-go-to-hell/">rethink</a> your <a href="http://www.fastcodesign.com/1662470/gap-bows-to-outcry-nixes-new-logo-and-crowdsourcing">stance</a>.<br /><br />When you support spec work and contest driven cultures, you are shouting out something.<br /><br />Is it what you wish to shout out to the world? Is that part of your new focus on supporting creative design? Do you want long term high level creative minds or short term myopic portfolio pushers?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Our Creative Culture is Dead</b></span><br /><br />It saddens me when I read the Ubuntu Art mailing list and others like it. I often see a dead cesspool where excitement and discourse should be flourishing. <br /><br />It is a dead culture.<br /><br />We need a thriving culture. We need to start with a rich and fertile soil. That soil is unequivocally not one built out of spec work and contests.<br /><br />Cultivate the youth. There are many times that a youthful member shows up to the list and, instead of being cultivated and engaged, they are lost to the ether. This is one less mind that, by way of chance discussion, may be led on a journey into a creative future. When the youthful appear, they are there for a reason. An interest. A shred of a starting point. A glimmer of an insight. It likely starts with embracing the opportunity to grow and mature those valuable minds into much more.<br /><br />Cultivate a culture. The culture itself needs to thrive. We don't need a boardroom with all of the chairs pointed at a screen so that we can listen to someone discuss licenses. We need a round table interaction where literature, art, design, philosophy, psychology, and sociology can be engaged. We need a cross pollination of creative fields and studies. We need to have developer minds and creative minds becoming passionate and excited about alternate perceptions of the future. It likely starts with our collective mailing lists and forums.<br /><br />Cultivate cooperation and understanding. We are all guilty. The very notion of Libre / Free software holds cooperation and community with such high regard you would think that we would be visionary leaders regarding the means and methods we use to collaborate. We are not. We seem to suffer from a collision of unity with diversity. How can we more greatly create a world of legitimate discussion regarding art, design, aesthetic, music, and other such diverse fields when we are so stuck on how much more consistent a damn panel looks with tripe 22 pixel icons of a given flavour? It likely starts with education and a long term commitment to a culture.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Closing With Hope</b></span><br /><br />While I am loathe to offer up this quote because it tends to address that fruit laden company, I'd like to do it in the name of the potential audience that is reading this. That audience tends to value those ever slippery notions of "real world results." Real world results stem from the foundation.<br /><br />Here it is. John Sculley on his term at Apple. Read this observation several times and let it sink in. In particular, pay close attention to the last paragraph.<br /><blockquote>"An anecdotal story, a friend of mine was at meetings at Apple and Microsoft on the same day and this was in the last year, so this was recently. He went into the Apple meeting (he’s a vendor for Apple) and when he went into the meeting at Apple as soon as the designers walked in the room, everyone stopped talking because the designers are the most respected people in the organization. Everyone knows the designers speak for Steve because they have direct reporting to him. It is only at Apple where design reports directly to the CEO."<br /><br />"Later in the day he was at Microsoft. When he went into the Microsoft meeting, everybody was talking and then the meeting starts and no designers ever walk into the room. All the technical people are sitting there trying to add their ideas of what ought to be in the design. That’s a recipe for disaster."<br /><br />"The best creative people want to work for the best clients. If you are a client who doesn’t appreciate great work, or a client who won’t take risks and try new stuff, or a client who can’t get excited about the creative, then you’re the wrong kind of client."<br /><br /><a href="http://www.cultofmac.com/john-sculley-on-steve-jobs-the-full-interview-transcript/63295">John Sculley talking about his term at Apple</a></blockquote>While Free / Libre software culture isn't a client per se, it has the same issues around it.<br /><br />Think about the personalities that desire to work at an Apple, a Nintendo, a BMW, or such company. Think about why. Is it to build a portfolio or because they eat, sleep, and dream about the creative process at such companies? Each of those companies has a voice. It shouts it out to the world in much the same way that the Gap shouted out something entirely negative to a culture that they required.<br /><br />Get vocal about spec work and contests. Ask people about what kind of culture they think they are breeding. Libre software projects can send a loud and clear message by actively seeking out artists, designers, musicians, writers and other creative people needed.<br /><br />Free / Libre software culture has value. It has a reason. It has a revolutionary ideal behind it.<br /><br />While our culture is diverse, it tends to be lumped under one banner by those outside of it.<br /><br />Don't let our Free / Libre software culture inadvertently shout out the wrong message to the precise people we should be addressing. Don't let people that know nothing and care less about the subject erroneously mix up and confuse the terms.<br /><br />This discussion is about cultivating seeds through to the wonderful harvest, not a short term yield.<br /><br />If you truly believe in Libre / Free software, cultivate the culture through the people. Don't accept anything less.<br /><br />Thank you all for reading...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] I'd love to know who it was. If anyone has information, please let me know.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1146642666142964312?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-84490740654459591692010-10-30T15:38:00.000-07:002011-09-11T12:23:02.493-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TMycQjtZ9KI/AAAAAAAABhQ/1Uoz-hzVOis/s1600/shoe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TMycQjtZ9KI/AAAAAAAABhQ/1Uoz-hzVOis/s400/shoe.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Libre / Free Software Shoe Design</b></span><br /><br />"Let's design some shoes!"<br /><br />"Ok! Great idea."<br /><br />"<a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/09/simplicity-aint-so-simple-or-even.html">The simplest shoe is always the best</a>."<br /><br />They delivered the shoe. They set up a bug report list. They thought they had finished with designing shoes.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Libre Neodesign</b></span><br /><br />A shoe might seem simple at first.<br /><br />The job of the designer is to sometimes hide the complexity of their thoughts from the endpoint of a singular audience member in much the same way that the code is hidden from an audience. Sometimes the designer must organize complexity in a meaningful fashion. However, even as simple and straightforward a shoe might appear, are there complexities there that you perhaps didn't first consider? Did you think about your audience?<br /><ul><li>What sizes of shoe are there? You <a href="http://dustyvolumes.com/archives/444">can't simply scale some designs</a>, which is why there is no creatures as large as a blue whale walking around on land.</li><li>What is the physiology of the audience? Wide feet? Two feet? <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20050901/fox_shoes050831/">One foot and a synthetic limb</a>?</li><li>Are there environmental conditions to consider regarding the footwear? Is the audience one that spends countless hours of the day on fresh hot asphalt? A professional NBA court or NHL ice surface? Or the Arctic tundra?</li><li>What are the aesthetic constraints? Global and local culture will dictate whether or not it is viable to wear a certain type of footwear. Is it inner city street wear in Baltimore or the legal offices in a tower in Toronto? Are you subject to <a href="http://www.medieval-life-and-times.info/medieval-clothing/medieval-sumptuary-laws.htm">any regional laws</a>?</li><li>What is the social circumstance? Why would someone desire to wear a shoe with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_ribbon">a pink ribbon</a> on it? Is there a historical reference point or detail to consider regarding the design?</li><li>Was there research into foot physiology? Does a foot change shape over the course of a day due to water retention or swelling?</li><li>Are there socio-economic contexts regarding materials and manufacturing processes? How does this impact your choice of materials? Are there other more complex issues regarding materials that span into social and cultural contexts such as mores and ideals?</li><li>Is footwear even required at all?</li></ul>Start with the audience and build backwards. It isn't just goal. It is role.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-8449074065445959169?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-41055384771279098182010-10-24T19:30:00.000-07:002010-10-24T22:36:55.309-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TMTlqfgKFII/AAAAAAAABhE/Yn1RVB4tn7c/s1600/pp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TMTlqfgKFII/AAAAAAAABhE/Yn1RVB4tn7c/s400/pp.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Three Chefs. Three Personas.</b></span><br /><br />Imagine being on a team of three people and attempting to bake a cake.<br /><br />Where would you start?<br /><br />If we included each of the three chef's favorite ingredient, would the cake suddenly taste wonderful for the three of them?<br /><br />What if we instead attempted to bake a cake that was unoffensive to each of the three? What if there were unique allergies to each of them? What happens if we grow our baking team to twenty chefs?<br /><br />What would the cake be composed of? Would it, even in that limited audience of only three chefs, be satisfying?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is a Persona?</b></span><br /><br />Personas are fictional archetypes used within a design process. It is an archetype that proponents of personas suggest put a human vantage point on a particular design. Personas are sometimes equated with the more nebulous "Use Case" in Libre culture.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why are Personas Likely a Failure for Libre Culture?</b></span><br /><br />Libre culture holds notions of sharing, collaboration, and community with high regard.&nbsp;A cursory examination might suggest that personas and use cases are a useful device to leverage in Libre culture as they appear to intersect with such ideals.&nbsp;How then, can personas be a negative concept in our culture?<br /><br />There appears to be two unique twists on personas and use cases that degrade the design process.<br /><br />First, personas and use cases tend to be retroactively fitted to an existing design. Roughly, the design is presented and use cases or personas are used to justify a particular design direction. One of our chefs may add ginger to the cake and after it is baked, justify the ingredient's inclusion by referencing traditional recipes.<br /><br />Second, personas and use cases never restrict a vision, but rather serve to extend it. An extension may well be justified for a given persona. The issue is that when multiple use cases or personas are presented, are the justifications working to counter one another?<br /><br />Chef A may suggest a persona recommending ginger, chef B may suggest mayonnaise, and chef C may offer up ketchup. Mixing the three together yields a recipe that is uniquely different than the original singular intentions of each individual chef.<br /><br />While personas and use cases may justify the positive impact of a design choice they may equally fail to address the negative impact of the various design decisions on the overall design.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Personas and Pitfalls?</b></span><br /><br />Personas are fictional archetypes. As an archetype, a persona may well help to dissolve the worthless and crippling dichotomies of User / Developer or Power User / Newbie, but they bring their own set of pitfalls.<br /><br />When does an archetype become a stereotype? What are the creator's internal belief structures and world views hidden away beneath the facade of the persona?<br /><br />Does a persona actively define an audience segement or does it make assumptions?<br />Does a persona bring with it an ethnocentric bias?<br />Does a persona use research to determine audience needs or guesswork?<br /><br />Are we baking a wedding cake for someone living somewhere in Canada or a rounded bread Korovai for someone of Ukraine descent?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Killer (Libre) App_s_</b></span><br /><br />With more unique audience-centric design patterns, Libre design and Free Software stand to truly harness the hidden horsepower of the culture. The diverse nature of Libre culture allows us to leverage knowledge and understanding in ways that would cost traditional companies millions of dollars.<br /><br />We, as a culture, have access to a radically diverse set of people through the distributed nature of Free Software. We have the ability to interact with and touch many different geological regions with an ethnographic uniqueness and sensitivity unseen before.<br /><br />It is up to us to embrace this diversity and begin to design the next generation of desired software that is sensitive to the particular needs of individuals, industries, and the distinct cultures in which they exist.<br /><br />There isn't just one cake out there. There are many. The ingredients are waiting.<br /><br />Thank you for reading...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4105538477127909818?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-2281954688762976482010-09-26T15:47:00.000-07:002010-09-26T15:57:25.694-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TJ_L3EoqpeI/AAAAAAAABgs/7V7Vi5VfCNY/s1600/simple.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TJ_L3EoqpeI/AAAAAAAABgs/7V7Vi5VfCNY/s400/simple.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />After reading Donald Norman's insightful piece entitled <a href="http://jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_not_the_answer.html#">Simplicity is not the Answer</a>, I have been pondering the notion of simplicity as it exists in Libre culture. It is a very hot buzzword in Libre culture. Perhaps at least as hot as <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/easy-intuitive-and-metaphor">other worthless and empty terms</a>.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Simplicity isn't Simple</b></span><br /><br />What does simple mean? Has anyone stopped to ask that question around these parts? Simple, it seems, isn't so simple. Above and beyond the foolish assumptions and empty definitions, there has been a uniquely Libre lack of insight regarding desirability.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Is Simple Synonymous with Desirability?</span></b><br /><br />Seems like a foolish question at first doesn't it? Everyone wants simple, correct?<br /><br />If we scratch past the surface, we have some pretty compelling research to suggest that, in fact, notions of simple are not only horribly complicated, but also that the desire and appeal of simple is tied to extremely complex circumstances and contexts. Donald Norman cites a cultural context example:<br /><blockquote>"But in the Korean store, I found a German toaster for 250,000 Korean Won (about $250). It had complex controls, a motor to lower the untoasted bread and to lift it when finished, and an LCD panel with many cryptic icons, graphs, and numbers. Simplicity?<br />[...]<br />Why is this? Why do we deliberately build things that confuse the people who use them?<br /><br />Answer: Because the people want the features. Because simplicity is a myth whose time has past, if it ever existed." -- Donald Norman from <a href="http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/simplicity_is_highly.html">Simplicity is Highly Overrated</a></blockquote>While simplicity within Libre culture is not only subject to grossly inept explorations, our culture typically makes the cardinal sin of avoiding the audience context. As Donald Norman cites above, there are clearly some disparate views on simplicity between cultures. Francisco Inchauste explores this further:<br /><blockquote>"In South Korea, for example, products like refrigerators are designed to appear more complex than non-Korean ones, even when the prices and specifications are very similar, because that complexity is equated with sophistication and value, and is thus a symbol of prosperity." -- Francisco Inchauste <a href="http://uxmag.com/design/the-dirtiest-word-in-ux-complexity">The Dirtiest Word in uX: Complexity</a></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Of Hedonists and Pragmatics</b></span><br /><br />If we subscribe to the idea that simplicity isn't quite as simple as some would have us believe, we potentially open the door for insight into when or if simple would be valued to the audience at hand.<br /><br />When is simplicity desirable? For whom?<br /><br />Simplicity, as we have seen in the above examples, clearly has a few roots in cultural context. As any reader of this blog knows, there are countless times I harp on the notion of audience. It is for good reason. Audience brings context. Audience determines the needs of the experience. Audience determines the facets of the design.<br /><br />But what if we lock in on an audience? Is it possible to deduce when an audience may desire simple and when they may not?<br /><br />At the topmost layer of Mr. Hassenzahl's work is the notion that there is a polemical division between Hedonistic and Pragmatic needs.<br /><blockquote>"The hedonic/pragmatic model of UX assumes that people perceive interactive products along two different dimensions. Pragmatics refers to the product's perceived ability to support the achievement of "do-goals", such as "making a telephone call", "finding a book in an online bookstore", "setting-up a webpage". In contrast, hedonics refers to the product's perceived ability to support the achievement of "be-goals", such as "being competent", "being related to others", "being special"." -- Marc Hassenzahl and others <a href="http://141.115.28.2/cost294/upload/506.pdf">Towards a UX Manifesto (Page 10)</a></blockquote>Of particular relevance to simplicity here is Mr. Hassenzahl's research notes an interesting axis between simple-complex and ordinary-novel.<br /><blockquote>"The model further assumes that people have implicit notions of the relation between particular attributes (e.g., simple–complex, ordinary–novel) and pragmatics or hedonics, respectively (in the sense of means-end-chains, see Reynolds &amp; Olson, 2001). Simplicity, for example, may signal high pragmatics, whereas novelty may suggest high hedonics. Or to put it differently: Simplicity suggests fulfillment of do-goals, whereas novelty suggests fulfillment of be-goals." -- Marc Hassenzahl and others <a href="http://141.115.28.2/cost294/upload/506.pdf">Towards a UX Manifesto (Page 10)</a></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Simple Collides with Airplane Cockpits</b></span><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TJ_Myj7K-6I/AAAAAAAABgw/TJFX4x3NdSs/s1600/cockpit.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TJ_Myj7K-6I/AAAAAAAABgw/TJFX4x3NdSs/s320/cockpit.jpg" width="320" /></a><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/caribb/98956751/sizes/z/in/photostream/"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">CC photo by caribb</span></a></div><br />Thus far, there is at least a solid body of evidence to suggest that a complex weave of contextual and circumstantial factors dictate the desirability of Simplicity. Simplicity isn't always desirable. Simplicity is likely moored in cultural vantages.<br /><br />Mr. Inchauste uses the image of a plane's cockpit to illustrate what complicated looks like. To an untrained pilot, a plane's cockpit is most certainly an intimidating view.<br /><br />But given a very specific audience, in this instance a trained pilot, a plane's cockpit is a summation of a number of factors. The complexities of piloting a jet obviously dictate how many features are required. The historical and contextual needs of piloting jet aircraft dictate that there will be a given degree of similarity between various models.<br /><br />Ultimately, the question facing Libre software design is "When is simple good and desirable?"<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>From Questions to Evaluation</b></span><br /><br />Given the citations, it might be worth exploring a series of questions when designing a Libre application.<br /><ul><li>Who is the application for and what is the cultural context? Simplicity may have reduced value in certain cultural contexts.</li><li>What are the audience's needs? If the needs are of a be-goal nature, novelty might yield higher dividends over simplicity.</li><li>What is the audience's level of expertise? Expertise levels drive needs and resultant concepts of simplicity.</li><li>If the application is of a do-goal variant, is there a need for contextual similarity with other designs and why? Moving a jet pilot's controls to a different formation or layout will likely have an adverse impact on her notions of simplicity, if it even were a question at all.</li><li>Has there been sufficient research on the <i>particular audience</i>? Concrete understanding of the needs and expectations of a given audience will help cultivate useful insights into how that audience experiences simple.<br /></li></ul><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Don't Be A Cheerleader</b></span><br /><br />If there is one thing that I'd like everyone to take with them after making it to this point in this post, it is the humble request that we stop being cheerleaders. Repeating empty terms and phrases is not helping us or our knowledge of design.<br /><br />Investigate. Research. Think.<br /><br />There are likely more than a few places in Libre culture where our designs are the equivalent of an unreduced fraction - overly complicated in communicating identical values. This post isn't about that. This post is about being considerate about context. It is about <i>avoiding</i> assumptions when we set forth in our efforts to design the future.<br /><br />The problem is likely not at all about complexity or how we design around it, but rather in our inability to deduce when and how much complexity is required.<br /><br />That question, again, starts with who. The answer starts and ends with that audience. Don't be an unsympathetic guesser and assumer. Be an empathetic and inquisitive questioner.<br /><br />Leave those buzzwords and golden rules for those that enjoy chasing leprechauns. <br /><br />Thank you all for reading.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-228195468876297648?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-15084427980116670362010-09-11T09:27:00.000-07:002010-10-09T00:38:32.961-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TIusu7cdIgI/AAAAAAAABgU/yF_zHnCw9DI/s1600/emb.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TIusu7cdIgI/AAAAAAAABgU/yF_zHnCw9DI/s400/emb.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>One passing comment about music player apps and <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/ubuntus-audio-panel-whos-fooling-who.html">a music applet from hell</a>, and I ask you:<br /><br />Are we living in the 1990's?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Contextual Design</b></span><br /><br />I believe <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/design-granularity.html">design granularity to be very real</a>. I believe that innovation can happen if we simply pull back and examine exactly what an audience is trying to do.<br /><br />A music application is boring. It's a list. It's a text based bit of dribble.<br /><br />An image browser is a stale misrepresentation of emotional experiences.<br /><br />While there are contexts where purely scientific designs are far superior, such as within an industrial audiovisual pipeline environment, I ask you to consider the idea that for a vast percentage of audiences, images and music are emotional states. They are experiences.<br /><br />They are bound to the subjective and tightly woven with high-level cognition.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Where We Are Now</b></span><br /><br />We are stuck in list views. We are there because we have always done it that way. I need not provide you screenshots as you are well aware of the state of affairs.<br /><br />This discussion hit fruition when Jay Sitter offered up a link from his past. I think it is on point in every respect. While discussing it, a comment of his lurked at the front of my brain.<br /><blockquote>"What innovations have we had over the last twenty years of music playing software? Horizontal hierarchy with browser panels? Cover Flow? Uh... lyrics? Auto-fetched album art? It's still a damn spreadsheet. We could change everything." -- <a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/2008/06/16/alphabetization-is-not-fit-for-music-libraries/">Jay Sitter @ Kilobitspersecond</a></blockquote>Indeed we could. In fact, I dare say that the brilliant and mind blowing innovation is already there sitting in front of us. It is camouflaged in extremely stale and inept art, design, and experiential choices.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Lyrics, Wikipedia, and other Emotional Stuff</b></span><br /><br />When I first stumbled across a music player that pulled Wikipedia pages I was somewhat torn. On one hand I immediately realized that it was pure innovation. Brilliant really. But the drab "cram it into a web page tab box" was so utterly depressing I nearly cried.<br /><br />The interconnected experience is upon us. We are living in a time where we can create dynamic content using all of the existing content provided to us. Some applications are already doing this, but they are doing it in a horrifically stale bread 1990's fashion.<br /><br />How do we tackle this issue?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Defining an Audience</b></span><br /><br />For this mental game, I'd like you to indulge the idea that we are designing a music playing application. Let's make some audience guidelines that will help steer the aesthetic:<br /><ul><li>The audience for this application is a twenty-something viewer.</li><li>The audience is a sophisticated Westernized cinematic language consumer. They are on the brink of a full second generation music video / commercial mind. They understand jump cuts and like language with the simplicity that their parents understood the cross cut.</li><li>The audience has a diversity of music magazine mentality media upon them. <a href="http://www.spin.com/">SPIN</a>, <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/">Rolling Stone</a>, and <a href="http://www.mtv.com/">MTV</a> are now the aged grandparents of the music-wrapped vibes of contemporary sites such as <a href="http://pitchfork.com/">Pitchfork</a> and <a href="http://drownedinsound.com/">DrownedInSound</a>. The language is <i>well</i> understood, after all, this is the second generation of digital ezines. It is the third in terms of visual music representations as innovated by MTV and other music-centric media giants.</li></ul><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Design Patterns</b></span><br /><br />What images pop into your minds when you read this? When you know an audience, do you get ideas or stimulus on how to present the data in <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/06/libre-improvements-meaningful.html">a meaningful representation</a>? Does defining the audience make design choices more clear or more irrelevant than prior to the definition? Does defining an audience present stale-avoid-the-allergic-reaction design or foster creative and innovative excitement through possibilities?<br /><br />What does music mean to this audience? Is it, as Jay suggests, a spreadsheet or is it something more? Is it an emotional state?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Organizing the Data</b></span><br /><br />How does our audience desire their data? Are they looking for an artist by the song title? Are they looking for the artist?<br /><br />Or are they looking for a mood? Is the music tagged? Can we leverage Last.FM-like data libraries against their needs?[1]<br /><br />Is the music subjective? Was there an event that happened and the music gains more meaning through it? How does our application understand that? For the random playlist, does tangential circumstance such as weather play a role?<br /><br />What does browsing emotion look like in the 21st century? It is a design problem that yields massive dividends to the group that provides an innovation solution.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Progressive Disclosure as Cinematic and Video Game Immersion</b></span><br /><br /><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2009/03/surpassing-apple-step-five-think.html">I wrote about the value of paying attention to adjacent industries quite a while ago</a>. I stand by that argument.<br /><br />Movies and video games hold the Holy Grail of what we seek. They have been doing it for years.<br /><br />Make it emotionally compelling. Make it immersive.<br /><br />What does our music application look like now?<br /><br />What does browsing for an artist look like when we arrive at them? What does a song look like? Is it a stale-bread spreadsheet or cram-it-in-a-menu-itus?