October 03, 2003 | View Comments (13) | Category: Design
Summary: Minimalistic design is not plain or boring. It is beautiful.
All of this comes about because I read an entry at this site. Sorry he does not have permalinks so I cannot give you the direct link to the entry.
A website design should give users some kind of experience when they visit it. The design itself should give the site a personality all on its own. This personality however should not get in the way of the true purpose of a site, which is for the users to use. I am not a minimalist person because I have too many different moods and personalities. Many of my friends will tell you that they did not get to like me until they really got to know me. My personality sometimes gets in the way of who I really am. With websites you might not have the luxury of users coming back to get to "know" the site.
Minimalism allows users to use the site. It allows users to use the site through great usability and really does not cause the user to put much thought into what he has to do to get the job done. Once you add the word "design" to minimalist then you are taking things to a higher level. Minimalist design does not mean white backgrounds or two column layouts. Minimalist design means that everything on the page serves a specific function without hindering the users experience or getting in the way of the message that the site is trying to deliver.
Many clients will not see the beauty of a great minimalistic site because to them they are plain and for their own personal reasons they may want something cool to show their friends or play with. Show them 2advanced and they start drooling. The problem with basing your opinions solely on the "look" of a site is that aesthetics are all relative to how the individual sees them. Many will agree that certain minimalistic sites are beautiful because they are "clean" and place form with function, not over. Everyone I know likes a clean site.
Apple designs minimalistic computers, but not too many people go around shouting how ugly they are. I would even argue that VolksWagen makes minimalist cars. The point is minimalism can be plain, but good minimalistic design is not.
In regards to this site the background is white solely for one reason. The site itself is called whitespace so I figured I would stick with that theme. Could this site use a little more color to add some emotion to it? Most definitely. Would it hurt to add an image here or there for visual appeal? No it would not. But until I find some other colors that go along with the message of the site or some images that do not take away from the content this site will remain the way it is. Surprisingly (or not) much thought went into this design. From the logo, to the header colors, to the fonts, and where borders should be added. Designing a minimalistic site is not hard. However, designing a minimalistic site that offers a great experience is. I am not defending the look of this site because it is my site and everyone has their opinions. I am defending my ideals of minimalism and why I hold it in such great regard.
The absolute most challenging thing is to do something simple. Because simple has to be perfect. If it's not perfect you see it a mile away. It's easier to create something complex, which of course can be really interesting, but for me, always feels like a more subjective solution.
I can not recall where I got that quote from, but I know it was from a famous graphic designer and it certainly struck a chord with me.
Not all sites should get the minimalistic treatment. There is a good reason why 37signals does not have any multimedia sites in their portfolio. They just do not do that type of stuff. That is not their specialty. I design towards my strengths and so should everyone else. Just please do not think that just because a site is minimalistic that it did not take the same amount of time or even more time to design than "complex" sites.
If you need some inspiration for minimalistic sites that offer great visual appeal then maybe you can have a look at these:
If you think any of those sites are unappealing then fine. Obviously we just have different design tastes. But they are all minimal because they serve their purpose and there is nothing I can see that I would take out from to enhance the design. That to me is minimalism at its best.
Looking at a rainbow I see seven color bands that come together to form something beautiful. There is nothing complex about a rainbow and yet it is beautiful. Ever witness a sunrise/sunset at the beach? There are 4 main elements at work here: water, horizon, sun, and sky. Four things is all that are required to make something beautiful. I am not a minimalistic individual, but I sure do love minimalistic things.
</rant>
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/17
By the way,
that Lambertin & Grotegerd website you cite as a good example of minimalist design, have you noticed its remarkable similarity to the twothirtymedia inc site:
http://www.twothirty.com/
I don't know whether these two companies are affiliated, but the distinctive use of stock-photos with extreme crops rather gives the game away. Where does being inspired by another site end and plagiarism begin? This is also an interesting subject for debate.
Joel
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
Joel: I do agree that minimalist design is a reflection of the true essence of the personality "of the site". I think we share the same views it's that maybe I interpreted your interpretation wrong when you threw my site in the mix of your topic. I do not think minimalist design reflects the personality of the individual. Maybe it does for some people, but for me I can tell you I am a flashy type person in the "real" world. Another good thing about minimalist design is that even though you may not find this design particularly inviting, it obviously does not chase you away from this site.
I never noticed the similarties between the two sites, but I don't think cropping photos would be plagiarism. Inspiration and plagiarism is indeed a touchy subject that I would rather leave alone for another site to tackle :)
I am glad you came here and posted your comments. I no longer have the sudden urge to strangle you :) I love your writing style by the way.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
I didn't realise I was close to being strangled! I wasn't particularly criticising your site, if anything I am undecided whether I "like" it as a design. But regardless of "like" and "dislike", which I point out are rather changeable -- you really have to sit with a design for quite a while to really know in your gut -- you are certainly right, your site encourages me to read it on grounds of content, and that is surely the true success of any design, that it doesn't get in the way of the content. I think I was standing up for a legitimate vision of minimalism that was less plain, that plainness and minimalism were not synonymous. I think of my own site as minimalist, but it doesn't fit in with what I see as the cookie-cutter version of minimalism that is currently doing the rounds. So I guess I am an advocate of diversification within a general movement of minimalism.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
Am I looking at the wrong sites? Twothirty and Lambertin & Grotegerd look very different. Simple yes, the same now way. Their layouts are even different, not to mention how navigation is handled. They do however reflect the same build quality. But that's about it.
btw. were can one see the trackback entries?