<br /><br />What if now apply the existing concept of pulling dynamic content already present in other music applications but display it for our particular audience with the mindset laid out? What impact does our audience have on the aesthetic?<br /><br />Images that flow. Gradual dissolves, zooms, and other transitions <i>as you are browsing the content</i>. Dynamic pull quotes drift across the interface as the audience browses their collection. Typographic explorations, as presented in those music magazines, reveal pull quotes and other interesting facts.<br /><br />An explosion of deeply immersive and engaging mental resonance.<br /><br />If you can take a screenshot of it, our design has failed as taking a still from a movie, a note from a song, or a sentence from a novel.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Unleash the Emotional Experiences Everywhere Like a Mind Bomb</b></span><br /><br />In Libre culture, we are cycling over old ground. Again and again and again. Look at us. Look around us. Feel shame.<br /><br /><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/abhorrent-absolutism.html">Archaic absolutist views</a> on wallpaper designs. Emotionally vacuous icons that must-work-on-all-backgrounds-for-all-people-everywhere. Empty and callous interfaces.<br /><br />That process of design has failed us miserably. It does not work. It is not usable. It is not useful. It is tripe peddled by snake oil salespeople. It is attempting to bake a cake that won't cause an allergic reaction in anyone.<br /><br />We need to stop and break the cycle. Immediately.<br /><br />Stop. Step back. Think.<br /><br />Pick an audience. Design to it.<br /><br />The innovation and brilliance is already there. It is sitting right there in front of us. We have sucked all of the emotion out of it, however, and it is hidden to all but the most astute eyes.<br /><br />Someone will execute emotionally engaging and immersive design. Someone will be much lauded for the innovation and creativity of the presentation.<br /><br />Some will ridicule the design for breaking from the past.<br /><br />In the end however, it is only the future.<br /><br />We never stopped to realize it was upon us.<br /><br />Thank you all for reading. Our numbers grow...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] I firmly believe that opening up a given audience to new music also provides some much needed opportunity to provide optional monetization. If it meets a desire or need and provides potential monetization, it should be examined in light of the audience at hand. Audience first, always. But if the audience has a need that also happens to provide an avenue for monetization, it should at least be considered.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1508442798011667036?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-42686587987675927022010-09-04T15:27:00.000-07:002011-03-24T23:43:15.982-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TILMhkMHkqI/AAAAAAAABgA/aSf_IjBb6AY/s1600/when-it-works.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TILMhkMHkqI/AAAAAAAABgA/aSf_IjBb6AY/s400/when-it-works.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>While it is an interesting exploration to disassemble something and attempt to diagnose why something is failing given its position in an art and design context, it is equally worthy to pay attention to something working.<br /><br />The new Ubuntu alternate wallpaper selection is perhaps the best example of successful art and design work in Ubuntu yet.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>When Things Work</b></span><br /><br />The Ubuntu 10.10 wallpaper selection is in the repositories and available for perusal. They are, as of the time of this writing, as follows:<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TIK9dDeqWSI/AAAAAAAABf0/x1JEs1-YqLM/s1600/wallpaper-samples.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TIK9dDeqWSI/AAAAAAAABf0/x1JEs1-YqLM/s320/wallpaper-samples.jpg" /></a></div><br />If we ignore the Purple -6 Vomit of Inducing Horror, I would suggest that this is likely the most successful presentation I have seen in Ubuntu proper.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why Does it Work: Composition</b></span><br /><br />The samples are all well composed when one pays attention to the guidelines of classical composition. Centre punching an object has a place, but sadly, in the last incarnation, it was misplaced.<br /><br />In no other iteration of alternate wallpapers have we seen such a cohesive application of composition within the images. There are a few edge cases that are close, but the visual gravity of the items still tends to locate them closer to the classical notions. A huge gain if we compare against <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/lucidity-of-vision.html">the images from the last selection</a>.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why Does it Work: Hue Range</b></span><br /><br />Ubuntu has suffered the claustrophobic and suffocating consistency-for-consistency's sake vision for a number of iterations. This results in a plethora of "alternate" wallpapers that were nothing more than brown smears of brown smears. Last release saw some absolutely empty grasps at embracing the brand identity default colour.<br /><br />Worthless. Empty. Vacuous.<br /><br />This iteration of the alternates however, we are finally seeing the earmarks of intelligent selection. Gone are the worries of the blind Utopian Usability Pig, and instead, an engagement of the mind is starting to leak through.<br /><br />We have a good range of hues in this selection. When we step back and look at them as a collection, we see a solid mixture and variance. A uniformity through variation.<br /><br />Alternate wallpapers should be just that - alternatives. Offering a range of hues is a tremendous step in that direction.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why Does it Work: Emotion</b></span><br /><br />Thankfully, the pathetic abortions of worthless blurry garbage have been boxed and stuffed into the attic. Instead? A dog, a flower, a landscape. Something that engages the mind. Something that may actually <i>mean</i> something to someone. Even abstract impressionism, given birth in a very clearly defined historical context, had a key component that so many miss while they are creating blurry garbage - <i>impression</i>.<br /><br />An engagement of the brain. A memory. An emotion.<br /><br />For those that like alliterations, it is a purely positive progression.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Why Does it Work: Mise-En-Scene</b></span><br /><br />The default selection of alternate wallpapers has a voice when viewed as a whole.<br /><br />In an ideal world, it is a unique voice that reflects the ideology and emotional foundation of the brand identity. While we are still wallowing in some strange amoeba-like progression towards that in Ubuntu proper, the default wallpaper selection is clearly making strides alone.<br /><br />As a group, the alternate wallpapers have more of a voice than the entire rest of the system.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>In Summary</b></span><br /><br />While it is easy to criticize something when things are struggling or the wheels on the wagon are square, it is quite possibly more difficult to notice when something is working well given the contexts.<br /><br />The default wallpaper selection in Ubuntu 10.10 is, I believe, the strongest of any release thus far. While the rest of the brand identity is struggling to say anything, the default wallpapers have some unique voices.<br /><br />Artistically and photographically sound, with a good use of the depth, colour, value, and composition, they are the most visually tight selection yet.<br /><br />Is there room to flesh this out further? Likely. What would one do to elevate the default set of wallpaper alternates? Would it be nice to perhaps underpin the selection with subtle emotional cues? Yes. Would it be nice to offer some other refined and sophisticated communication into the mix? Yes. Is there something else to be had there? Quite likely yes.<br /><br />That said, those are <i>extremely optimistic</i> questions. The bigger and grander "Where do we go from here?" or the "How can we elevate the game further?" are worth discussing in the proper circles with the proper mindset.<br /><br />With this iteration of the wallpapers, whatever the dead weight that was dragging the selections down is clearly gone, and we are left with a set of wallpapers that should be applauded. In fact, I'd dare say that whoever was responsible for the selection is likely sitting alone at Canonical, as their vision is clearly going in a more healthy direction than whatever myopic team / individual has insisted on the default wallpaper.<br /><br />I'd be so bold as to say that half of the problem with the vast majority of Libre art and design is the work itself. The other half is the fact that no one apparently realizes how utterly disturbing the work <i>is</i>. Sadly, the default wallpaper in 10.10 is still subject to that statement. <br /><br />If the default wallpaper is deemed acceptable to Canonical, the entire art and design team and everyone involved in any capacity should be deemed as nothing more than a sham and charlatanism. It is an extremely loud statement. It speaks.<br /><br />Get a vision. Get an audience. Get a voice. <br /><br />From there, we can <i>attempt</i> to deliver emotion.<br /><br />Better yet, when your corporate culture is blind, let the people with sight deliver the goods. The alternate wallpaper hints that there is at least <i>one</i> person at Canonical that values artistic and creative presence.<br /><br />In closing, I'd like everyone that values art and design to unequivocally dismantle the notion that a default wallpaper doesn't matter. That someone should simply change it. Let's start treating art, design, presence, aesthetics, and experiential design with the same respect and credibility as the code in the kernel.<br /><br />Nothing less is acceptable.<br /><br />Thank you all for your time...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4268658798767592702?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-32517578539810287912010-08-09T10:35:00.000-07:002010-08-13T15:35:12.174-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGBFT5EPxPI/AAAAAAAABfA/OW2Gdx3AXNQ/s1600/light-improves.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGBFT5EPxPI/AAAAAAAABfA/OW2Gdx3AXNQ/s400/light-improves.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />If you missed it, the new screenshots were released from Ubuntu's new light theme. <a href="http://design.canonical.com/2010/08/an-update-to-the-ubuntu-light-themes/">It was announced over at Canonical's design website</a>. Having a design website was a very important and significant addition, and I applaud whoever pushed (likely hard) to have a dedicated site.<br /><br />Before anyone reads any further, let it be known that doing this sort of interface design is dasterdly difficult and complex work. It is nightmarish to execute, massive in scope, and tricky to make technologically sound. And that is before we even begin to discuss aesthetics.<br /><br />Creating interfaces is the stuff of nasty nightmares and it should not for a brief moment be considered trivial to achieve. Have a wander over to GNOME-look or KDE-look if you need further evidence.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is in It?</b></span><br /><br />There are some much needed changes to the theme. Hard to guess exactly how much was due to a lack of having a GTK coder in the house. They have since hired the GTK developer of Murrine.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAj-_q0MAI/AAAAAAAABck/KDpUX7NiJF8/s1600/mise-en-scene.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAj-_q0MAI/AAAAAAAABck/KDpUX7NiJF8/s400/mise-en-scene.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />The above is a shot of the work in context.<br /><br />We can only assume the wallpaper will change. Hopefully it will change dramatically. It is by far the most disturbingly poorly crafted, ill-inspired, and outright awful creation of this mise-en-scene. As I and a few others have already&nbsp;<a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/ubuntu-brand-identity-in-context.html">mentioned</a> a <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/ubuntu-branding.html">while ago</a>:<br /><ol><li>It lacks pathos. Without a clearly defined audience, this is impossible.</li><li>It lacks craftsmanship. The presentation has the appearance of a hobby GNOME-look hackjob.</li><li>It lacks concept. We finally have some conceptual guidance with "Light". We end up with what happens when someone drinks too much brandy after their salmon souffle.</li></ol><div>Downright shoddy. And why is it important? The default theme, even with these much needed improvements, drags down the whole presentation into the GNOME pile of steaming mediocrity of yesteryear.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Overall Opinion</span></b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>It is a huge improvement over the last iteration. There are a number of reasons for this that I'll try to explain below. There are likely still more than a few forks in the design path worth exploring, but strictly in terms of visual representation of user interface elements, it is a large and significant step forward.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Active Selections</span></b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>This is likely one of the points that really feels a little too much. It's orange. And it's everywhere.</div><div><br /></div><div>I can imagine there are plenty of Libre types that are shouting out about the inevitable consistency facet. Consistency is a means to an end. There are other techniques.<br /><br />Have other paths been explored? Saturations? There is something about it that feels like the glaring blue or red lights that equipment makers inadvertently put into their devices only to find out that it lights up someone's entire room in the dim lighting.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is worth focusing on a few elements:</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAnkmtl-mI/AAAAAAAABcw/OkwsaVn4WYA/s1600/square-selection.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAnkmtl-mI/AAAAAAAABcw/OkwsaVn4WYA/s320/square-selection.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>The blatant disregard for craftsmanship on this selection box unfortunately pulls down a good deal of the work. It is too bad they didn't leave this hidden in the screenshot.<br /><br />It's square. Yep. And that's the list of compelling features.</div><div><br /></div><div>What I would have hoped for was some sort of underlying schema for the highlights. Are they slightly 3D? Are there lighting guides to follow? Is there something else to this presentation that lends toward a centralized style?</div><div><br /></div><div>Here is another example:</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAokil6CwI/AAAAAAAABc8/8VTqDSjEE9A/s1600/menu-highlight.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAokil6CwI/AAAAAAAABc8/8VTqDSjEE9A/s320/menu-highlight.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>This menu selection item shows a much higher degree of craftsmanship. There is more going on there. Unfortunately, it still seems stuck in the Tango-outline-outline-inset-outline style guide that unfortunately drags it down. Again too, the tone seems pretty heavily saturated. I note this because of one of the more impressive decisions they made coming up next.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Monochromatic Interface</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGArR5LA0iI/AAAAAAAABdI/n5H8DcOAJRc/s1600/interface-tone.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGArR5LA0iI/AAAAAAAABdI/n5H8DcOAJRc/s320/interface-tone.jpg" /></a></div><div><br />Thank goodness. It finally happened.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is not beyond the realm of reason that some talented designer will make a lovely example of hue based interfaces. I don't believe I have seen one yet in Libre software. Further still, lumping hue into the default background of interface elements likely coaxes the little hobgoblin out of his nest.</div><div><br /></div><div>When you add a subtle colour hue to an interface, you end up inadvertently painting the whole desktop in a wash of colour. This takes us back to the brown, brown, and a little more brown era. Too much. It would be like painting your living room walls the same colour as your couch and then buying a matching carpet.<br /><br />It is the exact same erroneous mistake legions of people make when they walk into their home hardware depot and make a paint selection based off of a five centimetre swatch.</div><div><br /></div><div>Removing all of the hue is a solid step forward. I can only wonder if they avoided doing it in the last incarnation to avoid the more blatant connections to the mainstream operating system that has similar cues.</div><div><br /></div><div>Yes it on one hand could be more cargo cultish. Yes it is running away from an attempt to create a successful slightly hued interface. Yes, it is.</div><div><br /></div><div>As a design decision though, it <i>elevates</i> the work from its previous incarnation merely by <i>avoiding</i> a poor execution.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Scrollbars and Troughs</span></b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>On the whole, these are vastly better. Why?</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA9JXsn-nI/AAAAAAAABeg/VNUXahkzVgE/s1600/progress-bar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA9JXsn-nI/AAAAAAAABeg/VNUXahkzVgE/s320/progress-bar.jpg" /></a></div><br /></div><div>I'd make a case that they don't look as lazy as they did before. Prior to this, we had a linear gradient tossed into the background. Now we see some craftsmanship. A little bevel near the edge and some attention to lighting in the progress bar trough. With the progress bar pill we see more care and attention to the details in the pill.</div><div><br /></div><div>Again though, I have to wonder about the outline on the orange pill. It seems like an overly simplistic method to gain contrast, doubly so when considering the relative value of the hue and saturation of the pill. It is a minor note, but one that I'd like to see explored further with alternate manifestations.</div><div><br /></div><div>Still, leagues better than the previous incarnation.</div><div><br /></div><div>The scrollbars haven't changed dramatically. The troughs show a little adjustment.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: auto;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAtpIADD0I/AAAAAAAABdk/hVrvR2F6n6g/s1600/scroll-bar-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAtpIADD0I/AAAAAAAABdk/hVrvR2F6n6g/s320/scroll-bar-1.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div><div>We can see a little outlining on the scrollbar arrows now where they were part of the background prior. The trough has a less contrast gradient inside it, which likely helps to pull away from the feeling of a lazy linear gradient.</div><div><br /></div><div>Again, the outline technique seems somewhat too easy a design path. There is likely a better way to create form without relying on the simplest technique. Remember how children learn to draw. They start with outlines.<br /><br />The three line gripper does, unfortunately, seem to echo the design path of yet-another-operating-system, and as such, I'd strongly try to avoid it.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>What would happen with further exploration of the scroll bars? Is there a unique approach out there that avoids the triple lines of the gripper and the outline method of defining its form?</div><div><br /></div><div>For the reasons cited, I'd label the progress bar adjustments much improved. The scroll bars less so, but still avoiding the earmark laziness of the previous version.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Typeface</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>The new Ubuntu typeface is in place and it has a serious push on the overall feel.</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAvqtdteeI/AAAAAAAABdw/7QufKTCMDGA/s1600/type.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAvqtdteeI/AAAAAAAABdw/7QufKTCMDGA/s320/type.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>The impact the type has on the overall system cannot be understated. It is diminutive in nature and strips away the bold and clunky looks of yesteryear for a sense of sophistication.</div><div><br /></div><div>There is a current obsession with gutters and padding in GNOME. I hope that some astute individual steps up and voices a concern. Egregious gutters, padding, and whitespace create interfaces that end up feeling massive and heavy.</div><div><br /></div><div>There is no difference between the blight of horribly cramped interfaces and those that suffer from airhead syndrome. Evaluate the balance in context. Executed with a poor obsession in the name of consistency will result in an identical feeling of heavy and ropey interfaces. Perhaps that is something the people pursuing those paths will need to learn for themselves.</div><div><br /></div><div>If there were one gripe I'd have with the typography, it is our ridiculous insistence on using bold letterforms in the title bar. We finally managed to get the text left aligned, now we just need to ditch that heavy misuse of bold.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Window Decoration</span></b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Neither here nor there as a design choice.</div><div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA9QbV1p5I/AAAAAAAABeo/5RjzIhKpBTg/s1600/windeco.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA9QbV1p5I/AAAAAAAABeo/5RjzIhKpBTg/s320/windeco.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div>The buttons do show elevated craftsmanship and is always a good thing. There is much to be said for showing detail in one's work.<br /><br />I fear we lost the trench a little with this incarnation, but again, it feels neither here nor there. Do we need the trench at all? In terms of lighting, it seems like a slight oversight that the lower lip isn't catching any light.</div><div><br /></div><div>The issue, combined with the bold text as cited above, is that the window header still feels heavy. Perhaps this is a combined result with the new typography lightening up the overall appearance. The massive height of the window border just seems ridiculously overweight.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Could we trim the fat by de-bolding the type? Could we shave some pixels off?</div><div><br /></div><div>For all of the people out there willing to shout out that empty word 'usability', I'd throw back 'design problem' and suggest we solve it.</div><div><br /></div><div>If we can't hit an aesthetic target <i>and</i> move our windows around, we have utterly failed. Is the window title bar the only solution? Are there others? Can we address the ability to grab a window and maintain a strict aesthetic voice?</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd hope so.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Buttons</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAy23RsdgI/AAAAAAAABeI/6jO8of0gles/s1600/buttons.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGAy23RsdgI/AAAAAAAABeI/6jO8of0gles/s320/buttons.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>Outline. Inset. Infill.</div><div><br /></div><div>Heavy as a lump of lead, these things are visually glaring, although not quite as much as their predecessors. These are lacking the craftsmanship we should strive for, and instead replace that with that patented goofball Libre outline, inset, outline, outline, inset routine. In addition to being derivative of every other interface theme out there in Libreland, they create an awkward sense of elevation.</div><div><br /></div><div>The internal tone, being darker, sets them out from the background quite significantly. This would head in the opposite direction of the instrumentation panel feel of the progress bar troughs.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is certainly not the kind of thing you would find on the front face of audiophile, videophile, or high quality equipment. This is the kind of button you would find on the front of a Goldstar or one of those All-In-One remote controls.</div><div><br /></div><div>Poor.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Sliders</span></b></span></div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA0TR9YX7I/AAAAAAAABeU/QBww6obMb2k/s1600/slider.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA0TR9YX7I/AAAAAAAABeU/QBww6obMb2k/s320/slider.jpg" /></a></div><div><br /></div><div>I am a little torn on this one. While it exhibits the same improvements as the progress bar troughs, it simply piddles its gains away by including that cruft of Tango inspired blemish upon it. Hideous. Huge.</div><div><br /></div><div>What would more greatly suit the trough in this instance? Were materials considered? What might fit this overarching thematic?</div><div><br /></div><div>These details are the kinds of things that make presentations spring to life. It fills them with emotion. It gives them style and nuance. Think about a kitchen and all of the elements in it. Everything matters. The materials that the countertops are crafted out of and their ability to coordinate with the cabinetry.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>These elements are like the door handles and cabinetry clasps. We should pay greater attention to them and imbue them with style. Are they hematite? Is there a unique stylistic choice here that we could visually echo elsewhere like spice in a food dish?</div><div><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Checks and Radios</b></span><br /><br />This one still obviously appears to need exploration.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA-5Y1sUDI/AAAAAAAABe0/GIqDdsnOS2g/s1600/checks-radios.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TGA-5Y1sUDI/AAAAAAAABe0/GIqDdsnOS2g/s320/checks-radios.jpg" /></a></div><br />These are neither here nor there again. Instead, they should likely be one more detail that lends to an overall styling.<br /><br />It isn't there[1].<br /><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Closing Riddle for You</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>If one takes anything away from this it should be to note that there are some serious improvements in this iteration.<br /><br />While one could certainly ask questions about the saturation of the orange selected elements and other design questions, the whole mise-en-scene cannot be seen as anything other than progress. This is not without the hobgoblin of yesterday still upon us.</div><div><br /></div><div><div>We need to ask some tough questions in Libre software. As with most of our interfaces, is this a high end instrumentation panel or a Play-Doh (no pun intended) inspired iteration on the standard trend? We should address the question with a clear answers, and not accidentally or intentionally wrap motifs in from that past era. It may require radical rethinking and a conscious avoidance of the old ways.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>I say bring it on. I beg thee.</div><div><br /></div><div>I have one final point, but it is a subject of large gravity, and as such, the foundation of another post. I'd ask you all to leverage your thinking upon it.</div><div><br /></div><div>When we view these things, we see them as static two dimensional images like looking at photographs from our past.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Just as with the photographs, this is not how we experience them. This is not how we live them. The tools used to develop this interface are trapped in that world. As I have said before, the tools inform the design as the chisel informs the wood.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>What is missing? It is so obvious it can go unnoticed.</div><div><br /></div><div>It should shape our design decisions. It should be mandatory to&nbsp;elucidate&nbsp;our visions within it. It opens up vast regions of interface interaction paradigms that have yet to be tapped.</div><div><br /></div><div>Let's see if you have the time to figure it out. ;) Post a comment if you do. If you can, please post the comments over at <a href="http://librescope.com/">Librescope</a>.&nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Thank you all for reading...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] I suppose one could make the argument that in fact there is no stated overall styling. Not really necessary for someone working alone in a dark room, but certainly helps to evaluate whether or not it is successful in that effort. What is it? I'd love to hear it.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-3251757853981028791?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-84568224001139986542010-08-08T11:01:00.000-07:002010-08-09T16:12:18.475-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TF7jBqrvxWI/AAAAAAAABcY/8-cuFnV8ms8/s1600/we.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TF7jBqrvxWI/AAAAAAAABcY/8-cuFnV8ms8/s400/we.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />There is no shortage of various blog postings tackling the "Problems with Free Software(TM)." Myself? Guilty as charged.<br /><blockquote>I can't change the fact that my paintings don't sell. But the time will come when people will recognize that they are worth more than the value of the paints used in the picture. - Vincent van Gogh</blockquote>I stopped to focus on this recently with another posting, attempting to <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/abhorrent-absolutism.html">explore the perils of absolutism</a>. The world where everything has a clearly defined description and is easily accessible. It appears easy for us as a culture to rally behind enticing words. "Beautiful", "Elegant", "Success", and "Better" are a few such terms.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">The Problem with the "Problem"</span></span></b><br /><br />It certainly has the earmarks of the above terms doesn't it? It is an easy word to rally around and get people to arrive at a democratic consensus. We have a "Problem." Agree?<br /><br />When we come down to defining the term, it gets much more murky. It is, I believe, <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/abhorrent-absolutism.html">a question of framing</a>.<br /><br />There are apparently more than a few individuals that are willing to run around screaming "Let's fix the house's problem!," garnering a good deal of support, and then perform act three of the Three Stooges as they bumble around and bump into each other not really knowing what problem they are addressing.<br /><br />In some instances it is worse. Sometimes, they bumble around pointing at vague nothingness or the hobgoblins of a bygone era.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Mythical Problem #1: Zealotry or Core Value?</span></span></b><br /><br />While it is easy to cite RMS as the&nbsp;clichéd&nbsp;and vocal Free Software supporter, I'd hope that many would accept he is an exception. His eccentricity and unique perspective gave birth to the notion of Free Software in his head. His steadfast determination and unflinching vision may have had a role in a significant portion of the Libre software available today.<br /><br />If we sat back and did a count of people like RMS, I'd dare say the number is precisely one. What is really the "Problem" here then?<br /><br />Vocal Free Software supporters? I need to wonder...<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Mythical Problem #2: Significant Market Share?</span></span></b><br /><br />One of the "Problems" often cited is the need for a dominant market share. Microsoft has enjoyed that for a while now. If you had to choose, would you rather be Apple or Microsoft right now?<br /><br />I'd ask you to give serious thought on that front.<br /><br />Does BMW have significant market share?<br />Does the University of Oxford have a significant market share?<br />Does Apple have significant market share?<br /><br />Are those companies and their associated cultures valued?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Design for Whom?</span></b></span><br /><br />Success, in these instances, seems to hint more at mind share than market share.&nbsp;When you are of AudienceX, where do you choose to invest your mind share to fulfill your needs?<br /><br />Would exchanging core values of the above companies in exchange for market share be more appealing to AudienceX or less?<br /><br />If we can accept that a company culture can be valuable in its uniqueness, it is possible to define successful mind and market shares around that uniqueness.<br /><br />In the end, I'd ask you to consider the who again. I'd echo a question I made in an earlier post - <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/07/allure-of-culture.html">who do you want to be a member of this culture</a>?<br /><br />Do you want the Cory Doctorows and Lawrence Lessigs? What are their writing needs? How do they desire the tools to behave? Design to those needs.<br /><br />Do you want the Richard Feynmans and Madame Curies? What are their particular needs? What workflows and systems would be more appealing to them? Design to that.<br /><br />Do you want the Ada Lovelaces and Richard Stallmans? We luckily already have a few...<br /><br />What about all of those nameless people in oppressive countries that run the very real risk of being executed in the name of their radically progressive thoughts? While it was <a href="http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-sciencechristianity.htm">a dark moment of our history</a>, it also is happening all around us right now. With <a href="http://www.techeye.net/security/us-mandated-backdoor-let-chinese-hack-google">mainstream systems</a> and <a href="http://www.torontolife.com/daily/informer/the-new-normal/2010/08/03/uae-vs-rim-the-blackberry-maker-folds-like-a-cheap-lawn-chair-reports-globe/">devices now succumbing to government and implied market pressures</a>, can Free Software be designed to meet their needs? A distribution that is a cornerstone of communicating out of those places? Encrypted messaging, publishing, data storage, and remote secure servers?<br /><br />Do you want random voices that would prefer nothing more than already existing alternatives such as Apple's OSX or Microsoft's Windows?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">We.</span></b></span><br /><br />It is a powerful word.<br /><br />Who are we? What do we wish to become?<br /><br />Strictly subjectively, I believe <i>those</i> are critical and foundational problems we need to now address. Those are the design issues at hand.<br /><br />Define it. Frame it.<br /><br />Achieve it.<br /><br /><blockquote>Culture's worth huge, huge risks. Without culture we're all totalitarian beasts. - Norman Mailer</blockquote><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-8456822400113998654?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-17603858893041194652010-08-07T10:26:00.000-07:002010-08-07T15:45:05.459-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TF2XPJQG1UI/AAAAAAAABcM/vbOkVYEuuU8/s1600/absolutism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TF2XPJQG1UI/AAAAAAAABcM/vbOkVYEuuU8/s400/absolutism.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><a href="http://markshuttleworth.com/">Mark Shuttleworth</a> is prone to saying some extremely astute things.<br /><br />In this instance, it was Mr. Shuttleworth's opinion on the culture of Free Software and its ability to solve problems. Not exactly a shocker for many of us. It's an easy buy-in.<br /><br />What was astute with his suggestion though, was a perception of why things failed. He suggested that a problem is met with failure when it is improperly framed.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The Thought Applied to Art and Design</b></span><br /><br />If we accept that many bright minds are adept at solving problems, why then, almost unanimously across the board, does our outward manifestations of art, design, and pathos so shamefully fail?[1]<br /><br />Is it possible that we aren't framing the issues properly?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Those Darn Words</b></span><br /><br />It's deadly simple to throw out words like 'elegant', 'success', 'quality', and 'beautiful'. We do it all the time in the Free Software culture.<br /><br />Those are easy words aren't they? "We should be beautiful not ugly!" How difficult is it for us to rally around that statement? Pretty simple isn't it?<br /><br />And then the masses wander off and start creating 'elegant', 'beautiful', and 'quality' things.<br /><br />And of course, we are 'successful'.<br /><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span">Never mistake motion for action. - Ernest Hemingway</span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Yikes. I'm Scared</b></span><br /><br />If someone suggests for a brief moment that we are fundamentally incapable of discussing things using words like the above examples, they would likely be derided as one of those time-sucking goblins. The energy wasters. Those haters, they will always hate.<br /><br />If you ask an individual to define a single term such as 'elegant', a random smattering of opinion would likely come forth. Ask two individuals, and now we have some difference of opinion. Discuss things long enough and suddenly the topic drifts from defining a word to a dismal path of semantics where the horrible vertigo of solipsism sets in.<br /><br />Aggh! Avoid the issue altogether. We all know what they mean, move on. That's how we get things done right?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Process to Negotiate the Difficult Terrain?</b></span><br /><br />If you look to the rampant diversion of opinion on the new <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/446">Ubuntu Unity Audio indicator over at Mr. Shuttleworth's blog</a>, you can quickly see that something is wrong here. How can one party quite rightly suggest that we should not include album art and another, equally rightly, suggest we include it and make it bigger?<br /><br />What is going on here?<br /><br />I believe, at the core, our inability to tackle the massive ball of presence, emotion, and aesthetics is fundamentally moored in our inability to, as Mr. Shuttleworth has said, frame the problem. This isn't about wasting time trying to define nebulous words. This isn't about time sucking a project into the pooper.<br /><br />At this core, if we can find a process to negotiate the complex terrain, we may be able to leverage the amazing power of Libre software development against the traditional roles of art, design, aesthetics, and emotion.<br /><br />The following suggestions are built up on quite a few years of watching Libre culture beat around the proverbial shrubbery of the issues at hand:<br /><ol><li>Accept that absolutism does not exist. In doing so, we accept that we must frame our design problems far more accurately than a small team working alone and isolated in a specific culture. Even our concepts of <a href="http://www-psych.stanford.edu/~lera/papers/mandarin.pdf">time</a>, <a href="http://johnnyholland.org/2010/01/11/my-days-are-filled-with-questions-the-bridge-between-cultures-and-design/">quality</a>, and <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/global-market-global-emotion-global-design">global culture</a> are tainted by our own subjectivity. Accept this. Embrace it.</li><li>Define who you are designing for. What are you attempting to address? How? Why? Are there specific needs that this audience requires? In doing so, we frame our evaluations and make them manageable.</li><li>Extend and colour design goals with tangible analogous examples. What sort of emotion is intended? Are there several visual examples that flesh out a term? Create a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_board">mood board</a>&nbsp;or similar presentation at the beginning of a project. In doing so, we help to frame the overall look and feel to the various participants.</li><li>During design, evaluate against the who. By framing the audience in (2) above, we allow our estimations to be educated and informed. While it will not ensure success it will assure a chance of success. When faced with opposing opinions on potential design paths, always evaluate the paths in the light of the who.</li><li>Success and failure should be evaluated against the who, not the individuals involved or parties outside of the audience of the intended design.</li></ol><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span">A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding. - Marshall Mcluhan</span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Absolutes are Absolutely Ludicrous</b></span><br /><br />There are many successful projects in the past that have likely never had to tackle the notion of absolutism. They just hammered out their ideas and carried on.<br /><br />Those projects however, have one fundamental difference to Libre culture though - they never sought to collaborate and interact on a global level[2]. They didn't have to validate and itemize design paths in a vast and disparate group of people. They didn't have to negotiate a difference of cultural perspective to thwart wasted energy and bikeshedding.<br /><br />For those in Libre culture, absolutism fundamentally cripples our ability to frame our design issues correctly.<br /><br />We are marching into new territory.<br /><br />Here's to applying new approaches...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] This is obviously a gross oversimplification. I don't believe the core of the statement to be false however. Exceptions to the statement obviously exist in the form of Firefox and Chrome, but by and large, my interests aren't with promoting the success of those projects but rather the unfortunate state of affairs for the more important bigger picture.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[2] There are some fascinating stories of massive international corporations facing the identical issues. You could likely Google for Wal-Mart and Glocalization. That however, is the subject of another post.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1760385889304119465?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-48591565742392751052010-08-04T10:53:00.000-07:002010-08-06T14:56:22.897-07:00<div style="height: 0px;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmlmy-BBlI/AAAAAAAABbg/Rvm3qdUCm1c/s1600/wrong.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmlmy-BBlI/AAAAAAAABbg/Rvm3qdUCm1c/s400/wrong.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>It's All New Design This Time! No Really!</b></span><br /><br />This is a good exercise that touches on why <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/07/allure-of-culture.html">building a culture is so important</a>. Every time I look at the new Ubuntu music-applet-sound-all-in-one-super panel I struggle against my instinctive reaction.<br /><br />I see a long standing history of art, design, presence, aesthetics, and emotional experience being neglected. It chases us like a dark spectre of our past.<br /><br />This isn't new. These are the same old patterns repeated while professing to be different.<br /><br />The lady doth protest too much.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">What the Hell Has Gone Wrong?</span></b><br /><br />I ask you to look at the following samples. Even a passing glance at this should prick the hairs up on your arms with the same morbid reaction to looking at a decaying corpse.<br /><br />There is nothing to love here. Nothing. And yet our community cheerleaders seem absolutely blind to the inherent kludgey issues.<br /><br />It is, for all intents and purposes, hideous. And better still, it is hideous wrapped up with some absolutely questionable design.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Chic. Right?</b></span><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmmIkb8c5I/AAAAAAAABbo/aErUgblWshQ/s1600/soundmenu-now.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmmIkb8c5I/AAAAAAAABbo/aErUgblWshQ/s320/soundmenu-now.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>First, we roll out an implementation. Then we retroactively fix it. Right? So the original implementation for the sound panel thingamajig rolls out, and what do you know, there's an issue. To quote Mark Shuttleworth:<br /><blockquote>Note the tight space for the track data, and hence the ellipsis.</blockquote>And the result?<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmORnPoCkI/AAAAAAAABag/f8BV9lN6vDA/s1600/bleed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmORnPoCkI/AAAAAAAABag/f8BV9lN6vDA/s320/bleed.jpg" /></a></div><br />Now somewhere, someone might be going "That's hip right? Overlapping text on an image is pretty stylish right?"<br /><br />It sure can be. Is this it?&nbsp;Unequivocally not.&nbsp;It's a solution to a self made problem.<br /><br />Let's ask ourselves exactly what this applet is supposed to be doing? I'll guess at:<br /><br /><ol><li>Provide a central interface that allows us to control all of the audio.</li><li>Provide a region that shows related audio elements. In this case, it is the output of the music player.</li></ol><br />I would ask you though, is this about the application or the data it represents? Why? Because in this case, I would make a strong argument that the audience could care less about the application level. In fact, what is important here, and likely why we are including it in a menu, is the music.<br /><br />What music is it? Is it playing? Can I skip a track? Can I replay a track?<br /><br />Does the target audience care what the music application is?<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOVYArdEI/AAAAAAAABa4/QqNr-X3-sX0/s1600/dowecare.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOVYArdEI/AAAAAAAABa4/QqNr-X3-sX0/s320/dowecare.jpg" /></a></div><br />In the above 'design', the data has taken a second-rate-low-end-back-seat. We jam ellipsis in that effectively destroy <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/06/libre-improvements-meaningful.html">a meaningful representation of the data</a>. If we subscribe to the idea that the data itself is what is important, we have completely destroyed the entire purpose of this design element.<br /><br />Secondly, if the data is indeed the purpose here, why is the album art given the same back-seat-third-rate-representation? What might be more effective?<br /><br />I'll try to touch on why I believe these sorts of decisions get made later, because I do believe there is an underlying rationale to the unfortunate choices.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Visual Flow</b></span><br /><br />Graphic layouts will pull eyes along a path. This is a complex series of interactions between colour, value, dimension, and other such areas wrapped up in the audience's experience. With this panel applet, I'd make a strong case that there is a lack of visual flow.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br />There are many minor details in this presentation that I would suggest destroy the visual flow and leave a general sense of hodge podge.<br /><ol><li>Inconsistent padding and gutter room. Of note would be the strange padding between the two sound icons on the main volume control and the distinct lack thereof on the timestamps on the progress meter.</li><li>Visual flow. The weight of the buttons comes to mind. It is one thing to draw attention to something using dimension, but another entirely when the element in question is nothing short of an acrylic Elvis painting on black velvet.</li><li>Much information. If the intentions were to be a quick panel, the information provided suggests otherwise. If we were to try and figure out why we would need these sorts of things in a quick-to-access menu, we might make some gain. How often is the target audience requiring to choose a playlist? How often is the audience needing to make adjustments to the sound preferences? Are the features presented useful when analyzed in conjunction with the audience that is using it?&nbsp;</li></ol>Some wide open questions that would need further thinking and, more importantly, perhaps some research.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Broken Semantics</b></span><br /><br />This one seems glaring. At the top we have two elemetnts that appear to control system level audio. Then, again, way down at the bottom, we have a preferences menu item.<br /><br />If we use proximity, should we deduce that the sound preferences are a part of the music playing application?<br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOXFj6OjI/AAAAAAAABbA/CHWwaacSX1g/s1600/semantics.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOXFj6OjI/AAAAAAAABbA/CHWwaacSX1g/s320/semantics.jpg" /></a></div><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Stuff-it-in-a-Text-Menu(TM)</b></span><br /><br />This trait has been appearing with ever more frequency. It drives me to distraction.<br /><br />Putting something in a menu is not design. It is lazy.<br /><br />I'll predicate this with a hypothesis: The tools inform the design as the chisel informs the wood it carves.<br /><br />If all of the work you do is trapped in a prototyping sketcher, Flash, or Inkscape, or GIMP, what is the inevitable byproduct of that? How do predefined notions of user interface libraries shape a perception of design interfaces? Should they? When all you have is a hammer, everything tends to gets treated like a nail.<br /><br />Much like the above ellipses 'solution', it is mired in the tools used to arrive at a solution. GIMP is strictly two dimensional. If we start hacking away in GIMP before we have arrived at a vision, our solutions will inevitably be informed by the tool in which we are hacking it out.<br /><br />At no point did someone stop and develop a vision / solution first and then develop in the direction of that solution. No, instead, the path of least resistance was presented. Solve a problem that we actually created.<br /><br />Had the starting point been a vision, multiple viable solutions may have presented themselves. Could we animate it? Could we elevate the experience in doing so? What other contemporary examples harness representational data in a way that is unique? Is there anything to be learnt from them?<br /><br />Many possible paths, and yet we are stuck with the data destroying ellipses.<br /><br />So how do we present options now?<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOkAGwt2I/AAAAAAAABbI/f-Xde_SpgFU/s1600/putitinamenu.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOkAGwt2I/AAAAAAAABbI/f-Xde_SpgFU/s320/putitinamenu.jpg" /></a></div><br />In addition to being a lazy solution, in this context, one could make a pretty good case that the menus and resultant text heavy presentation are pulling away from the visual flow. There is much to read and, as a result, much visual noise. Indeed, the top most "Mute All" isn't even a menu. Is it a button? Why isn't it a button? What cognitive dissonance is created as we present our audience with entirely different interaction semantics? "Choose Playlist" also has the added triangle that somewhat disturbs the right gutter.<br /><br />What might a viable solution have been that didn't require a menu? We certainly could have used some sort of iconic button to reduce the visual noise and elevate the flow, but should we stop there? Are there other innovative solutions to be had that we aren't seeing?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>The </b></span><s><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Best</b></span></s><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b> Biggest for Last</b></span><br /><br />It is far to easy to simply cringe at those buttons and walk away. But why do some cringe? What is wrong there?<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOS6k0ySI/AAAAAAAABao/ghjgDcs6a4Y/s1600/buttons.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmOS6k0ySI/AAAAAAAABao/ghjgDcs6a4Y/s320/buttons.jpg" /></a></div><br />Let me roll through a subjective romp of neural firing:<br /><ol><li>A new styling. There are drop shadow cues on the interface glyphs. This appears new. I was unable to find another sample of this technique anywhere in the system. Currently, with no other examples anywhere in the system, this is an issue as it draws significant attention to itself in terms of the visual flow.</li><li>Base form does not reflect interaction frequency. There is an awkwardness of the base button forms. The forward and back seem to be getting too much visual say as though their importance is, strictly in terms of visual gravity, as important as actually playing or stopping the music. Compare against the Firefox interface explorations which each have a much more stable set of visual gravity that parallels their frequency. They also exhibit much more craftsmanship than the above buttons.<br /><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmd49KsdtI/AAAAAAAABbU/Y_YHF805dK4/s1600/firefox-3-back-forward.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFmd49KsdtI/AAAAAAAABbU/Y_YHF805dK4/s320/firefox-3-back-forward.jpg" /></a></div><br /></li><li>Bevel styling. Tied to (1) above, we have to ask ourselves a question. I am entirely for making changes and adjustments if they have been thought through. This doesn't appear so. If this is indeed a new anchor for a new aesthetic style, should we should be pursing it?&nbsp;&nbsp;Has there been a visual series of studies or explorations to back up an entirely new aesthetic direction using this as an anchor? Should there have been? How would this element handcuff future elements in terms of design direction and presence?</li></ol><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Not Convinced</b></span><br /><br />All in all, I'm not convinced that we have any more design thinking here than we did four years ago. Personally, this looks like the same patterns repeated.<br /><br />I am not criticizing Canonical's desire to forge ahead with their plans. In fact, I'd be of the opposite belief. I strongly encourage more Libre companies to push ahead with dramatic and radical changes. We need that sort of stubborn resilience. Unfortunately, in this case, I believe it is seated in some questionable aesthetic, design, and interactive issues.<br /><br />As a complete outsider, I can see this effort as an extension of the heroic hacking that has taken the Libre movement so far. "Shut up and code!" Indeed, if it weren't for that attitude there would be nothing here to discuss, and for that reason alone it should be applauded.<br /><br />However, when it comes to raising the bar for interaction paradigms and interfaces, I have to question the validity of not stopping at intermittent design checkpoints and re-evaluating the plan. At which point does the hacker creed of code first create a series of problems that now require hackish solutions, such as the ellipses issue? At which point do we stop and ask ourselves just what the hell we are trying to accomplish?<br /><br /><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/08/defining-success-and-failure.html">Was there any thought given to what will dictate whether this has been a success or failure</a>? What are they?<br /><br />Art, design, presence, aesthetics, experience, and emotion are nebulous creatures. They cannot be tackled with the same tools that has brought our rich culture to where it currently rests. The patterns that may have yielded success cannot be assumed to provide success in other areas. The same logic may not apply. The process may need to be different.<br /><br />It appears to be the same hacker ethos, the same hacker sensibilities, the same hacker solution process, all over again but now applied to art and design.<br /><br />It looks like history repeating itself.<br /><br />A tremendous thank you to all of the people that have spoken up, sent email, instant messaged, and otherwise to voice your caring. We need more people like you to engage the culture. Please do.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">A Postscript</span></b><br /><br /><b></b>Mr. Shuttleworth left a comment here that I believe deserves some attention in the main body of this article. As much as it is easy for idiot monkeys like myself to throw out yet-another-worthless-and-empty opinion, <i>he</i> is the one that has invested a ridiculous amount of his own money into Ubuntu. Without him, all of this discourse is moot.<br /><br />On key values of the panel indicator:<br /><blockquote>"provide a home for all the apps influencing "what I'm hearing" with suitable metadata and interaction opportunities"</blockquote>At some point this will likely need to be regulated, no? What applications? Every single one with an isolated sound control pipe? How massive will that applet get? Should this goal be more restricted in scope? I'd certainly think it should.<br /><blockquote>"do it stylishly"</blockquote>And here is a core problem with our current Libre software approach.<br /><br />What the heck is stylish? Seriously. Please give that some thought. Your economic and ethnographic details are specific to you, and as such, they define the words.<br /><br />What is worse is that not many see how empty such terms are, and instead, go off rendering or clawing at their own take on 'stylish'. It takes us right to where we are now in Libre design - no focused discourse and a mish-mash of directions.<br /><br />While it is completely acceptable to work with loose semantics in casual conversations, when we start talking about gettin'-it-done, they fall apart. It is rather like the empty allusions to "elegant" I've been seeing popping up in GNOME circles.<br /><br />In practical terms, providing a more rounded brief or even mood boards would likely have helped to get more people on the same page, perhaps?<br /><br />You have specifically called this "classy", and I can't disagree with you. Perhaps to you it is in fact, "classy". This is a difference in fundamental perspectives. And in the end, it is really irrelevant what you and I think. This is about an audience. Who is it? They are the barometer, and in the end, we need to speak <i>their</i> language.<br /><br />"Let's design a panel applet for music control aimed at 20-30 somethings with North American / Western European music magazine sensibilities." and build up around the other design constraints of being a panel applet. Alas, I didn't try to provide a brief on this.<br /><br />At any rate, you have your own design team there. Start with them perhaps? Surely a productive and creative explosion could happen if the design goal is framed appropriately?<br /><br />I've kept mocks out of this discussion. I don't believe they are worthwhile. If there is any value at all in this post, it could rapidly be washed away with a subjective response to a mock. Strictly on aesthetics, I'd&nbsp;<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/100804433705878937883/Mockups#5493941238577600450">suggest this one in a heartbeat over what is currently presented</a>. It is certainly in the vein of the clinical presentation, so personally I'd question the validity of such an approach. That said, the execution is far superior to what is currently in place. The other design concerns still stand.<br /><br />Thanks again for taking the time to drop by...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4859156574239275105?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-62639547141051249442010-08-03T11:41:00.000-07:002010-08-03T12:12:40.186-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFhigCVcdGI/AAAAAAAABaQ/BiKAuWoBiC8/s1600/neighbor-entities.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFhigCVcdGI/AAAAAAAABaQ/BiKAuWoBiC8/s400/neighbor-entities.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Neighbor Awareness as a Guiding Principle</span></b></span><br /><br />So you install your fresh and new DistroX. Wonderful stuff.<br /><br />Now you head over to your laptop and install DistroX. Terrific.<br /><br />And what happens? Until you follow a myriad of installations or manipulations or IP blah blah or password hell, you effectively have two isolated islands.<br /><br />If we start thinking about needs, we might find a large set of useful implications when analyzing the notion of a neighbor awareness.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span"><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">Neighbor Awareness?</span></b></span><br /><br />This isn't attempting to purely replicate any known set of functionality currently out in computing. What I'd like you to dream about is the idea that, via tried and true security options such as OpenSSH[1], every computing device within range, be it IP subnet, Bluetooth, Ad-Hoc wireless, or any other available technologies, becomes a neighbor.<br /><br />Automagic.<br />Automatic.<br />All via a single click.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Let Your Mind Wander</b></span><br /><br />Imagine you log on at your local university. After you log on, you select the neighborhood launcher.<br /><br />You can see a full listing of nearby computing devices and entities. The presentation isn't a stale listbox, but rather a magical unfolding with full transitions as the entities fade into view. There are a few different filter / group settings that when you hover over the various nearby entities all gracefully sweep into different piles of elements.<br /><br />You begin typing "A-m-a-n-d..." and as you do so, the public facing avatar of four Amanda's show up in the contextual filter. You find the Amanda you are looking for. You click on here, and a knock-knock-knock sound signals an attempted initiation of connection.<br /><br />Meanwhile, on the other side of campus, Amanda is working hard on her LLB. Because she lists herself as available, a knock-knock transitions on her living space. She sees you have made a request, and accepts.<br /><br />From this point forward, full computing interaction can happen. It all started with a single click and built outward. Now you can share files, engage and interact, and other such things simply by interacting with Amanda's avatar. Stretch the imagination and ponder what other needs might be addressed through such a system?<br /><br />Even more importantly, your securely registered friends and associated devices have automatic detection for the next time around. Turn on your cellular phone, get within range of a contact, or any other registered connection and you are greeted with a notification on all relevant systems.<br /><br />All of this would be stored via an ask / allow / block system, permitting a full degree of privacy.<br /><br />Now consider what happens when you attach a cellular phone to your network, or a remote network attached storage device, or another workstation in your basement[2].<br /><br />Automatic awareness and interactions with a single click.<br /><br />Some interesting side links that have a similar flavour in some fashion:<br /><a href="http://doctormo.org/2009/07/25/ubuntu-desktop-contacts-as-indexed-files/">DoctorMo explores the idea of contacts as indexed files.</a><br /><a href="https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SettingUpSamba">Let's have the computer do the work? Make this mess one click.</a><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] Obviously security should be of the highest order. Registered SSH public keys might be a very effective way of permitting or blocking using typical usage scenarios. How to tackle spam attempts is another matter. The point is - we shouldn't get hung up on what we currently have, but rather focus on the end point and build backwards. We have some damn brilliant minds that could likely solve this design issue in a very short period of time. It should also be noted that the technology could easily extend to location based data.</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[2] This could likely be extended to a contextual interaction with other devices such as printers. What happens when you drag a PDF to a printer or a FLAC to a media device? Does the PDF print? Does it store it on there? Does a simple radial menu appear with interactions? What about the FLAC? Does it play? Does it transfer / sync it? Much to explore, but at the core we have a very uniform design language here that could likely flower into much more.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-6263954714105124944?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-80036284497750622212010-08-02T13:01:00.000-07:002010-08-02T14:04:15.048-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFcxF45gQmI/AAAAAAAABaE/9SPnv896Blk/s1600/success.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFcxF45gQmI/AAAAAAAABaE/9SPnv896Blk/s400/success.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Fictional World of Dartopia</b></span><br /><br />Once upon a time, there was a world called Dartopia.<br /><br />In Dartopia, they organized their culture around a game of darts. Each participant got a dart and tossed it. Each participant waited until the dart landed and then assigned themselves a score of their choosing.<br /><br />In a famous match, two of the most esteemed dartspeople were engaged in high battle. Regibauld on one side and Bowlina on the other. It was a heated game.<br /><br />In the final round, Regibauld made a deft toss that shot directly into Bowlina's eye. He chose to award himself a full five marks on the grounds that the dart hit a target that was close and was therefore subject to Limbaum's Law. Bowlina replied by not even tossing a dart, and cited Hattersack's Law for another full five marks.<br /><br />The matches in Dartopia all ended in draws. For this reason, Dartopia's spectator numbers were extremely low.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Libre Design - a World of Infinite Success</b></span><br /><br />Much like Dartopia, Libre software suffers a critical and fundamental flaw regarding the pursuit of all things design. When a project has no clearly defined metric for success, it engages in a worthless process of guesswork.<br /><br />As such, much of Libre software succumbs to a ridiculous debate of bikeshedding or opinionated subjectivity, all the while failing to address whether or not a design aids or fulfills the needs of a particular audience.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is Success?</b></span><br /><br />Success obviously could mean vastly different things to a near infinite number of people. In fact, any project, from the larger collectives with massive codebases to the tiny projects developed by a single person, could define the benchmark differently. Some might define monetary reward as success while others may define it via vaguer notions of audience satisfaction.<br /><br />The problem here isn't in the diversity of potential goals for success in Libre software, but rather the complete disregard for defining them in the first place.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Without Goals, All Decisions are Moot</b></span><br /><br />We often see only the manifestations or symptoms of this lack of stated goals. Without the vision, it is nigh on impossible to evaluate whether or not a feature is valuable, needed, or desirable. We have all watched threads deteriorate from legitimate discourse into "Well that's that and we are developing it / footing the bill so please respect this choice."<br /><br />While I applaud such a concrete decision, we should accept the fact that forging ahead and getting things done / committing code isn't a barometer for success[1]. If we don't define the context of success, how is any success even possible?<br /><br />Instead of two separate parties wandering like amoebas after two different and nebulous ideas, we would have two powerful sets of minds focused in on solving a design problem.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Who Evaluates Success?</b></span><br /><br />In the end, the core of design is quite simple. Dieter Rams defined a loose set of ten ideas that encompassed his perspective on design. One of them is particularly relevant here:<br /><blockquote>Good design makes a product useful. -- <a href="http://designmuseum.org/design/dieter-rams">Dieter Rams</a></blockquote>Seems obvious, yes? Why then would a world respected designer feel the need to state it? The demon, as always, is in the details. With a focus on Libre software, the questions are clearer:<br /><br />Who is the software for? Stating "everyone" amounts to "no one", as <a href="http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-February/msg00174.html">Havoc Pennington insightfully said</a>.<br />What are they trying to do?<br />What feature helps aid that audience to achieving that need?<br />What feature interferes or confuses that audience?<br /><br />In light of those questions, we have a solid entry point for evaluating success. If we examine only the target audience for the design, do they find it useful? Why? Why not? What feature aids that particular audience to fulfilling the particular task / need? What feature is not relevant? How does the design of a feature augment or interfere with the given task / need?<br /><br />It should be stated with the utmost clarity that, in the end, the success of a given design is determined solely by the target audience[2]. All opinions beyond the scope of the target audience, whether positive accolades or vitriolic anger, are <i>irrelevant</i>.<br /><br />Certainly it is well beyond the scope of a blog article to figure out how to evaluate the success of these types of questions. Sociology has made it very clear that asking a question in a particular way can often trigger a given response, invalidating the information. Same goes for polls and voting. The need to glean valuable information in a meaningful way is the subject of an entire discipline and separate discussion.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;">In Summary</span></b><br /><br />While reviewing and assessing information can be difficult and complex, it should not dissuade us from forming clear goals to define our success and failure. We need these goals to evaluate how our designs are working. There is likely much value in forwarding some markers for failure as well. A firm set of checks and balances to guide our design, and perhaps more importantly, evaluate the design choices after they are implemented.<br /><br />We need less mental horsepower wasted on dissonance and bikeshedding and instead directed toward solving design questions. We need less debating over features and more focus on delivering a need to a given audience in a design that suits them.<br /><br />Success or failure remains in the eyes of the audience, not the creators. Without defining a set of constraints and evaluating our success against it, we can never hope to achieve it.<br /><br />Let's allow ourselves to succeed by defining it.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] There is an interesting side note here in that we are now in the midst of a flamewar over just such a topic. Should our universal metric for success be </span><a href="http://gregdekspeaks.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/red-hat-16-canonical-1/"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">purely upstream commits</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">? What if we miss the point and </span><a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/439"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">consider this an outbreak of tribalism</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;"> when, in essence, it is purely a different metric of success at hand?</span><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[2] There can be economic forces at play. It is possible to deliver a successful design that has a net sum loss of funds for a company. That too is a design constraint, but is one that is assumed in the creation of the work as opposed to the evaluation post-creation. It also has less of an impact on Libre software design, although the success or failure of a project in terms of its ability to attract participants, does indeed have an impact on development constraints.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-8003628449775062221?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-43163172766891589982010-08-01T19:14:00.000-07:002010-08-02T14:04:55.816-07:00Well OK... Perhaps not. :)<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFYo_eRjS2I/AAAAAAAABY0/3mo-yR115EM/s1600/librescope.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFYo_eRjS2I/AAAAAAAABY0/3mo-yR115EM/s400/librescope.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />This is a testament to gravity. When you first start writing on the web, you are painfully aware that you are but an isolated voice talking to itself. You write. You press publish. And...<br /><br />Off into the nothingness.<br /><br />Over time, though, with the tremendous aid of searchbots, minds arrive.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>A Loose Thought</b></span><br /><br />A while ago I toyed with the idea that it would be lovely if we had a central area for like minds to gather regarding Libre software art and design. A place free of ZOMGAWESOME cheerleading and HATEHATEHATE of the endless stream of hate sites. A place where the collective feels inertia and strength as opposed to a closed and cliquey corner of sycophantic praise or vitriolic bullying.<br /><br />In short, a place where people that are passionate about Libre software art, design, presence, and aesthetics can debate, discuss, and engage each other.<br /><br />Not being a web designer type, I let the thought pass.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Then and Now</b></span><br /><br />As those minds from earlier gathered, some cross pollination occurred. One mind gets introduced into another and gradually a shared set of interests form. A gravity developed. Traction.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.librescope.com/">Librescope</a> is the product of that gravity.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What is it?</b></span><br /><br />Librescope is the brainchild of Jay over at <a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/">Kilobitspersecond</a>. He is a passionate and articulate individual with a sharp interest in Libre software design. When he approached me with the idea that there should be a gathering place with coffee shop / art house sensibilities for Libre art and design issues, I was immediately interested. Jay pushed a massive rock up a hill and <a href="http://www.librescope.com/">Librescope</a> was born.<br /><br />With a firm belief to make publishing content painless, it was agreed upon that it would aggregate our various blogs into one feed with the hope that a community would grow. Out of that, it is hoped that we might find other like minded authors to add to the feed.<br /><br />A place for Debian, OpenSUSE, Fedora, Ubuntu, KDE, GNOME, XFCE, and every other type of Libre software individual can engage topics that matter regarding art and design.&nbsp;The focus spans all distributions, software, and manifestations. If it is Libre and related to art and design, we want to discuss it. More importantly, we want to discuss it with you.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>What it isn't?</b></span><br /><br />Librescope is not a site about cheerleading on distro X. It is not a site where various hate ranters will be given yet-another-forum about issue Y. Comments will be subjectively moderated by our Editor-In-Chief.<br /><br />In short, it is created for people like you.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-large;"><b>Passion</b></span><br /><br />We are hoping that we can grow a passionate community that embraces debate, discussion, and educated discourse. We will do everything we can to ensure that the discussions are pertinent, relevant, and respectful to the members of the new community.<br /><br />Our current goal is small, and as such, we don't have a formal method of adopting new writers and such. Currently there are two forms of editors: article writers and feed editors. The article writers get their blog posts tagged with <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/search/label/librescope">librescope</a> syndicated and aggregated to the main site. Feed editors help to tag relevant blog posts and articles already on the web. These too are aggregated on the site. If you have a sustained interest in art and design in Libre software and are interested in contributing, contact Jay over at <a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/">Kilobitspersecond</a>.<br /><br />So without further ado, if you or someone you know is interested, please blog, tweet, dent, and link to it. Join us in trying to grow a little Libre coffee shop / art house / design corner of the internet over at...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.librescope.com/">Librescope</a>.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4316317276689158998?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-71894819477997814372010-07-28T23:07:00.000-07:002011-01-19T15:33:15.890-08:00<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFE2AuK_QuI/AAAAAAAABYo/0hcmFwPr7-Q/s1600/culture.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5499236006018106082" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TFE2AuK_QuI/AAAAAAAABYo/0hcmFwPr7-Q/s400/culture.jpg" style="display: block; height: 200px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; margin-top: 0px; text-align: center; width: 400px;" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>An Often Heard Term</b></span><br /><br />If one did a text search of this blog, they would likely come across the term audience with excessively high frequency. There is another term that is equally important. It has equally far reaching implications and is at least as important. What is it?<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">The Culture</span></b><br /><br />Libre software art and design has been lagging for some time. It seems like every other day there are various blog postings regarding why it is failing. At the top of some of those lists are a few recurring thematics. In no particular order, we could likely arrange a loose list such as:<br /><div><ul><li>Money. The lack thereof for incentive.</li><li>Numbers. The lack of human resources.</li><li>Talent. The lack of experience and ability with regards to art and design.</li></ul></div>While the above factors are complicated and somewhat intertwined in their various incarnations, I would forward a hypothesis: That as important these factors appear, they are nothing more than purely symptomatic.<br /><br />They are the manifestations of a much deeper and darker disease. The disease is a lack of artistic and creative culture.<br /><br />In an attempt to highlight this core issue, we need to look at each of the above three problems in context.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Can't Buy Me Love: Money</b></span><br /><br />There are indeed some things money can't buy. If it were the case, we could likely suggest that Canonical would have had found itself plenty of exposure lauding the artistic and aesthetics of Ubuntu via the likes of <a href="http://notcot.org/">NOTCOT</a>, <a href="http://juxtapoz.com/">Juxtapoz</a>, and other such creative sites.<br /><br />But Canonical is small perhaps? Granted. So let's set our aims higher. How about the 200 billion dollar monkey known as Microsoft? Ask yourself if Microsoft would love to be known as the aesthetic art and design monster in computing. They aren't. And yet they have a veritable bottomless well of income to tap.<br /><br />What about General Motors or Ford? What price do you think they would pay to be immediately associated with luxury, quality, and like terms? I'd bet a hefty sum. Again though, they are often trumped by the likes of the staple names such as BMW. Certainly Ford could afford to hire anyone they want?<br /><br />Money, in the end, is no solution. In fact, if you look to all of the recent hubbabaloo about the Canonical design team, we should not forget that each and every bit of the presentation thus far was professionally created. That's right, paid for. <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/10/ubuntuification-of-art.html">The bleak and dismal CD / DVD covers</a>? Paid for. <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/10/intrepid-ibex-default-wallpaper.html">The wash of wonderfully pablumy bland default wallpapers</a>? Paid for. <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/07/who-is-ubuntus-audience.html">That box design of pure awesomeness you desperately wanted to buy at BestBuy</a>? Paid for. Ubuntu isn't the only sinner here, as there is a long lineage of Libre companies that foot the bill for absolutely abhorrent work.<br /><br />Money cannot purchase creative and artistic insight or the value of appreciating it when it is presented.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>No Army: Numbers</b></span><br /><br />It takes a vast number of people to do all of this art and design stuff doesn't it? Of course it does, and while it is entirely foolish to argue that one could create a colossal body of work with only a handful of people, numbers don't tell the whole story.<br /><br />If we look at some of the fundamental issues with the aforementioned companies such as Microsoft, we could speculate that in fact the size of the company has an adverse effect on their ability to change. Microsoft is a behemoth. It moves at a glacial pace. Even if it wanted to, Microsoft couldn't change.<br /><br />Its genetic disposition has been laid out ages ago and meanders along the tragic vector. Every single additional person that becomes a part of that culture, in a roundabout fashion, becomes part of the problem as they ethically support the status quo.<br /><br />It is only the smallest and darkest corner that is permitted to churn out ballsy typographic explosions as seen in the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jslL0VAvD0">Zune HD's music browser</a>, and even then, there must be a mountain of detractors along the way.<br /><br />With tremendous numbers comes a distinct loss of agility.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Plentiful Picassos and Multiple Mozarts: Talent</b></span><br /><br />How many times have we come across the "If only we had talented and trained artists and designers, then we would be complete!"<br /><br />Returning to the above theme, play a simple mental game. Whether you love them or hate them, the impact of a Chris Bangle or a Shigeru Miyamoto cannot be ignored. The brilliance of those types of personalities have led their companies into the stratosphere. The darlings that so many seek to be.<br /><br />Now let's pretend for a moment that Ford or Hyundai sought out <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/07/allure-of-culture.html">Chris Bangle</a> or that <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/07/who-is-ubuntus-audience.html#uds-search-results">ValuSoft</a> wanted to crank out a hit game and was chomping at the bit for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shigeru_Miyamoto">Shigeru Miyamoto</a>. What is the percentage chance of their success to enlist those talents?<br /><br />I would be so bold as to speculate that even if a company offered the company itself as stock options to some of those personalities, they would not be able to land the individuals.<br /><br />Those types of personalities are the culmination of opinion and judgement. That opinion and judgement is imprinted upon each and every decision they make and what cultures they choose to become a part of.<br /><br />Just as the history, tradition, and culture of a big league sports team impacts the quality of players that will play for them, so too does the history, tradition, and culture of a company impacts the creative minds it can attract.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Full Circle Back to Culture</b></span><br /><br />It becomes a self-perpetuating loop. Love, hate, or apathy, the culture will have a direct influence on future growth. With love comes greater numbers of similar minds. With hate comes the repulsion of a given audience. With apathy, yet another audience seeks out an alternative.<br /><br />Our current Libre culture is aesthetically, artistically, and creatively bankrupt. As such, we are caught in a traumatic loop. With each passing day we grow our culture slowly in the exact same direction, ever away from the vital lifeblood we fundamentally require.<br /><br />Given our current trajectory, no amount of money will buy us a solution, no quantity of people will right the ship, and no talent will magically appear on our horizons. There is even perhaps more bleakness in accepting that the size of a culture adversely affects its agility to change.<br /><br />The next generation of Chris Bangles, Shigeru Miyamotos, William Gibsons, Michelangelos, and Jonathan Ives&nbsp;<i>will</i> choose a culture to belong to. Will it be ours?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>The Tides of Change</b></span><br /><br />Is there anything we can do to challenge the current trending and shift the course?<br /><br />I am quite passionate in believing that we could effect a change. It, as the old cliché goes, starts with you.<br /><br />The limited number of people that read this blog are, I am compelled to believe, of a different ilk. You tend to be passionate, articulate, and pretty darn astute with regards to the common topics featured here.<br /><br />As a culture, we need you to stay here. We need you, despite your tendency to be quiet, to speak up. We need to you, and others like you, to generate gravity. We need you to become part of a core that forms a firm and unyielding presence. How might we do this a little more effectively?<br /><ul><li>Get more passionate. Cultivate a culture that enjoys an intellectual exploration of art, design, presence, aesthetics, and like areas. Counter the DONOTWANTS and ZOMGAWESOMES with insight and introspect. Don't explore the trivial exteriors but rather the complex issues surrounding the whys or why nots. Share your thoughts using microblogs or other shares.</li><li>Use meaningful examinations. The various toxic phrases that riddle Libre culture abound. What does usability mean? For whom? What is a human interface guideline in the context of a culture that spans diverse and eclectic societies? What is beautiful in that context? What is ugly? A "Human Cooking Guideline" is utterly ridiculous, so why is a "Human Interface Guideline" even given a straight face?</li><li>Share yourself and your culture. Language and cultural chasms impede our knowledge and understanding. Many of you are from different cultures. Celebrate and educate others with regards to your own cultural art and design heritage. Why is something the way it is? Why does a particular colour bear meaning? Are there subtle trends and currents in your contemporary culture that would not be understood without context? We should celebrate and highlight differences, not attempt to water them down to some sort of Utopian wash of grey.</li><li>Group in the name of gravity. Let's face it, there isn't a colossal number of people like you. Grouping together and forming a community around a shared set of ideals is at the foundation of Libre software, so why should it be any different for Libre software art, design, and aesthetics? Speak up. Speak out. Stick together.</li><li>Water the seeds you want. If you stumble across someone floating out in the blogsphere that seems to share your passion for art and design and happens to also cross over into Libre software, show your appreciation. If we don't do that we run the risk of forever losing them. Extend an email. Drop a reply. Given our current bias of dysfunction regarding all things creative, we must exert extra effort to grow the numbers.</li></ul><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Pipe Dreams</b></span><br /><br />While all of this might seem like a pipe dream, consider the alternative if we should fail. Consider a culture that continues down this bleak path. Consider our likelihood of impacting future generations. Consider the health and welfare of Libre software itself if we cannot attract the vastly important and influential minds of tomorrow.<br /><br />Small in number but deep in influence.<br /><br />In short, we need more people like you.<br /><br />Thank you all for reading...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7189481947799781437?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-6529015768998347582010-07-09T18:03:00.000-07:002010-07-10T01:46:05.733-07:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TDfMR_xOxOI/AAAAAAAABP0/U2r3Z3YTNRY/s1600/user.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 200px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TDfMR_xOxOI/AAAAAAAABP0/U2r3Z3YTNRY/s400/user.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5492082880149374178" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-large;"><b>Word: user (noun)<br /></b></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-large;"><b>Pronunciation: \ˈyü-zər\</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>This is a noun of dire origins in Libre computing. It is a term that unceremoniously reduces a diversity of people from a complex and far spanning range of cultures into one ridiculously simplified puddle of mud. It tends to stimulate grotesque proportions of oversimplification, ethnocentricity, and erroneous absolutist concepts and theory. It is timeless and immovable. It is inflexible.</div><div><br /></div><div>Bereft of all context, it is a vacuous term. Worse, it hides its deceitful nature under the guise of knowledge or information. Often compounded by associated words including "Joe", "Computer", "Average", and "Friendly". It is often accompanied by subjective random claims that attempt to steer design directions without the context of the individuals it seeks to address.</div><div><br /></div><div>Replace with "audience" or a dear friend's name to force a certain degree of context on your work. In doing so, it may restrict your scope down to a manageable set of design constraints adding meaning, value, emotion, and other positive attributes to your work.</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-652901576899834758?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-76110652971783867332010-06-27T16:21:00.000-07:002010-06-27T19:03:41.098-07:00You walk onto the car lot. You look around.<br /><br />That one reminds you of Sal's jalopy. Nope.<br /><br />That one vaguely reminds you of your ex-husband's mustache. Definitely no.<br /><br />Ah... there's one...<br /><br />You hop in. You start it up. Suddenly as you are sitting there admiring the interior you hear some subtle popping. A dinging here. A rattle there. It's ever so subtle, but you can't help but notice it.<br /><br />You exit the car and head over to another lot.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Demon in the Details</b></span><br /><br />I will start this post off by stating loud and clear that I am well aware that a good portion of this discussion has far reaching tendrils. There are issues of video cards, there are issues with various hardware configurations, there are... well you get the picture.<br /><br />I will also start this discussion by stating, loudly and clearly, that I don't give a damn. Nor should you. That is called design. In turn, the role of Libre design should be to let the computing do the damn work where a solution is possible, and where not yet possible, attack the problem with all of the tenacity and brilliance that the community can muster.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Immersion and the Visual Experience<br /></b></span><br />If we want, we can live in a cave. We can systematically and religiously pretend that we don't care about some minor detail here or that issue Y is more pressing there. We just want the darn thing to sorta, kinda, in-a-roundabout-way, work.<br /><br />This is the culture of good enough, right?<br /><br />Across almost all of our presentations we have a glaring and horrible disregard for one key dramatic element - visual experience. I prefer the term experience because it extends well past minor gripes and suggestions into a much bigger issue. You can't as easily toss experience away as you could say, a simple bug or issue.<br /><br />No. Experience is a culmination. It is a presence. It is the net sum of parts.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Visual Burps, Hiccups, and Other Nasties<br /></b></span><br />If you have gone to see a movie in the past decade, imagine how your experience would have been had the movie played back at 10 frames per second. Imagine if the movie dropped down to 2 frames per second intermittently.<br /><br />Likely a poor experience.<br /><br />Imagine if the movie had regions of the picture with an irritating and inconsistent fluctuation of the previous frame slashed across the screen for a moment. Or perhaps a jaggy and pixelated portion of the actresses face is shown when she runs quickly.<br /><br />What would the above features do for your immersion into the movie?<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Laughable, But it is What We Got<br /></b></span><br />As laughable as some of the above situations are, we suffer from them daily in Libre software.<br /><br />We have framerate drops when moving windows, we have tearing, we have aliasing, and a plethora of other smaller fits and finiggles that interrupt the immersive experience. In turn, the chances of inducing a flow state are subtly skewed.<br /><blockquote>Flow is the mental state of operation in which a person in an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity. -- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)">Reference</a></blockquote>Why should we care about these little details? The overall thing works right?<br /><br />Wrong.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Back to Where We Started<br /></b></span><br />If you have ever held something in your hands and said "Wow this is beautifully crafted!" you will find that your mind went through a complex series of events to arrive there. The visceral sensation was likely a culmination of minor details. The various portions of the piece all collectively play in the same orchestra.<br /><br />More importantly, there isn't a niggling bit of sprue here. There isn't a slight difference in tolerances there. The alignment isn't out on an ornamentation element.<br /><br />Now think back to that car example. That little ping. That little pop. All of the tiny details add up in a cumulative fashion. Gone is the orchestra and in its place is haphazard collection of street buskers.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What Can We Do?<br /></b></span><br />If we need any further guidance on the matter, a brief examination of key values in video gaming would likely yield good dividends. A few things that video games did during their early evolution were:<br /><br /><ol><li>Focus on frame rates. Deliver a benchmark minimum and aggressively attack the reasons that those benchmarks can't be met. Wolfenstein 3D would have been much less compelling had they presented the work at ridiculously low frame rates. Industry standard motion picture in North America is 30 frames per second, and seems a likely bottom end benchmark.</li><li>Focus on and eradicate aliasing. If you don't know what aliasing is, the best way to describe it would be to consider a line drawn in pixels. When you draw a perfectly vertical or horizontal line, the lines are perfectly along pixel runs. When you move at a slight angle however, the jaggies show up. Anti-Aliasing is a technique that delivers middle tones between the darker pixels to smooth out the overall look. We still have aliasing between windows and backgrounds in Metacity. It also appears (along with the above frame rate inconsistency) when dragging wobbly windows using compositing.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCfqXVgF65I/AAAAAAAABPE/4z_DPsJpMZg/s1600/aliasing.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 200px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCfqXVgF65I/AAAAAAAABPE/4z_DPsJpMZg/s400/aliasing.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5487612357603879826" /></a></li><li>Focus on destroying tearing. Tearing is a loose term to explain strange residue between frames. Imagine drawing a pencil animation and before you are finished, someone starts to turn the page and draw the next frame. Two frames would result - a portion of the previous and the current. This manifests itself when using compositing and also quite often during video playback.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCf-Y3orVoI/AAAAAAAABPQ/adz7Y7LxvWY/s1600/tearing.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 200px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCf-Y3orVoI/AAAAAAAABPQ/adz7Y7LxvWY/s400/tearing.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5487634374179116674" /></a></li><li>Sub-pixel smoothing. No, I'm not talking about using the RGB or like layouts of LCD displays. I'm speaking of using non-whole frame pixel matrices to provide elegant movement of slower moving objects. <a href="http://www.willmcgugan.com/blog/tech/2007/4/25/going-sub-pixel-with-pygame/">Will McGugan has a beautiful example coded up using PyGame to illustrate it</a>. He also provides some wonderful animated examples, of which this one is from.<br /><br /><center><img src="http://www.willmcgugan.com/images/subball.gif" border="0" height="108" width="72" /><img src="http://www.willmcgugan.com/images/subball.gif" border="0" height="108" width="72" /><img src="http://www.willmcgugan.com/images/subball.gif" border="0" height="108" width="72" /><img src="http://www.willmcgugan.com/images/subball.gif" border="0" height="108" width="72" /></center></li></ol><br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>I Don't Care About the Buts and What Ifs and Nor Should You</b></span><br /><br />Now I am well aware that we could let ourselves out of this trap by suggesting twiddle x value here or video card tweak there. We could delude ourselves into believing that the optimal situation can be arrived at with some various configuration options. We can even go so far as to pretend that our Jurassic era desktop meets the gracefulness of many commercial ventures.<br /><br />We would be utterly wrong. It is a cop out of the largest proportions.<br /><br />The computer should be doing the work. Every single person that meets a minimum set of system requirements should be blessed with precisely the same experience out of the box. No fiddling. No twiddling. No excuses.<br /><br />We should strive to make the system desirable on its own merits. We should struggle with the smaller details to create a serious sense of quality to attract an audience that cares about quality.<br /><br />In short, we should create that car that has a trademark purr and not even the remotest ping.<br /><br />In all fairness, there are very few vendors that share my desire for quality. Google's Android, as much as I adore it, suffers from the very same framerate issue at times. It is subtle, but swiping left and right will reveal that stutter.<br /><br />A serious look should be given to the iPad, as it truly deserves a huge plus one on the attention to visual immersion. It even pushes the animation of minor details further, <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/11/surpassing-apple-step-one-animate.html">something I ranted about a long while ago</a>.<br /><br />If we would simply look to adjacent inspirations, namely video gaming, we may have led the charge on this front. We might even avoid <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/against-imitation.html">the ridiculous degradation into pure and outright theft of ideas</a>.<br /><br />Thank you all again for reading. Without you, the valued readers of this blog, there is no reason to bother with any of this...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7611065297178386733?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-75258680374110897392010-06-25T14:59:00.001-07:002010-06-25T15:00:45.851-07:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCUmvyTI66I/AAAAAAAABO4/ZjZm8kxoO-Y/s1600/kennedy.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCUmvyTI66I/AAAAAAAABO4/ZjZm8kxoO-Y/s400/kennedy.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5486834323418573730" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7525868037411089739?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-39417822921039337602010-06-23T14:52:00.001-07:002010-06-23T14:53:36.703-07:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCKCTv3UshI/AAAAAAAABOY/X2UQTUCJV-c/s1600/voltaire.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TCKCTv3UshI/AAAAAAAABOY/X2UQTUCJV-c/s400/voltaire.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5486090571868320274" /></a><br />Trying it on. It is a difficult sizing...<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-3941782292103933760?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-90669848130327370102010-06-22T16:13:00.000-07:002010-07-03T21:13:40.229-07:00This post is largely about a few broad and far reaching concepts that we could stand to use a heck of a lot more of in Libre software.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>From WTF to WYSIWYG</b></span><br /><br />Long ago, during the dark ages of computing, word processing had an odd form. Unlike what many of you have come to expect, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wordperfect-5.1-dos.png">document publishing involved typing bitmap characters onto field of blue</a>. You had no clue how your text was going to end up, and only really got to see the product after you printed it out.<br /><br />When WYSIWYG editing landed it was heralded as a new phase in computing. Almost overnight, the document publishing landscape changed dramatically.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Digital Media</b></span><br /><br />For the longest time, during digital music's infancy, many folks browsed their directories using generic looking icons. What were people looking at though? Several thousand songs later, and the umpteenth music note icon, things were looking for a bit of a shakeup.<br /><br />Eventually, the tree lists gave way to album art and the new music era was fully in motion.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Photo Processing and Image Manipulation</b></span><br /><br />As we can expect, image manipulation suffers quite radically on the command line. It wasn't that long ago however, that applications such as Photoshop and other WYSIWYG approaches had some seriously strict limitations upon them.<br /><br />Various things we take for granted, such as on canvas real time image scaling for example, were incremental improvements.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What Do All of the Above Have in Common?</b></span><br /><br />If there is a critical thing to note with the above revolutionary approaches, it is a simple concept at their core: a meaningful representation of an abstract concept or data.<br /><br />When we hear cries for intuitive elements, we can't help but address the need for meaningful representations of data and abstracts. While existing solely within the realm of the audience and their culture / experience, the concept of making things meaningful to that audience isn't an alien one.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>When To Re-Evaluate Something</b></span><br /><br />We have a list of things, we stick them in list boxes. When we have input, we stick it into input boxes. All of this is fine and dandy until someone comes along and tips the cart over.<br /><br />When given the chance, some clever designers take two steps back and evaluate exactly what they are doing. Unlike the stuff-it-in-a-menu approach that we seem to cling to in Libre software, a few folks are taking the time to re-examine exactly what we are <span style="font-style:italic;">trying</span> to do.<br /><br />If we take two steps back and rethink exactly what an audience member is trying to do, we arrive at all sorts of possible junctures to create an experience.<br /><br />Is the audience trying to visualize a word processing document? Are they manipulating their media? Are they trying to find a particular window they have open?<br /><br />From those sorts of simple questions we arrive at innovations such as WYSIWYG document editing, CoverFlow, Expose, and other design approaches.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Obvious? Obviously Not</b></span><br /><br />It cannot be stressed enough that what seems like an obvious iteration to go from plain bitmapped font layouts to WYSIWYG editing was, in fact, a revolutionary idea and innovation. To draw an analogy, we could look to the advent of album art cover browsing or pinch to zoom photo exploring, two relatively 'obvious' things that took execution to bring to reality.<br /><br />In short, there are plenty of revolutionary design paradigms sitting right in front of us waiting to be harnessed. What are they and how can we design them?<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Stop. Think.</span></b><br /><br />Almost as a direct and sole response to Apple's design techniques, standardized interface libraries are being bombarded with scrutiny. As a culture, we are perhaps more open to the idea of shifting interfaces based on the content they are presenting.<br /><br />A wonderful starting point for Libre design may be to simply let go of all of the guidelines and worthless cruft of a past rapidly fading in the rear view mirror. Instead, we should focus in on our audience. A particular audience, with particular needs and expectations.<br /><br />Computers are now more capable than ever to render complex graphics, grab a nearly bottomless depth of information, and <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2009/03/surpassing-apple-step-five-think.html">create compelling and immersive experiences</a>. During our rethinking, we should embrace this and not constantly fall back on lowest common denominator lazy design.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Pondering Forward</b></span><br /><br />In closing, I'd be curious as to what our clever minds could visualize for some extremely abstract concepts already in front of us. The next bout of innovation will have been sitting there all along, screaming out for us to give it a shape and form.<br /><br />What does a Twitter / Identi.ca stream look like? Does a manually scrolling list box do the concept justice? These are events streaming in real time, with a constantly shifting evolution of interactions and connectivity.<br /><br />Does a GNOME toolbar do actions justice? A multi-touch gesture is quite simply a meaningful representation of an action. Is there a gem of a design paradigm to be had in your standard email client? What interactions communicate more greatly with your audience?<br /><br />When you log into your system, do boxy gridded images work exceptionally well to represent a human being? If it is a computer in a family living room, what speaks to that audience? Contextualize your audience and design accordingly.<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>A Final Note</b></span><br /><br />We have all of technology to design. The landscape is so vast in front of us that it is near infinite.<br /><br />Embrace that infinite nature and please create new designs, not knock offs under <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/against-imitation.html">the foolish and misguided banner of "great artists steal."</a><br /><br />Thank you all for reading.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-9066984813032737010?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-91509187520396477422010-06-21T23:31:00.000-07:002010-06-21T23:57:58.529-07:00I wander. I stumble across a blog.<br /><br />The blog owner died of cancer.<br /><br />I knew they were out there; a small cache of bytes. Infinitely duplicated and downloaded thousands of times long after the creator moved along.<br /><br />I wonder. Where do they go when they are gone?<br /><br />It feels like some strange science fiction novel. We have all been too busy posting images, Tweeting, Facebooking, and emailing to notice.<br /><br />I wonder. When I am gone, who will happen to stumble across this pitiful pile of bitrot? Will my daughter wander through here gently tracing the recesses like footprints on a beach? Will the waves of ether have washed them away?<br /><br />There is a certain poetry to it.<br /><br />All of this is pure magic.<br /><br />A hundred years ago the writers of the age were dreaming up strange new worlds that we would explore. Little did they know that the future held a peculiar empty vastness.<br /><br />An enduring emptiness where random minds stumble into each other with the grace of a drunk heading home from the pub.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-9150918752039647742?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-16912279308747839792010-06-20T14:03:00.001-07:002010-06-20T14:27:44.573-07:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TB6DbyLnbkI/AAAAAAAABOM/h05F0Ob-67w/s1600/mrdoobsharmony.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 209px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/TB6DbyLnbkI/AAAAAAAABOM/h05F0Ob-67w/s400/mrdoobsharmony.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5484965909534043714" /></a><br />Every now and then I am absolutely blown away by some of the brilliance in the Libre community.<div><br /></div><div>For some reason I stumbled across <a href="http://mrdoob.com/projects/harmony/">Ricardo Cabello's (aka Mr. Doob) Harmony</a>. I saw the link come up and decided to visit it because I knew of Ricardo's presence in the community during the wallpaper selection process for Ubuntu 9.10.</div><div><br /></div><div>What I found was an enthralling experience. </div><div><br /></div><div>I am one of those people that will spend more than a reasonable amount of time drooling over how ink flows out of a particular pen or how smooth the graphite is for a given brand of pencils. Ricardo's application induces exactly that sensation for me.</div><div><br /></div><div>It is difficult to pinpoint precisely what feels so right about Ricardo's application, but I'd be willing to bet that if you have any interest in artwork and illustration, it will hit a chord with you. I found myself completely lost with the idea that maybe someday this would become a full blown native application. What would I dearly love to see?</div><div><ol><li>Saving and loading of projects.</li><li>Simple layers maybe even with blend modes?</li><li>A few more brushes.</li><li>A tablet-centric interface pattern. Popups of pie based interface elements directly under the tablet's stylus complete with single handed number pad driven hotkeys. Obviously pressure sensitivity as well.</li></ol></div><div>Purely fantasy thus far, but as you will note from <a href="http://mrdoob.com/blog">his blog</a>, many people have already ported his tremendous work to Android and like operating systems. I'd encourage you to check out <a href="http://www.androlib.com/android.application.org-sketcher-AwEF.aspx">Sketcher</a>, which appears to be a direct port of Harmony.</div><div><br /></div><div>So without further ado, go drop by and marvel at some of his brilliance at <a href="http://mrdoob.com/">his main site</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, Ricardo, thank you so much...</div><div><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1691227930874783979?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-73542899871515815122010-06-18T20:44:00.000-07:002010-06-18T21:57:55.885-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Who Rules Our Content?</b></span><div><br /></div><div>This post is largely concerned with a world view peddled by Big Content(TM). In order to properly frame the questions, we need to briefly examine a seemingly unrelated topic in the history of genius.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Genius Wasn't Always There</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>We would like to think that those brilliant minds filling up the biographies of bookshelves everywhere have always been around to lead us small minded folks through the darkness. It hasn't always been the case however. In fact, the notion of genius and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auteur_theory">auteur</a> is largely a phenomenon of the last seven or eight hundred years.</div><div><br /></div><div>Rooted in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance">Renaissance</a> and watered during <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanticism">the Romantic era</a>, the concept of the brilliant genius grew forth. For those interested, there is <a href="http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0631157859.html">a book available</a> and even <a href="http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius.html">a good TED talk</a> that discusses this evolution.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>From The Collective to the Singular</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>So what changed? At the core of the notion of genius, is the idea of the singular. With that broad sweeping change came the abandonment of the idea of creator as a cultural vessel. No longer was a creative a product of a culture, an historical moment and like circumstance, but rather a solitary, timeless, and magic-wielding superhero.</div><div><br /></div><div>The genius, using dark and mysterious alchemy, creates. We, as simple minded serfs, consume.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>From Genius to Big Content</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>A few hundred bumps down the historical road we end up roughly where we are now. "We" exist as consumers. "We" are nothing more than mouths that require feeding. Content comes down from the high mountain, and we, desperate and hungry, consume it.</div><div><br /></div><div>More importantly, we are expected to consume it from approved pipes and spoons as dictated by the agents of creativity. These agents choose the desired format, the method of delivery, and determine how we are to be controlled and restricted in our consumption of the creative output. There it is. And over 'there' are we.</div><div><br /></div><div>Isolated. Secular. Parceled.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>An Alternate View</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Getting back to the title of this posting, I would like you to consider an alternate view of the genius. Art history tells us that art exists solely within the context that it is created. If we remove the culture, the context, and the history, we are left with nothing more than a simple soup can, a white circle with a red triangular wedge, or an eyeball being sliced open as a cloud moves past a moon. </div><div><br /></div><div>In short, without the circumstance and the lifeblood of context, the creation is absolutely meaningless.</div><div><br /></div><div>In this light, content exists as a tapestry, interwoven with the complex ecosystem of the society that creates it. From that very culture comes the life of the content.</div><div><br /></div><div>With context, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell's_Soup_Cans">the soup can is now a challenge of the confines of institutionalized art</a>. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_the_Whites_with_the_Red_Wedge">The circle and wedge explode into a famous icon of a political movement</a>. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Un_Chien_Andalou">The eyeball becomes an anchor for an entirely new cinematic surrealist language</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>In every instance, the content was not only a byproduct of the culture, but also in turn became yet another thread within the tapestry.</div><div><br /></div><div>In this respect, content might be likened to the practice of cannibalism in some cultures. The culture creates the content and in turn, the consumption of the content imbues the culture with further meaning.</div><blockquote>Upon consumption of the deceased group member, the spirit of the dead was believed to be absorbed by the entire tribe and was considered by them to be one of "the most respectful ways to treat a human body." - <a href="http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/cannibalism/2.html">Reference</a></blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>The Big, Silly, Trivial Questions</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Are we, as Big Content would have us believe, strictly one way consumers of content delivered through shiny pad-like devices? Is there something far more complicated at play? Are we somehow devolving because <a href="http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/06/02/steve-jobs-we-shouldnt-be-come-a-nation-of-bloggers-too-late/">we have become a despicable "nation of bloggers"</a>? Are <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mZlSkAuHnY&amp;feature=topvideos&amp;skipcontrinter=1">the many people that captured this absolutely disturbing footage of significant cultural magnitude</a> somehow less important because it originated via the pipes and spoons of non-traditional news channels?</div><div><br /></div><div>Have we, through the inertia of our blind acceptance of media distribution channels turned ourselves into <a href="http://www.istartedsomething.com/20071109/ted-larry-lessig-copyright/">a read-only culture</a>?</div><div><br /></div><div>Or is it possible that we are just now reaching critical mass on a cultural movement that resurrects a communal view of content creation and consumption?</div><div><br /></div><div>Are we content cannibals?</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7354289987151581512?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-5149827552642647192010-05-22T12:36:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:03:38.360-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is the fifth and last image in the android lineup. It is the fourth of four solo shots. The final android is Wilhelm Leeb.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S_gy_mHp_fI/AAAAAAAABOA/XVfobYLiiMs/s1600/android-bill.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 267px; height: 400px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S_gy_mHp_fI/AAAAAAAABOA/XVfobYLiiMs/s400/android-bill.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5474181415214644722" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-514982755264264719?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-10971710678653441152010-05-15T18:36:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:03:24.747-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is the fourth image in the android lineup. It is the third of four solo shots. Say hello to the android known as Chris Peterson.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S-9M-jv6eCI/AAAAAAAABN0/014JZzJGDH8/s1600/android-chris.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 267px; height: 400px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S-9M-jv6eCI/AAAAAAAABN0/014JZzJGDH8/s400/android-chris.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5471676709910247458" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1097171067865344115?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-51313722426695203712010-05-08T13:56:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:03:12.430-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is the third image in the android lineup. It is the second of four solo shots. Say hello to the android known as Jared Slingerland.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S-XQwn-20pI/AAAAAAAABNo/d5PgM7S2fsM/s1600/android-jared.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 267px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S-XQwn-20pI/AAAAAAAABNo/d5PgM7S2fsM/s400/android-jared.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5469006856296256146" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5131372242669520371?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-46202309333909177602010-05-01T21:29:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:02:45.464-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is the second image in the android lineup. It is the first of four solo shots. Say hello to the android known as Jeremy Inkel.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S90A5U9dVjI/AAAAAAAABMg/avMhiHdizl4/s1600/android-jeremy.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 267px; height: 400px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S90A5U9dVjI/AAAAAAAABMg/avMhiHdizl4/s400/android-jeremy.png" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5466526507576677938" /></a></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4620230933390917760?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-79850231522575785352010-04-30T17:02:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:02:03.560-07:00<div>Not <a href="http://www.android.com/">that Android</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>This image below was the primary goal of the photo shoot. After I did <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/something-strange.html">a few proofs of principle</a>, I decided to take the plunge and attempt doing the style in a real world application.</div><div><br /></div><div>It was a little worrying as you never quite know if you have suitable footage and plate shots to pull it off. At any rate. It worked out quite acceptable and is apparently doing quite well within the internal European press circles.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9tyQmJWwgI/AAAAAAAABL8/lsxJLXl_DCc/s1600/android-1.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 254px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9tyQmJWwgI/AAAAAAAABL8/lsxJLXl_DCc/s400/android-1.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5466088202187489794" /></a><div>More to follow...</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7985023152257578535?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-57136380651275727952010-04-27T19:38:00.000-07:002010-06-23T14:01:43.949-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg7FLU3FI/AAAAAAAABLE/6mcOXxjvuL8/s1600/water-3.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg7FLU3FI/AAAAAAAABLE/6mcOXxjvuL8/s400/water-3.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013609699794002" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg6vDjaLI/AAAAAAAABK8/zqwpw7xA1Vk/s1600/water-10.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 215px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg6vDjaLI/AAAAAAAABK8/zqwpw7xA1Vk/s400/water-10.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013603761612978" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg6A_grAI/AAAAAAAABK0/JlcaLBUkNaY/s1600/water-9.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg6A_grAI/AAAAAAAABK0/JlcaLBUkNaY/s400/water-9.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013591396625410" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg56pzseI/AAAAAAAABKs/4YiN9z1F4qg/s1600/water-11.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 215px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg56pzseI/AAAAAAAABKs/4YiN9z1F4qg/s400/water-11.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013589694984674" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehImw1HyI/AAAAAAAABLk/OVhYp1ItNvo/s1600/water-5.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehImw1HyI/AAAAAAAABLk/OVhYp1ItNvo/s400/water-5.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013842053766946" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehIUN_olI/AAAAAAAABLc/oKjjLKrva60/s1600/water-1.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehIUN_olI/AAAAAAAABLc/oKjjLKrva60/s400/water-1.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013837075817042" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehIHkPRsI/AAAAAAAABLU/zEhL4Vte5Oo/s1600/water-6.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9ehIHkPRsI/AAAAAAAABLU/zEhL4Vte5Oo/s400/water-6.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013833679455938" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg7fqu_bI/AAAAAAAABLM/-_aQakGc4k8/s1600/water-0.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9eg7fqu_bI/AAAAAAAABLM/-_aQakGc4k8/s400/water-0.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5465013616810851762" /></a><br /></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5713638065127572795?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-65137968595634123812010-04-25T16:45:00.001-07:002010-06-23T14:01:25.331-07:00<div>Promotional work for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>'s new album <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_Electronic_Device">Improvised Electronic Device</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux.html">First round of standard photography is here</a>.<div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/rock-bands-redux-deux.html">Second round of standard photography is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-of-androids.html">Android group photo is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/second-march-of-androids.html">Android Inkel is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/third-march-of-androids.html">Android Jared is here</a>.</div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fourth-march-of-androids.html">Android Chris is here</a>.</div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/05/fifth-march-of-androids.html">Android Wilhelm is here</a>.</div><br /><div><br />As of two weeks ago, I completed a set of photography for Metropolis Records' <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_Line_Assembly">Front Line Assembly</a>. I will say that I have been quite happy with how the body of work turned out. This is the stuff of press junkets and magazine materials.<div><br /></div><div>It is always exciting when you get a chance to deal with artists that have some deep roots in their particular field. In this case, some of the members' projects and ex-projects include <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinny_Puppy">Skinny Puppy</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delerium">Delerium</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_Unit">Noise Unit</a>, to name a few. That's some heavy weight on the ol' shoulders.</div><div><br /></div><div>We planned on doing a set of android shots and a set of standard photography head shots.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'll lead into this with a selection of the head shots.</div><div><br /></div><div>Without further ado, I'd like to extend large thanks to the following people:</div><div>Bill Leeb - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Chris Peterson - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jeremy Inkel - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Jared Slingerland - Front Line Assembly</div><div>Nav Degun - William F. Whites Studio Equipment</div><div>Neil McBride - Humble Producer and Workhorse</div><div>Jenna Kuchera - Key Makeup</div><div>Emma Garland - Makeup</div><div><br /></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX8RlUf8I/AAAAAAAABJU/M3nL0mdOu8M/s1600/water-7.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX8RlUf8I/AAAAAAAABJU/M3nL0mdOu8M/s400/water-7.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464300047163490242" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX8CxvCPI/AAAAAAAABJM/rjQNg0IyMcw/s1600/water-8.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX8CxvCPI/AAAAAAAABJM/rjQNg0IyMcw/s400/water-8.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464300043189029106" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7-MfjeI/AAAAAAAABJE/k2SSzMBm4Is/s1600/water-4.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7-MfjeI/AAAAAAAABJE/k2SSzMBm4Is/s400/water-4.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464300041959083490" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7rw-6mI/AAAAAAAABI8/aaG9-effKFc/s1600/water-2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 215px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7rw-6mI/AAAAAAAABI8/aaG9-effKFc/s400/water-2.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464300037011860066" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7fRl6OI/AAAAAAAABI0/ANhnaFVsFiM/s1600/water-12.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 288px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9UX7fRl6OI/AAAAAAAABI0/ANhnaFVsFiM/s400/water-12.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5464300033658972386" /></a><br /></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-6513796859563412381?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-39908732320563458182010-04-24T21:25:00.001-07:002010-07-03T21:14:02.819-07:00As the readers of this blog well know, I'm a huge advocate for highlighting the very relative position that art and design plays in a culture. Art and design is pinched between the massive cogs of the past and the future. As always, there is much to be learnt from simply looking to history for guidance...<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>The Evolution of Art and Design</b></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PZP1B7hXI/AAAAAAAABH4/REz5fjcFW4g/s1600/fords-car.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 324px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PZP1B7hXI/AAAAAAAABH4/REz5fjcFW4g/s400/fords-car.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5463949638886983026" /></a></div><div><blockquote>"Any customer can have a car painted any color he wants so long as it is black." -- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T#cite_note-19">Henry Ford</a></blockquote></div><div>A telling quote. As a general path, it seems that art and design diversifies as it matures. Back when Henry was pumping out the first automobiles, regardless of the design constraints, the audience had yet to evolve to the point of needing aesthetic and emotional refinements.</div><div><br /></div><div>The market was young and the sophistication of the audience was about the same as a pre-schooler's taste in color.</div><div><br /></div><div>Was the automobile an exception though? Can we see a greater trend here?</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Design Granularity</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>If we look to the the advent of digital cameras, we could likely spot a similar trend. We can easily visualize the blocky clunk of a pocket camera from the earlier years. What colour do you remember seeing? If I had to wager, I'd bet you said it was silver or black.</div><div><br /></div><div>If we were to hand the task of designing a pocket camera to the Free Software crowd, ask yourself if you think we would consider designing this:</div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PImXoyr_I/AAAAAAAABHk/aK7u6Aeumjg/s1600/polka-dot-fuji.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PImXoyr_I/AAAAAAAABHk/aK7u6Aeumjg/s400/polka-dot-fuji.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5463931334436237298" /></a>While a slightly sophisticated eye might view the pink as somewhat cliched and possibly even a chauvinistic / misogynistic take of male design for other, Fuji clearly sees an audience that warrants the kitschy application of atomic era polka dots enough to set a manufacturing path into work.</div><div><br /></div><div>A brief look at cellular phones would reveal a similar trend. The early going featured the now classic brick:</div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PKzSZWCwI/AAAAAAAABHs/cTgINf3e4Ls/s1600/brick.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 163px; height: 400px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S9PKzSZWCwI/AAAAAAAABHs/cTgINf3e4Ls/s400/brick.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5463933755390823170" /></a>More than a few companies made the early phones, and in fact, they more or less looked the same.</div><div><br /></div><div>Now? While some would immediately think of Apple's product here in North America, <a href="http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/mobilephones/0,39050603,62060624,00.htm">CNET Asia shows a pretty good smattering of design granularity in motion</a>. <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/global-market-global-emotion-global-design">Marco Van Hout cites the 'ilkone' cellular phone that was specifically designed for Muslims</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>From cars to cameras and over into cellular phones, we have more than a few examples of design that has evolved into greater and greater diversity - a design granularity.</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">What's in it for Libre?</span></b></div><div><br /></div><div>What is there for us in the Libre Culture to take from this maturing trend? I would suggest the following points:</div><div><ol><li>Reject the "It has always been that way." Rethink what we assume and take for granted in the context of audience needs. Don't think <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/EmpathyVsPidginUsability#Other cool stuff">"What other cool features are available?"</a> until you have an idea of the audience. When is Firefox cumbersome to an audience and when does a particular set turn to Chrome?</li><li>Can we chip something off of a monolithic structure and turn it into a polished gem? When does Lightroom and Aperture supersede Photoshop as the tool of choice for a particular photography audience? Are there examples in our Libre culture where focusing may yield tremendous dividends? <a href="http://blog.cberger.net/2010/02/27/krita-meeting-2010-%E2%80%93-day-1-2/">Krita may be viewed as a solid example here</a>.</li><li>When considering how someone interacts with something, don't fall back into lazy design. "Put it in a menu!" "Well we need to show progress so a progress bar!" If we are trapped in the limited scope of the existing interface elements, we will never see innovation. Consider the context of the audience and investigate if there is room to diversify the interface in the name of emotional engagement or aesthetics. Should we use a stale grid of images or <a href="http://www.androidtapp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Android-Photo-Gallery-Albums.jpg">a more fluid and organic layout</a>? What more greatly suits the audience needs given the context?</li></ol><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">In Summary</span></b></div></div><div><br /></div><div>We in Libre are somehow caught in a strange dance. We clearly value choice as is obvious from the countless numbers of applications and distributions available. But how many of those choices are truly unique? How many specifically concern themselves with the needs of a particular audience?</div><div><br /></div><div>I am but the continuing sum of your clicks...</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-3990873232056345818?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-90897898408750982132010-04-14T19:47:00.000-07:002010-07-03T21:16:07.495-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What is in a Wallpaper?</b></span><div><br /></div><div>Some think that wallpapers are strictly the stuff of fluff. Just a quickie drop of something that does little more than cover the display and must meet the standard rubbish checklist of mythical is_usable, is_dark_in_xxx_region, is_not_contrasty, is_not_distracting, etc.</div><div><br /></div><div>I won't link to the blog posts from our esteemed art and design leaders that highlight such rubbish, as I am willing to wager that the readers of this blog have long since stomped over such vacuous terms.</div><div><br />Is a wallpaper only decoration? Is it purely skin deep? Is it something more?</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What is a Wallpaper?</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>It is a very good question.</div><div><br /></div><div>Some can argue and bicker about the above points ad infinitum. I won't. I will make a strong case that a wallpaper isn't just frill. It isn't just skin deep. And it isn't something to get obsessive about ridiculous usability studies over.</div><div><br /></div><div>The following speculation is based entirely on the notion that the default set of wallpapers should work toward promoting the identity of a project. They should act as a team and support each other. They should bring the goals and emotional desire of a project to the forefront and engage the audience.</div><div><br /></div><div>To borrow a phrase from someone that I have a great deal of respect for, <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/07/art-of-design-from-master.html">Chris Bangle suggests a car is an avatar</a>. I found his phrasing to be resoundingly telling of his deep insight into art and design philosophy.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd echo his point and suggest that in fact the design of the default wallpaper is similar. A wallpaper <i>is</i> an avatar. It is a representation. It is a culmination. It is an emotional handle to grab on to.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>On Contests</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/01/specs-and-contests-we-all-lose.html">I have made myself clear on this front</a>. I think all forms of contests and other art and design abuses have no place in our culture and should not be supported. I believe it is fundamentally symptomatic of a culture with little to no value of art and design language and thinking.</div><div><br /></div><div>It dismisses the worth of artists and designers as equivalent to the ability to pull randomness from a hat.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Ubuntu Lucid's Wallpaper Contest</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>If you missed it, there is a yearly contest at Flickr that started last year. Against my better judgement, I participated in the form of a 'judge' last year. This year,<a href="https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-wallpapers/0.31.3"> the selection available in the official Ubuntu Lucid package</a> is as follows:</div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S8aBWdgXIkI/AAAAAAAABCg/yNwnypYjASY/s1600/contest.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 200px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S8aBWdgXIkI/AAAAAAAABCg/yNwnypYjASY/s400/contest.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5460193821110772290" /></a><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What Does the Selection Say?</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>There were three facets to the wallpapers I tried to consider when participating last year. The first is the overall impression, or rather the mise-en-scene. The second was diversity of content. The third was the emotional payload in relation to the project and audience. Tricky as hell to try and evaluate those items (especially with no declared audience), but I believed in their core value enough to try.</div><div><br /></div><div>My first initial impression is that, as with last year's selection, the variation in colour and motifs create a much better sense of diversity than in previous incarnations of brown, brown, brown, and some brown. It also much more greatly increases the chance that an audience member might be able to find something that speaks to them and, as a result, doesn't create an immediate sense of exclusion.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>On Colour Selection</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>The overall colour tones of the selection are a little weighted toward the darker and blue tones. Not criminal, but it certainly pulls the quick first impression toward a slightly awkward sense of compositional balance. It may have been more positive to retain a greater variation of colour, perhaps with a few select images to help gravitate toward the new colour palette.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>On Diversity of Content</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>While the Ubuntu of yore seemed to echo some sense of organic (albeit traditionally malformed and horribly executed in practise), the images included seemed to make sense with the inclusion of organic things. This isn't a bad motif to carry over, but one could argue that the older motifs are gone now with the <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/ubuntu-branding.html">newer identity</a> <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/ubuntu-brand-identity-in-context.html">campaign</a>. In fact, some sort of motif around light might have been worth at least exploring. It would have been an interesting creative venture to work with a series of artists, designers, and photographers around that possibility.</div><div><br /></div><div>This time around, we have a clump of flowers.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Images and What They (May) Say</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>It would be impossible for me to be fair to the folks that want my honest opinion to not criticize the work. For some, it might seem like a personal attack. It is not intended as such. It is purely an attack on the work. Apologies in advance if I utterly offend and disparage someone.</div><div><ul><li>A - 1: A truly wonderful shot. Compositionally strong with the value favoring an off axis left. The sense of looking up in awe likely isn't lost. Pass.</li><li>B-1: Awful. Emotionally a blur of nothingness. If you want to find this sort of tripe, how difficult is it to wander over to Gnome-Look or spend three minutes making one in Inkscape? Horrible center punched composition. Only positive is the non-monochromatic tone. Fail.</li><li>C-1: More tripe. Centre punched rubbish. Creates a sense of "Look Mom! I can take a photo with your camera!" emotion. Perhaps someone was grasping at the slight aubergine tone? Fail.</li><li>D-1: If C-1 were IMG_D0023, this is IMG_D0024 off the roll. Utterly worthless in composition. Utterly worthless in depth. Or is that someone again grasping at the violet? Fail.</li><li>E-1: When we need a flower, this is how to shoot one. Notice the non-centre punched composition. Notice the use of depth of field and use the third dimension. Lovely yellow pops against the blue. Pass.</li><li>A-2: The droplets on leaves motif is almost cliched at this point. <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/11/gift-from-me-to-you.html">I too have pursued the kitsch</a>. Again though, the centre punching madness drags this photo down from what it could be. It also is monochromatic. The monochromatic tone in this one however, brings something to the whole selection in terms of tone, even if weak unto itself. A hint of the third dimension as well. Pass.</li><li>B-2: Well composed, but do we need more flower related items? Almost monochromatic, but leagues better than C-1 and D-1. Pass.</li><li>C-2: Another well executed shot. Solid composition with the division between the rocks and the ice. A nice subtle mixed bag of analogous hues sprinkled in the frame. Also a plus one within the context of flowers. As always, an exception to the third dimension tenet is exemplified with this one. Pass.</li><li>D-2: Well composed but lacking a certain depth. Perhaps a nice variation on the tones with a sombre bleakness? A little more depth in the image wouldn't hurt to push a little more craftsmanship feeling. Once again, a flower. Fail.</li><li>E-2: A heavily image manipulated pier. The composition is centre punched on two axis. In terms of content, likely a plus one simply because it isn't a flower. Regardless of the manipulation, still shows more care and craftsmanship than some of the other failures. Pass.</li><li>A-3: This is B-1's sibling. Nothing like creating a sense of value by offering up a careful selection of blurry mess for your audience. Degrading and insulting to the other people that diligently crafted images for the contest. Abstract miasma easily generated or obtained with less than a click from some other tripe peddler. Doesn't speak anything. Fail.</li><li>B-3: And if you want creamed asparagus, here it is. Uninteresting. Creates a sense of lacking effort of creation. Fail.</li><li>C-3: A well composed and crafted shot. A moment. Precious? Certainly could be read as such. While monochromatic, works against the overall set's tone and, in this instance, is well crafted in its application of value. Lovely work worthy of a frame on a wall in an architectural magazine. Pass.</li><li>D-3: Let's hear it for iz_usable, doesn't_distract, and that other tripe. Insulting and reeks of a design and art sentiment that could care less. Fail.</li><li>E-3: And rounding out the pack is another centre punched flower. Blah. Pocket camera sensibility. Fail.</li></ul><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">In Summary</span></b></div></div><div><br /></div><div>If we take the argument that the wallpaper selection is based on a totality and overall presence, we might make a case that the content and subject is weighted in the wrong direction. What do the images of flowers work to further push the brand identity of the new Lucid campaign? What does selecting poorly photographed flowers of little resonance or worth say about the quality of the larger project?</div><div><br /></div><div>Of the countless number of photographs in the Flickr group, I can't help but think the people that chose the ridiculous photos in question should not be in a position to be making any sort of selection. It is shameful to the participants and greatly drags down the overall presence of the project.</div><div><br /></div><div>A quick sum would give this series 7/15. Sadly, the quality difference between five of the fifteen elements is so obviously large that even a grade school individual interested in art and design should be able to spot the differences.</div><div><br /></div><div>In closing, <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Brand">the tenets of precision, reliability, collaboration, and freedom</a> are likely not presented as much as they could be with the wallpaper selection. One could likely warp the contest into a misconception of collaboration, but that would be foolish. I also sincerely doubt that Pentagram would put their design ethic on a contest or in the hands of someone that doesn't even have a fifteen year old's sense of art and design thinking when it comes to the evaluation of the work.</div><div><br /></div><div>It speaks enough that it is a contest. It speaks more in the quality of the work selected.</div><div><br /></div><div>Some are resoundingly good. Others are shamefully inappropriate, misguided, poorly executed, and perhaps most disturbingly - accepted for inclusion.</div><div><br /></div><div>To all of the wonderful commenters and emailers, thank you all tremendously. I greatly value your comments and opinions. May this blog be blessed with further readers like you...</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-9089789840875098213?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-30893586075422584572010-03-18T14:42:00.000-07:002010-03-19T08:43:20.354-07:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S6KoQsR42EI/AAAAAAAABBs/BhgmIeimf0k/s1600-h/prag-fund.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 198px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S6KoQsR42EI/AAAAAAAABBs/BhgmIeimf0k/s400/prag-fund.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5450103503789283394" /></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>More on Audience</b></span><br /><br />Language takes extremely specific meaning within the confines of a given culture. I recently had a chat with a German friend about the subtleties of ideal versus idealist. It came down to a discussion with the idea that in North America, idealist brings a slightly negative connotation along with it, where ideal has a slight twinge of strength associated.<br /><br />It is subtle, and yet speaks loudly to the notion of audience in design. In this case, it is the design of communication language.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Is it Fundamentalist?</span></b><br /><br />The great debate goes something like this:<br /><br />Person A believes that the Free in Free Software means pure freedom. The freedom to do anything - including running and supporting proprietary software.<br /><br />Person B believes that the Free in Free Software should come with some constraints and that the protection / enshrinement of the Free should take precedence over the freedom to do everything.<br /><br />Person A is often viewed as pragmatic and Person B is quietly dismissed as fundamentalist. Simple. Positive and negative. Yin and yang. Right?<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">A Note on Free Cultures</span></b><br /><br />In most Free cultures, we live by a strict set of laws and government. We give up certain rights and freedoms in the name of a line in the sand that is loosely the 'greater good'. If you break those rules, you give up even more rights and freedoms.<br /><br />How can freedom be destructive? Can freedom erode freedom somehow?<br /><br />In such a culture, one isn't free, for example, to engage in activities that are seen as being destructive to the greater whole or others. Of course this is a floating benchmark. The bar moves, and the culture shifts. Smoking, drinking, and drug use are obvious examples here. Hate speech and such is another constantly evolving and shifting discourse.<br /><br />At the core though, is the idea that certain freedoms are suspended in the free culture.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Closing with Language</span></b><br /><br />So, with the above scenario of Person A and Person B, and the positive bias of pragmatic versus fundamentalist, we see an interesting discussion evolve.<br /><br />Those that support absolute freedom are seen as logical and pragmatic while those that are supporting a restricted view of freedom are seen as fundamentalist. That is the language that is peddled by many in Libre culture, so it seems fitting to apply it, no?<br /><br />I ask you, however, is that a clear view on how our culture runs?<br /><br />Is someone that pushes forth the idea that an absolutist freedom is a destructive one a fundamentalist?<br /><br />Who is the absolutist fundamentalist and who is actually pragmatic?<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-3089358607542258457?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-31527514177776472432010-03-11T16:12:00.000-08:002010-03-11T16:16:36.645-08:00Whilst digging through some of my now deceased grandfather's photography, I stumbled across this specimen.<div><br /></div><div>I will be the first to tell you it bears a striking resemblance to myself. It is still a tad worrying...</div><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S5mHd_bUWUI/AAAAAAAABBQ/5PuI8NWyy6Y/s1600-h/grandfather-android.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 301px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S5mHd_bUWUI/AAAAAAAABBQ/5PuI8NWyy6Y/s400/grandfather-android.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5447534173593295170" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-3152751417777647243?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-73988888699510116432010-03-11T13:30:00.000-08:002010-07-03T21:23:42.499-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Context is Everything</b></span><div><br /></div><div>It seems there is no shortage of opinion on window decorations. Every high-school self-labeled artist-cum-designer seems to have crawled out of the woodwork and started citing laws and theorems attempting to justify or invalidate the design decision.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'd like to avoid that pursuit and talk about design as language.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>What is it Saying?</b></span></div><div></div><blockquote><div>To design is to communicate clearly by whatever means you can control or master. -- <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Glaser">Milton Glaser</a></div><div></div></blockquote><div>If you study art and design for any length of time, you realize very quickly that Mr. Glaser was ridiculously accurate with his estimation. Art and design is language. Art and design storms its way into the future by embracing or usurping the established grammar of the past. It has a cultural nomenclature and code buried beneath the simplicity of image. The roots run deeply into culture and history.</div><div><br /></div><div>To the outside mainstream world, Libre culture appears mired in a two dimensional world where X is defined by Microsoft and Y is defined by Apple. Why shouldn't it? To a sizable majority, only those two Axis exist...</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Borrow or Steal?</span></b></div><div><br /></div><div>I'll be so bold as to say that the visceral connotation with imitation is a negative one. Whether it is dressing up like a pop culture starlet or imitating sylistic techniques stroke for stroke, the outcome seems to reflect back upon the individual. In most circumstances, the result looks nothing more than confused insecurity.</div><div><br /></div><div>Often wrongfully accredited to Picasso, I'd like you to read the full quotation so that you can read very clearly what was implied when T. S. Eliot said the often misquoted and warped principle:</div><div><blockquote>One of the surest of tests is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different from that from which it was torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest. - <a href="http://www.bartleby.com/200/sw11.html">T. S. Eliot Essays on Poetry and Criticism</a></blockquote></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Should We?</span></b></div><div><br /></div><div>In light of the above T. S. Eliot quote, I ask you if you still think it is quite acceptable to imitate?</div><div><br /></div><div>In terms of Libre culture's context, we cannot help but acknowledge the two other "artists" in the room. They are living right alongside of us.</div><div><br /></div><div>So when we design things, we should be well aware that the language we choose to use is being used by others around us. It isn't a design question, it is a communication question. </div><div><br /></div><div>Imitation is profoundly negative in its own right. Imitation of <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/01/itunes-and-ipad-equals-bliss.html">a company that is in direct opposition to the goals of Free Software</a> is mockery. And while it may sound utterly ridiculous and radical to suggest that we knowingly steer away from accepted patterns of design, I would suggest <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIY_culture">that more</a> than a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(art)">few movements in the past</a> had a language of design that accompanied the context.[1]</div><div><br /></div><div>Art and design is language. What are we saying? Where is our voice?</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">[1] I was originally of the mind that the Aubergine tone anchoring the new Ubuntu palette wasn't imitation unto itself, I am now leaning toward the suggestion that the combined culmination of the parts seems to be painting a larger picture of imitation. It isn't a single item, but rather the entire mise-en-scene.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7398888869951011643?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-18319436952979128852010-03-06T09:03:00.000-08:002010-08-14T20:44:35.708-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"><b>Is There Something Written There That We Can't See?</b></span><br /><br />Another deluge of fickle internet attention has passed, our cultural tendency to not care about art and design was lifted briefly, and we are free to go about chatting in the little coffee shop here. In addition to trying to finish up a little project, I thought I would attempt to tackle some of the criticism / attacks out there on the last post. I'm a big boy. I make no claims to being correct. I get plenty of things wrong plenty of the time.<br /><br />We have a pretty good pattern in our culture about dealing with comments. Either you play by a certain set of rules or get labeled a troll and discarded etc. My belief however, is that somewhere in that simple comment that someone posts, there might be something worth learning.<br /><br />I'll predicate the discussion with a few of my most firm beliefs:<br /><ul><li>If you label someone as a derogatory term (EG "troll"), you are effectively dismissing them and, regardless of what they said, you are discarding a potentially valuable insight.</li><li>If we stick everything on a polemical scale of YES / NO or +1 / -1, we oversimplify the situation and make no significant cultural gain or understanding.</li><li>General commentary might be seen as a pretty good averaging of cultural understanding. Biased obviously towards those that are willing to comment.</li><li>The most important thing, I believe, is to acknowledge that there is a real live human behind every comment. A sophisticated and intelligent distillation of many thousands of years of evolution. Is a comment a minor transgression or a culmination of that person's being? Was there a reason for the act at that moment? Have you or I ever done the exact same thing? Did we view our reasons as different?</li></ul>On that note, let's dive into a selection of comments that I found quite insightful.<br /><br /><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">Commentary Examined</span></b><br /><blockquote>Why does he think his colours work for his site and Ubuntu's doesn't?</blockquote><blockquote>Anyway, it seems that a lot of these bloggers agree on certain key points, why don't a group of them (if they're willing to write so much about it) get together and hash one out? It would be a good way to give back to the open community.- <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0lmiip">jasonhaley</a></blockquote>First, I don't believe I took an issue with the color palette of the new Ubuntu identity. From what I can see, I see two legs of a potential triad. This is a huge step forward from monochrome. I'd love to see the third leg rolled into the presentation, or at the very least, see what happens if we do. It doesn't seem too far off of <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/308">Mr. Shuttleworth's three pillar approach either</a>.<br /><br />With regard to my site versus Ubuntu, well, that's me. It is my own little thing. I don't syndicate or publicize this blog. I prefer to let people that are interested find things they are interested in on their own, rather than having things thrust upon people that have no interest to read it. That said, I've been wanting to change the looks of the blog for a long while, and gear it more to be strictly content oriented. With the growing numbers of readers, I suppose I should have done that sooner. Apologies, and your point is acknowledged.<br /><br />I think that the idea of hashing something out is entirely the hope of all of this. Maybe if we can discuss the merits of a direction based on goals and not random IZUGLY / ZOMGAWESOME, maybe we can get to a culture that sees the value in unique directions for different reasons. That culture is taking a while to build. I think we are getting there though. Heck the fact that this blog posting got any attention at all might be a testament to that.<br /><blockquote>It's nearly unreadable. Whoever thinks pumpkin orange, magenta, lavender and vomit green should be used -- together! -- for text on a dark brown background, should not be doing usability reviews. - <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0lns7e">grignr</a></blockquote>Again, this is purely a personal little area, as stated above. I honestly never really intended for more than but a handful of people to ever even click here.<br /><br />Unfortunately, I fear that I may have totally misworded my blog posting if you thought it was about usability. It was intended to be about art, design, and aesthetics. I tend to side with <a href="http://www.markboulton.co.uk/journal/comments/aesthetic-usability-effect">Mark Boulton's belief on usability that if you "Look after the design [...] the usability will take care of itself."</a> But alas, that is another discussion entirely.<br /><blockquote>It's nice how he believes his interpretation is objective. - <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0ln53l">eleitl</a></blockquote>Oops. Again my bad. I in fact intended for it to entirely be a judgement piece. See, my view on art, design, aesthetics, experience and such is that you are hiring / paying / requesting someone's involvement purely for that judgement and opinion. It is why I value the amazing photography of <a href="http://claudiomiranda.com/">Claudio Miranda</a> or the phenomenal and heroic work of <a href="http://mattmahurin.com/">Matt Mahurin</a>[1]. I don't want objectivity, I want to see the world through the eyes of talented visionaries.<br /><br />What I do believe however, is that we are able to analyze art, design, presence, aesthetics, and such with an analytical eye. What are the goals? What is the communication? Who are we trying to speak to? In that light, I do firmly believe we can look at the execution and compare it against those constraints. Objective? Likely not. Then again, I am not entirely sure we can ever see things in a Platonic sense. Is it more productive than random conjecture? A resounding yes. This is what art and design study is entirely about - analyzing the work in context. Fair?<br /><blockquote>That guy might be a what in some cultures is called "a douche".<br />EDIT: What the f*ck does this even mean: "Publishing grid with a little bending of the rules. Predictable application as well touches on the Reliability tenet. Collaboration and such will implicitly be there by the featured Dents / Tweets / Blog / etc. Positive." - <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0lozsc">zecg</a></blockquote>Apologies again. Through the strange machinations of the web, I have actually had the pleasure of meeting a pretty solid core of people. Those are the people that read this blog. I suppose to many in the outside world, I am just a douche. Granted. I also have extremely little insight into how all of this translates across so many different cultures. I learned full well that poking a joke at "Y'all" has offended some people, where it was a rather careless wording of language in an attempt to draw an analogy to a particular cliche. Point is, I can only control a certain degree of that, and gear this work to the audience at hand. I can certainly acknowledge that I should have explained myself better in areas. "Y'all" was one of them that I addressed in the comments. Your questions though, are equally valid however.<br /><br />Bear in mind that you get about 10 seconds to have people read things. I can't change that. I tried to be point form specific for the people that read this blog. In order:<br /><ol><li>"Publishing grid with a little bending of the rules. Predictable application as well touches on the Reliability tenet. " <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_(page_layout)">Publishing grids are found all over print media</a>. This is a sign that the person creating the work has understanding of that and is a positive indicator. Compare against the work that came before, and you can see the earmarks of skill with regard to the new site design. Again this is extremely positive. It shows talent and care. I'll applaud that any day. The reference to a predictability works well with one of the goals of the project - Reliability - as you can use a grid and create a sense of variation as well. Again I'd say that when a design touches on the goals, it's fantastic. Caveat of course is that it ultimately depends on the context of the audience.</li><li>"Collaboration and such will implicitly be there by the featured Dents / Tweets / Blog / etc." It's a bigger question here. How do we communicate the goals through the website's design? Collaboration is a damn tricky one. I'm not sure that there isn't a very interesting way to create that sense through the actual layout of the site design. That would remain an open design question that might have a solution. The obvious manner to highlight some degree of collaboration is to syndicate the Dents, Tweets, and Blog postings of the community that is collaborating on the project.</li></ol>I hope that helps to clear things up.<br /><blockquote>I am afraid he just seemed to make up excuses for not liking it. I am currently using the theme right now and its a vast improvement over the previous brown. I will admit it could be better and will probably go back to shiki-colors, but I like the direction in which its moving. - <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0lmqh9">flaarg</a></blockquote>The posting was an attempt to analyze the merits of the design work in light of the declared goals. We never have had goals before in Ubuntu proper, and so this was a good chance to look at those goals. If I had to boil down my opinions to a single WANT / DONOTWANT, I'd hope that you see I am in favour of risk and change. I am in favour of the basis that is being laid.<br /><br />There are bigger worries for me. Are we as a culture maturing enough to really hone in on an particular audience and deliver an exceptional experience to them? Are we willing to discuss the merits of one design decision over another based on goals and the audience? Are we willing to accept that things may be completely distasteful to one audience and be extremely compelling for another?<br /><br />So I guess in short, I tried to examine if there was any direction at all or if it was a random board position from chess? If there is a direction, is there room where the execution or delivery could be more optimized? Are there inherent and low lying issues that are addressed or are we totally blinded by the change? How does it look to someone outside of the Libre culture and why? Extremely tough and challenging questions, I will agree.<br /><blockquote>he lost me when he started talking about western-centricity, i'm afraid. that's just grasping at straws in this context; the aesthetic of the computer desktop <em style="font-style: italic; font-weight: normal;">is</em> western-centric by its sheer history, and other cultures have used that look and feel as a baseline even where they've blended it with their own thematic elements. the two articles he linked to in his introduction are a lot better. - <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/b9drb/insightful_analysis_of_ubuntus_new_look/c0lmotg">zem</a></blockquote>Zem, I don't know what to say other than you absolutely nailed it.I agree 110% with you. The desktop is Western centric I suspect. That worries me. I can't help but imagine how the forced solutions are to someone's world that revolves around Mandarin, for example. Are there areas where this likely causes issues in some other cultures? As an estimation, I'd likely say hell yes. And how much are those cultures excluded by traditional proprietary operating system things that we take for granted? Is there not a monumental chance for us in Libre culture to address those needs on a case by case basis? How much of a sincere strength is that when viewed in light of the proprietary and closed offerings? If you haven't read it, please see <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/global-market-global-emotion-global-design">Marco Van Hout's illuminating piece on the myth of Global Culture</a>.<br /><br />What I am <i>not</i> entirely certain of is your belief that the melting pot is working. Maybe it is. My visceral reaction is that it isn't. And worse, the nature of exclusion is that you never really ever hear exactly how exclusion is working because the people that can tell you are excluded entirely.<br /><br />I ask you though, what system to you believe is more capable of delivering that a compelling and experiential oriented computing system to that diversity of culture? Is it the proprietary and limited system or the Libre approach? If your answer is Libre, why aren't we more effective at dealing with it and instead justify our failures to address that diversity by comparing against the two big companies?<br /><br />That discussion extends well past culture too, right into accessibility needs and requirements as well as industry specific deliveries. Yet another topic of course...<br /><br />And yes, <a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/2010/03/03/the-new-ubuntu-lucid-look-an-appraisal/">Jay's</a> and <a href="http://blog.rfquerin.org/2010/03/04/ubuntu-rebranded/">Rich's</a> posts are far better. I'd agree.<br /><blockquote>I like green.- <a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8923033&amp;postcount=9">PostMonkeh</a></blockquote>I don't want to pretend to put words into someone's mouth, but what is stated here is a rather archetypal response. In summary, I can see "Well all art and design is subjective. DUH."<br /><br />And yes. It is. It operates on the singular. It operates on the emotional.<br /><br />That said, attempting to dismiss the fact that there are people that study it and practise it and analyse the context is difficult to avoid. Why do you look at composition the way you do? What is 'good'? Wasn't Disco good? Then it wasn't? Now it is again? Why? What the heck does a soup can have to do with capital A art? In reality, when you study art / design / etc. you learn very quickly that the language of art and design is constantly evolving in response to the context. It evolves out of response to the culture. It evolves and weaves with history.<br /><br />In short, while I don't really accept the absolutism implied in <a href="http://www.andyrutledge.com/creativity-is-not-design-test-2.php">Andy Rutledge's excellent article, it nails the general point - design and art are language</a>.<br /><br />Lastly, there was one comment which has since been deleted. It was something along the lines of:<br /><blockquote>That is one Pepsi generation explanation. - unknown</blockquote>Apologies if I mangled the quote.<br /><br />This last one is the one that perhaps is the most frustrating to me. Not because someone said it, but rather because I truly believe it is not entirely what our culture believes. Dismiss me with it, but please don't dismiss the core of the idea.<br /><br />I'd like to think that Libre culture has some of the brightest and most intelligent people alive. They not only understand the importance of computing but they also understand clearly its role in our society and why, fundamentally, that that role shouldn't be governed and bound by some corporation.<br /><br />The problem here is though, that it cuts to the bone of analysis. Should we analyze kernel drivers? Should we scrutinize how the scheduler works in the kernel? Should we evaluate how xxx works in context yyy?<br /><br />I would hope that you believe the answer is "Heck yes!" to those scenarios. Now ask yourself if you would hold the same degree of scrutiny to the art, design, presence, and experience side of this equation? Do you want people dealing specifically with the issues or do you want glassy thin voting UP / DOWN? Do you want our culture to evolve past where we seem to have been stuck regarding those matters for how long? Do you want our choices to be justified and reasonable to the outsiders that will no doubt tear it to shreds and analyze it with the scrutiny that it deserves?<br /><br />I don't want to create the illusion that I'm for the waffly bullsh*t-baffles-brains approach that take us down <a href="http://gawker.com/5150582/breathtaking-document-reveals-pepsis-logo-is-pinnacle-of-entire-universe">the waffly path that Pepsi took</a>. To be fair though, I don't think anyone can appreciate how much duress that poor design team was under completely redoing the look for a soft drink bastion. That's billions of dollars that you need to justify somehow. Not agreeing with it, but I can surely see the ridiculous pressure there.<br /><br />So with that, I'll end another ridiculously long blog post. Sorry for those people that need it all boiled down into three words. I'll never be able to do that.<br /><br />Once again, I thank you all for reading. I'd say there are a lot of good signs that we have evolved tremendously in only a few years. We have a lot of ground to cover still though. If I had to leave you with one request, it would be that we don't try to distill things down to a Digg system, as it grossly oversimplifies the complexities.<br /><br />I am but the sum of your clicks...<br /><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">[1] If I had to pick one single individual that has influenced me more, I could do no worse than to cite Matt Mahurin. Long before I really studied photography, his work was impacting my brain. Long before I went onto University to study fine arts, his work was a reference. You may not know who he is. You may know his work. Enough said.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-1831943695297912885?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-43297299644215541812010-03-04T08:50:00.000-08:002010-07-03T21:15:43.421-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Uh Oh, Again?</b></span><div><br /></div><div><div><div>Two reviews are largely responsible for this reaction post. If you haven't read them, I encourage you to check out:</div><div><ul><li><a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/2010/03/03/the-new-ubuntu-lucid-look-an-appraisal/">Jay's analysis of the execution</a>. There is nothing more insightful than reading a piece and saying "Good point. I should have examined that a little more closely."</li><li><a href="http://blog.rfquerin.org/2010/03/04/ubuntu-rebranded/">Richard Querin's insights</a>. Grounded in logic and largely about the relationship between the higher level goals set forth in the identity page in relationship to the execution.</li></ul><div>As a result, I thought I'd dig a little deeper <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/03/ubuntu-branding.html">than I did recently</a> into what might be there to be seen.</div><div><br /></div><div>When you are dying of thirst in a desert, a cup of water seems like the best thing in the world. That said, a small cup of water doesn't get you out of the desert or even close to the salvation that so many it seems are pouring out.</div><div><br /></div><div>How much of the identity campaign response is truly different than what we had before? How much of it is an outpouring of relief (albeit entirely foolish) that the brown is gone? Where are the deeper veins of change?</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">The Tenets</span></b></div><div><br /></div><div>First, we have a vocalizing of the brand identity tenets. This is a positive step in the right direction. They are defined as follows:</div><div><ol><li>Precision</li><li>Reliability</li><li>Collaboration</li><li>Freedom</li></ol><div>MERIT: +1</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>The Thematic Anchor</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Light. "Visually light is beautiful, light is ethereal, light brings clarity and comfort."</div><div><br /></div><div>Light also brings a plethora of other things to the table, not all positive. I'll assume that the goal of the thematic is to deliver that on the desktop.</div><div><br /></div><div>MERIT: +1</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Who?</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Yep. You guessed it. Not there.</div><div><br /></div><div>Hard to really guess who this is going to deliver the above goals to. We don't even have a ballpark demographic or culture. Well, let's be ethnocentric then and call it Westernized Culture shall we, as when you talk about light, it means some pretty radically different things in different cultures. Apparently they don't care about that.</div><div><br /></div><div>New challenges for companies that aren't the old dogs should be navigated, not avoided.</div><div><br /></div><div>MERIT: -2 (Additional demerit for the glaring hole of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other">othering</a> gets bonus points here)</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Ubuntu Logo / Wordmark In Context</span></b></div><div><br /><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sqkGDcOI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/B-iI4nXaVqA/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-dark.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 105px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sqkGDcOI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/B-iI4nXaVqA/s400/new-ubuntu-dark.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444549215525236962" border="0" /></a></div><br /></div><div>I'll stand by my evaluation that the typeface is vastly superior merely via addition by subtraction. Yes the older version is that bad. It spattered everything and everyone with a hideous sense that people who use Ubuntu also say things like "Y'all" and muck about with straw hats on our heads. It is that poorly executed.</div><div><br /></div><div>This typeface is far superior. Does it meet the design goals, however? Again, because we fail to talk about contextual references of the audience, I can only make the grotesque assumption that everyone is supposed to view it through the eyes of a Westernized / European context.</div><div><ul><li>Lowercase entry letter. Nicely restrained. Touches nicely on Light thematic. Positive.</li><li>Modulated medium to thin strokes. Again touches nicely on Light thematic. Positive.</li><li>Arty farty sharpness touches on the Precision tenet. Positive.</li><li>Pimple wart of the CoF reeks of afterthought. Negative.</li><li>Non absolute black dark tone helps the Light. Positive.</li><li>Good counter and bowls feel pretty airy. Works with Freedom and Light. Positive.</li><li>Head nod to the older CoF speaks of history and therefore Reliability. Positive.</li><li>In contrast to what came before purely on type? Resoundingly Positive.</li></ul><div>MERIT: +2 (Bonus merit for banishing that old nightmare face)</div></div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">The Boot Splash</span></b></div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uBBPkhCI/AAAAAAAAA_k/FO-0goNvlUI/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-boot.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 234px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uBBPkhCI/AAAAAAAAA_k/FO-0goNvlUI/s400/new-ubuntu-boot.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444550700818531362" border="0" /></a><div><ul><li>Compositionally stronger than traditional vertical centre punching. Close enough with the centre of gravity to hit Westernized composition via Phi. Positive.</li><li>Dark aubergine looks completely acceptable in this look, but does it work to the aesthetic visual anchor of Light? Doesn't need to be on point with a literal light == light work, so I'll give it the benefit of a doubt. Positive.</li><li>Lean sparseness is a rather brutal literal reading of Light, but it still works. Positive.</li><li>Wart pimple looks even more out of place here. That wordmark emblem combination is now going to be around a long time given history. Negative. </li><li>In contrast to the nasty Karmic mess before? Positive.</li></ul><div>MERIT: +1</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Desktop</span></b></div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uvJmpNPI/AAAAAAAAA_w/5zVVOzktEyg/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-desktop.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uvJmpNPI/AAAAAAAAA_w/5zVVOzktEyg/s400/new-ubuntu-desktop.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444551493336773874" border="0" /></a></div><br /><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S5AShI8w3UI/AAAAAAAABAY/SuLh9Vyg09c/s1600-h/warty-final-ubuntu.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 250px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S5AShI8w3UI/AAAAAAAABAY/SuLh9Vyg09c/s400/warty-final-ubuntu.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444872310038256962" /></a></div><br /><div><ul><li>Herein lies the biggest oopsie. This is a gongshow, and rightfully so as the whole point of establishing the design team is to work away from the gongshow. We can't fault the work entirely for this, as they have a long history of neglect and cluster to work out of. Neutral.</li><li>Window decoration. <a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/2010/03/03/the-new-ubuntu-lucid-look-an-appraisal/">Read Jay's post for a pretty good examination</a>. It's awful. It doesn't touch on a tenet and it doesn't help push the aesthetic goal of Westernized Light. Negative.</li><li>Icons. Handed down. Outline outline outline outline. Can't fault them. Neutral.</li><li>Interface / GTK. Nasty. Can't fault them. Neutral.</li><li>Wallpaper. Uninspired and seriously lacking. A blur on a blob of a blur. Poorly executed. Completely emotionally bankrupt. No audience. Weak. Symptomatic. Negative.</li><li>Type selection. Discuss it. Think about it. Bringhurst and Tschichold are all about giving the type meaning. Bringhurst discusses choosing type for a project based on the type's lineage. None of that is here. Nothing. Empty. Vacuous. Negative.</li><li>What is the context of this desktop? There are two others. A few glaring similarities should be out of bounds purely based on the context. Good idea for <i>them</i>, but we can't go there, especially when we consider what that other system stands for. Propagates more of the same negative connotations with imitation. A different company / mindshare might be able to get away with it. Linux can't. Don't quote Picasso on me unless you know what the hell he meant. Negative.</li></ul><div>MERIT: -2 (Extra demerit for even showcasing this mess)</div><div><br /></div><div>The Website Redesign</div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47wmiJp-0I/AAAAAAAABAM/A7wiKAGunmQ/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-site.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 290px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47wmiJp-0I/AAAAAAAABAM/A7wiKAGunmQ/s400/new-ubuntu-site.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444553544330509122" border="0" /></a></div><div><ul><li>Publishing grid with a little bending of the rules. Predictable application as well touches on the Reliability tenet. Collaboration and such will implicitly be there by the featured Dents / Tweets / Blog / etc. Positive.</li><li>Light overall tone is easy to pull toward Light. Positive.</li><li>Good sprinkling of the loose palette. Positive.</li><li>Nasty plastic machine. Negative.</li><li>Quirky icons for levity pushes toward Light. Positive.</li><li>In contrast to what came before? Resoundingly Positive.</li></ul></div><div>MERIT: +2 (Extra merit for the execution)</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Summary</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Again, I'd like to say that I believe one of Ubuntu's strongest facets was the idea that there was a connection to humanity implied. It was never executed. Throwing that out may leave them more open to the idea that it is Yet Another Operating System Computer Rubbish.</div><div><br /></div><div>MERIT TOTAL: +1 ( +6 / -5 )</div><div><br /></div><div>The positives of actually attempting change should be applauded. I'll stand by that.</div><div><br /></div><div>That change must also be cautiously tempered with the realization that simply changing a colour palette won't do anything. Change for the sake of changing, logo wordmark aside, is generally not terribly productive.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is about context. You can get no clear picture of where Ubuntu is going without considering where it is coming from. While much of the picture is equally bleak, there is room for hope in that we are actually seeing attempts at change and experimentation.</div><div><br /></div><div>One can't evaluate a position on the chess board without examining what came before. Did the player randomly play his move and end up there? What is the process of their evaluation of the board? Does her move have a longstanding history of deep evaluation and thought enough for you to trust her move? Those answers will likely give you some hint as to whether the game will result in success or failure.</div><div><br /></div><div>We can't expect success 100% of the time or else we handcuff everyone. We need to be a culture that respects innovation and creativity. The new identity campaign isn't entirely risky, but it isn't entirely easy to pull off either.</div><div><br /></div><div>The creative and the innovative come at a price. That price is risk.</div></div></div></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-4329729964421554181?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-20382350231266910182010-03-03T15:02:00.000-08:002010-07-03T21:15:35.222-07:00This post is a quick update thanks to the colossal amount of visits, email, and poking people have been giving me. Why the hell people are asking me to comment is beyond me, but I'll give it my best kick at the can.<div><br /></div><div>Unless you have been living under a rock, Ubuntu has a new brand identity campaign going.[1]</div><div><br /></div><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">The New Logo<br /><br /></span></b></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sq4Kym8I/AAAAAAAAA_Y/6iM7mWUXsLg/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-orange.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 135px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sq4Kym8I/AAAAAAAAA_Y/6iM7mWUXsLg/s400/new-ubuntu-orange.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444549220913814466" border="0" /></a></div><div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sqkGDcOI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/B-iI4nXaVqA/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-dark.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 105px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47sqkGDcOI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/B-iI4nXaVqA/s400/new-ubuntu-dark.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444549215525236962" border="0" /></a></div><div><ul><li>I'll say that the wordmark is far superior to the old homebrew amateur hack mess. I won't even reference it. The type has a sense of craftsmanship to it, largely due to simply abiding by classical typography rules - not the nasty unmodulated strokes we have come to see everywhere. I sincerely hope the designer didn't borrow too heavily from an existing typeface or the wrath of imitation shall fall upon them. Huge progression away from the old worthless typeface.</li><li>The CoF feels like an add on and poorly thought out. It feels like "Well we are stuck with this so let's put it here." The dot seems to pull the centre of gravity off to the right. I can't say there is an easy solution other than that perhaps Canonical should have employed the <a href="http://www.davidairey.com/">extremely talented David Airey</a> to bring his talent to it. If anyone could have made the CoF work with the type, it is him.<br /></li></ul><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Boot Splash</span></span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uBBPkhCI/AAAAAAAAA_k/FO-0goNvlUI/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-boot.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 234px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uBBPkhCI/AAAAAAAAA_k/FO-0goNvlUI/s400/new-ubuntu-boot.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444550700818531362" border="0" /></a><br /><ul><li>Solid composition. The centre punching madness is gone on the vertical axis.</li><li>Gravity feels slightly odd, but that is a byproduct of the pill dot CoF emblem I suspect. The palette is likely set, but if forced with it, it may work better with less value to pull some gravity back to the wordmark.<br /></li><li>Huge improvement over the eyesore of nastiness known as our current Karmic boot screen. Monumental improvement. When you can't do well, do less, and the Karmic boot did not do well.<br /></li></ul><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Desktop</span></span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uvJmpNPI/AAAAAAAAA_w/5zVVOzktEyg/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-desktop.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47uvJmpNPI/AAAAAAAAA_w/5zVVOzktEyg/s400/new-ubuntu-desktop.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444551493336773874" border="0" /></a><br /><ul><li>Sad to see brown gone. It never had a proper kick at the can, and this desktop is slightly symptomatic. Mauve is chic currently, though, so no huge loss there. Feels like it is really trying desperately to lean toward the good old <a href="http://www.behance.net/signalnoise">Canadian kid James White</a> though. Love to see the complimentary tones of the palette creep into it somewhere.<br /></li><li>Uninspired blandness in tone. Yet more of the "let's make it neutral for everyone." Here's a thought, how about we make it an emotional experience by thwarting the blandness of gradient hell? A move to an emotional experience is predicated on something that speaks something more than watered down gradients. While it pulls slightly away from <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2008/10/ubuntuification-of-art.html">the Ubuntufication of art</a>, it needs to pull a heck of a lot harder. Varied palette alone cannot do it.<br /></li><li>The window decorations are nothing short of nasty. Has some uninspired usability stamped all over it.</li><li>Consistent palette for the win for a harmonious transition from the splash screen. Let's see those colour compliments ebb in.<br /></li><li><a href="http://www.kilobitspersecond.com/2010/03/03/the-new-ubuntu-lucid-look-an-appraisal/">Jay over at KiloBitsPerSecond has done a tremendous highlighting of the substandard execution in the desktop itself</a>. Highly recommended reading.</li></ul><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:130%;">Other Deliverables</span><br /></div><div><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47v59c-bmI/AAAAAAAABAE/sUx4caPG8n8/s1600-h/notepad.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 293px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47v59c-bmI/AAAAAAAABAE/sUx4caPG8n8/s400/notepad.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444552778565185122" border="0" /></a><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47v5VoPUFI/AAAAAAAAA_8/9CovLtqi8b0/s1600-h/cdconcept.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 138px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47v5VoPUFI/AAAAAAAAA_8/9CovLtqi8b0/s400/cdconcept.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444552767875010642" border="0" /></a><br /><ul><li>The Swiss 'Big Idea' approach is fantastic, and a fitting quote selected. A non-monochromatic palette is allowed to show its strength here.</li><li>The CD packaging is still in a mock stage. The cover is yet more of the same ghastly photography whatever mehness of old. The interior image of the computer is equally worthless. Nothing speaks a new regime of quality like the old regime of stock photography. Again, commit dammit. Commit.<br /></li><li>Typesetting is leagues better than the past incarnations. A publishing grid goes a long way.<br /></li></ul><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The New Site</span></span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47wmiJp-0I/AAAAAAAABAM/A7wiKAGunmQ/s1600-h/new-ubuntu-site.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 290px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S47wmiJp-0I/AAAAAAAABAM/A7wiKAGunmQ/s400/new-ubuntu-site.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444553544330509122" border="0" /></a><br /><ul><li>By far the most impressive visual overhaul for Ubuntu proper.</li><li>Excellent publishing grid work and a real craftsmanship of design.</li><li>Same shoddy weakness in photography. Enough with the crap photography and absolutely stock photo plastic rubbishy computer bits already.</li><li>Lovely site layout and consideration to typography. Best improvement on the whole.</li></ul><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Summary</span></span><br /><br />So where does this leave us?<br /><br />I'd make a pretty clear vote of support for the changes.<br /><br />The step away from absolute hobby level typography is a massive plus one. The logo is an overall improvement, but still has the earmark of someone ill-equipped with an I-can-do-that-too attitude. Likely involving someone that specialises in logo work might have been better. Still, a massive improvement on the whole.<br /><br />The new website, hideous plastic wet floor photography notwithstanding, is extremely tight. This can only be more pronounced when you compare it to the existing look. Fantastic work on that front.<br /><br />The desktop is still showing growing pains. While I applaud the choice of a non-monochromatic implementation of colour, the real difficulty of "Just what the hell should we do" is still there. The window decoration is brutal in composition / padding / etc., and the flipping of a side will no doubt draw the justified criticism of OSX similarity. The palette on the window decorations also shows a clear disregard for the new scheme. <a href="http://troy-sobotka.blogspot.com/2010/01/six-ubuntu-oopsies-and-possible-quick.html">The bold titlebar type and padding! padding! padding! everywhere needs attention as well, and leans still slightly to the heavier and clunky feeling that people have come to accept from Free Software</a>. The oncoming GNOME 3 theme mocks look to have more of that absolutely hideous approach.<br /><br />I should stress that at no point do I want to create the idea that this is easy work. The team has made colossal steps forward, and deserve a full applause for achieving even that. To the outside world, we only see the fruits of that labour. On the inside however, I imagine there was an incredible battle to get even to where we see in the new brand identity work.<br /><br />So for this day, I would have to say given the history and trending in all of Free Software, the Ubuntu work deserves full accolades. There is still obviously much work to be done, but at least we can see signs that the old regime is loosening its iron fist.<br /><br />Thanks to everyone for the email, comments, IRC chitter chatter, and such. I am still shocked that anyone gives a flying rat's ass about what I have to say. Onward...<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">[1] Identity. A designer can design an identity campaign. They cannot design a brand. The brand is what an audience gives back.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-2038235023126691018?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-53213019499938307082010-02-25T09:05:00.000-08:002010-07-03T21:15:27.443-07:00<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Elegance and Other Empty Terms</b></span><div><br /></div><div>I stumbled across a <a href="http://www.bomahy.nl/hylke/blog/on-gnome-and-elegance/">post yesterday pertaining to elegant</a>.<div><br /></div><div>I am fond of the term. I'll make no qualms about it. I firmly believe that with some stringent caveats, elegant is the term we need to nail.[1]</div><div><br /></div><div>There is a larger issue here however. It is a problem of context. The absolute neglect of traditional art and design theory / thinking when people start bandying words around as though we live in some sort of absolutist miasma.</div><div><br /></div><div>We do not.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>From ZOMFG to DO NOT WANT: Typical Libre Cultural Responses</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Why should we pay attention to this? Why should we take an otherwise innocuous post from Hylke and investigate the core of what is being forwarded?</div><div><br /></div><div>Because at the core of Hylke's message is a very important design decision. For us as a Libre culture to enact such a design direction involves a good deal of sophisticated thinking. It involves an entirely holistic approach to the technical execution of art and design that isn't simply a 'little ditty here' and a 'little ditty there'.</div><div><br /></div><div>We so often care so little about design presence that we look at a post such as Hylke's and do one of two typical comments:</div><div><br /></div><div>"ZOMGAWESOME!!!!!!"</div><div><br /></div><div>or</div><div><br /></div><div>"DO NOT WANT!!!!"</div><div><br /></div><div>Sometimes the commentary has some sort of half baked addendum as to why a particular commenter's view is more valid or less valid, which is glazed over by participant next who asserts their viewpoint. No one reads those comments anyways...</div><div><br /></div><div>Two steps this way, two steps that way, then two steps over there. Interest turns to apathy and yet another case of "Oh well... it's just ( bikeshedding | fanboyism )."</div><div><br /></div><div>If you wonder or get angry when a project shuts their doors down to community 'involvement', it is precisely this reason. Art and design thinking that stopped at age six or seven being shout out with extremely loud voices. Blam: Stop energy.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>STFU You Semantic Idiot. We All Know Elegant. Get on With It!</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Seems simple enough doesn't it?</div><div><br /></div><div>What is unfortunate here is that the dark strain of absolutism will actually rear its head in ways that are not pleasant. Every time you hear someone scream out "I KNOW WHAT I LIKE", you can almost immediately dismiss them.</div><div><blockquote>"Anyone that cares for his art seeks the essence of his own technique." -- <a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=N-T_ogXMzlgC&amp;printsec=frontcover&amp;dq=dziga+vertov&amp;cd=1#v=onepage&amp;q=&amp;f=false">Dziga Vertov, 1922</a></blockquote></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Absolutist Bullsh*t</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>The following little evaluation is largely for a Westernized North American audience. It may extend further, but the bias will most certainly be rooted in language. Note the words in single quotes below:</div><div><br /></div><div>'Beauty'. Did you immediately think feminine / female?</div><div><br /></div><div>'Truck'. Did you think masculine / male?</div><div><br /></div><div>I will acknowledge that most of the readers of this blog have proven to be pretty darn clever. Perhaps you already spotted the pitfalls and are aware of the trap.</div><div><br /></div><div>If you take one thing away from this reading, it should be that absolutism is nasty. It is ethnocentric, egocentric, ignorant of the ever mercurial historical context, and fosters <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other">othering via the implied difference</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>How the Hell Can We Do Anything?</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>Tricky question, no?</div><div><br /></div><div>The very premise of art and design theory is that you think those very real pitfalls through. Be aware that what you assume is only, as the old adage goes, making an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'.</div><div><br /></div><div>Great. We got elegant. Now what?</div><div><ol><li>Did you consider age demographic? What is elegant for a hip pre-twentysomething female snowboarder is likely entirely different than a middle aged thirtysomething female lawyer living in a downtown apartment. Only ten years difference is a generation gap. Remember that. What was noise for your dad is alternative or classic rock for you.</li><li>Did you consider culture? What is elegant for the aforementioned pre-twentysomething female is probably well... not exactly relevant or on point for a pre-twentysomething woman living in India, Africa, or Japan. <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/global-market-global-emotion-global-design">Global design? Global myth</a>.</li><li>Did you consider your contemporary context? When you think of flying, it makes sense to show lovely tall buildings with planes, right? Not so much in North America these days. I'd cite the relatively unfortunate ad campaign of Greyhound Bus Lines here in Canada. The tagline was "There's a reason you never heard of bus rage." Makes sense right? Rather funny even.<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/08/05/greyhound-rage-ad.html">Until a moment of darkness</a>.</li><li>Are you really certain you know what the hell you are talking about? Seriously. If I asked 10 high profile art directors to define elegant, they would all likely be stymied. It's a nebulous thing. Do your homework. Do your research. What elegant are you talking about? Build a mood board. Gather data. What is the historical reasoning behind your vision of elegant? Prepare to start peeling apart an onion of complexity. Once you have clearly localized exactly what you mean visually, try to make sure that everyone that needs to be involved understands that. <a href="http://www-psych.stanford.edu/~lera/papers/mandarin.pdf">It is a universal truth that time is perceived left to right in our heads, right</a> (PDF LINK)?</li></ol></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><b>Look Before We Leap</b></span></div><div><br /></div><div>It's only four points, but you can likely see how complicated this can get extremely quickly. By clearly defining the constraints and the vision, you can greatly avoid paradoxical situations that flame out into stop energy.</div><div><br /></div><div>Remember, when you start seeing bike shedding or the opportunity for it, the project's designer'(s)' vision is weak. You should be able to tactically evaluate every decision in light of the vision.</div><div><br /></div><div>Finally, consider who is calling the shots. I'd be so bold as to say the cares and attention a kernel hacker can offer on art and design are likely moot. A loud Free Software evangelist that heads a project is likely not the best person to be evaluating GDM design.</div><div><br /></div><div>Our eagerness to move forward <i>must</i> be tempered with the full realization that there are formal and traditional approaches to execution.</div><div><br /></div><div>Thank you all for taking the time to read the post. Keep the art and design thinking alive and well. Keep caring and be wary of the <a href="http://www.uigarden.net/english/easy-intuitive-and-metaphor">'simple' terms</a> that some bandy about like candy...</div><div><br /></div><div>I am but the sum of your clicks. </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">[1] There is a long bunch of mumbling and drooling from me about elegant and its ties to living spaces, casual communicating, and the need to distance ourselves from clinical terms such as 'users' and 'computers'. I don't want to clutter up the post with that sort of thing.</span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5321301949993830708?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-76257016758940188532010-02-23T22:25:00.000-08:002010-02-23T23:36:58.360-08:00Adobe has long been the benchmark company behind content generation in the digital photography and graphic design arts.<br /><br />What Adobe does, it does extremely well. They have a focused audience and steer their design toward that audience. Adobe has been, and likely for the foreseeable future will be, the gatekeepers of content generation. Given this current situation though, are there potentially turbulent times ahead for Adobe?<br /><br />Where is the turbulence? Adobe's Air is mostly hot. Adobe's Flash is now seeing a three pronged attack against it that would make Erwin Rommel shudder in fear.<br /><br />On one front, we have the unyielding Steve Jobs that has been clearly attacking ground on both Flash and content generation. Premier has been hacked down by both Final Cut Pro and Avid. Aperture has clearly specialized in on photography far enough that Photoshop's jack-of-all-trades may get caught slouching.<br /><br />On the second front, the elephant known as Microsoft is peddling Silverlight.<br /><br />On the final front, and perhaps the worst one, Google is attacking Flash with a driving push toward HTML5 and CSS. The move is even so bold as to having Google give up on proprietary elements such as Gears. Factor in the iPad and iPhone into the HTML5 / CSS attack, and Air deflates a little more.<br /><br />Let's assume that the future continues to crumble for Adobe in those two capacities. No more Flash design needs. No new Air market design needs.<br /><br />What now? Could the boat be sinking for a company that doesn't have as much diversity and flexibility as the other three? Can Adobe count on being allowed in a room that is getting more and more locked out in the iPad / iPhone? What if Microsoft or Apple start pushing their own content generation packages that start clipping further into Adobe's markets?<br /><br />If we look into a future that more clearly focuses on content creation and the audience that needs it, is there a possible end-zone run here? "Tolerated" status on Microsoft turf, potential competitor on Apple turf, and no turf likely on Google OS, what is a company to do?<br /><br />In the realm of pure speculation, what if Adobe adopted Linux with both arms?<br /><br />Now before you bust out laughing, I ask you to consider the following few questions. Please note that some of them involve billions of dollars worth of potential revenue.<br /><br />1) How desirable do you think a completely beautifully designed Adobe Creative Workstation would be to a design company? By designers and artists for designers and artists. The best possible interfaces and the best possible hardware.<br /><br />2) How much would companies like to have a workstation that focuses strictly on their work without the additional overhead of licensing fees or yearly operating system upgrade fees?<br /><br />3) How much do you think Hollywood with its extremely deep pockets would like to have Photoshop rendering and running on zero-license fee workstations instead of the alternatives? Remember, Hollywood needs computing workstations and render nodes like the Roman army needed soldiers.<br /><br />4) How much value is there in a system that is custom designed, tweaked, and precision tuned the way that no do-it-all system could be? Fewer crashes as Adobe would have a fixed target platform. More refinements and performance tuning than ever possible on proprietary operating systems in addition to open ended render nodes for (3) above.<br /><br />Finally, as wild as this might sound, I'd point all of the readers that know little about Autodesk's <a href="http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&amp;id=10244036">Flint</a>, <a href="http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&amp;id=10243429">Flame</a>, and <a href="http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&amp;id=10243407">Inferno</a> stations over to their respective links.<div><br /></div><div>Linux as Adobe's end run? Maybe, just maybe...<br /><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:x-small;">I'd also add that I find it completely unfortunate that more Linux vendors don't cater to audience specific high dividend production pipelines. They are everywhere, and yet not a single shop has been set up to deal with the specific needs of these sorts of industries.</span></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-7625701675894018853?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-54411007647830851282010-02-02T10:52:00.001-08:002010-02-02T10:57:48.398-08:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S2h1k6tdM9I/AAAAAAAAA-g/Kz-CRI1cE54/s1600-h/future.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S2h1k6tdM9I/AAAAAAAAA-g/Kz-CRI1cE54/s400/future.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5433722227518157778" /></a><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/1320130447886520387-5441100764783085128?l=troy-sobotka.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>Troy James Sobotkanoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1320130447886520387.post-28732863994796852022010-01-31T22:47:00.000-08:002010-01-31T22:48:55.956-08:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BHeta7y8/S2Z5LFJahRI/AAAAAAAAA9U/ksGE2gHCbtw/s1600-h/past.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 400px;" src="http://3