Egor Kloos (http://www.dutchcelt.nl/weblog/)
Does this site have trackbacks enabled or is my weblog is acting up again. Anyway I made a little post with my thoughts on minimal design.
http://www.dutchcelt.nl/blogged/P152_0_1_0/ (my apologies for the spam)
Egor Kloos (http://www.dutchcelt.nl/weblog/)
Egor: The trackback links are at the end of the entries highlight in gray :)
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
as the guy who designed the twothirty site, i really don't feel they copied my company's site design. it's a box with a cropped photo, that's about it.
it's really easy to be similar where are barely any "creative" elements involved.
paul (http://twothirty.com)
The way I see it, minimalism is just a word, and not a very descriptive one at that. One way to think about it is reducing things to their essence. In the case of web sites the essence may be any type of media: text, images, flash, etc. In the context of a business site, it can mean focusing on the company's primary communication goals and not offering too much information. On the other hand, it could mean a robust search mechanism into a huge array of information (is Google not minimal in its own way?). When put into that context, it's a wonderful goal, but it doesn't really imply a specific aesthetic. I think if you go back and read Joel's article, this is very much along the lines of what he's saying. He laments the sterility of many 'minimalist' blogs, not minimalism itself.
Frankly, I have to agree (although I dislike the look of his Blog right now... the main site looks great, but the blog is creating all kinds of weird visual tensions I don't like). It's not that I don't like the aesthetic, I just feel that it is an unnecessary trend. It begins to feel like a crutch after a while... that people are going the 'safe' route instead of using all the power of visual design and typography. Not that it is bad for the blogging world: a weblog is about the writing, not a strong brand and visual impression. The dynamic is such that a blog can really look like anything and interested people will still read it.
As a designer, I am not comfortable sticking with the tried and true standard techniques. It feels like I'm selling out my personal development when I'm following all the formulas without actually poring myself into the project. When I see something impressive out there that I can't do, it inspires me to forge ahead. On the one hand, there is probably nothing I can do that hasn't been done before, but on the other hand there are tons of things I can do that _I_ haven't done before. I know it all sounds a bit hypocritical given the current undesigned state of my own site, but it's just how I feel.
Now, about your site. The 9rules site works for me. The navigation and message is clear. The orange links pop and make it easy to take in the meaning. The whitespace blog doesn't give me that same clarity, however. The about section in the middle of the navigation looks almost exactly the same as the main text and blurs the identity of the navigation. The navigation and entry titles also contribute to this feel. I realize they are different levels of grey (and maybe it looks better on an LCD), but I only notice that on close inspection. I think taking out the about sections would go a long way to restore the visual hierarchy. Beyond that you could even throw in a color or two to stir up some emotional response. Hey, just my impressions, please don't take it personal, I think your philosophy is great.
Gabe (http://www.websaviour.com/)
Gabe: Wow, great comments. In regards to what you say about minimalism I agree with most of what you have to say. To me it can only be a crutch when another form of design may be more effective for the message. As I said before minimalism is not for everything.
In regards to this site, I even admit in the post that it could use some "pep", but until I find the right combination of "pep" :) then it will have to stay the way it is and people will just have to be content to come for the content (nice play on words there if I do say so myself). I respect all criticisms of this site as noted in the "about" box so thank you.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
The quote about minimalism reminded me of a conversation between some musical friends of mine:
"What have you been working on?"
"Oh, by Mozart."
"Ah... I remember when Mozart was easy."
Everyone in the group knew exactly what was meant; a lot of Mozart's pieces are easy to play at a mediocre level. As one grows more musicality, you begin to realize how much more you can draw from the simple notes. The same Mozart piece you played easily years ago becomes very difficult because you realize that you have to execute it perfectly or else compromise much more musicality than you do with more complex pieces.
caiuschen (http://fallenearth.org/blogs/caiuschen/)
Ack, used < and >. It was supposed to read, "Ah, (insert some piece here) by Mozart."
caiuschen (http://fallenearth.org/blogs/caiuschen/)
Great example. Definitely makes you think just a little bit more about how to achieve perfection through simplicity.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
Hi,
A rant to address my rant, that's how it should be. I do have permalinks by the way, they're the orange links in the dateline (not obvious enough?). Here's the link to that entry on minimalist website design:
http://www.biroco.com/2003_10.htm#oct01
I've been reading your entries on web design with great interest. You say something that caught my eye immediately above, because it goes right to the heart of the debate: "I am not a minimalist person because I have too many different moods and personalities."
Now this is something I take issue with. I don't believe minimalism is an expulsion of the personality or mood and I'm curious why you think this. In many ways, this was the subtext of what I was writing about in my own blog entry. To me, good minimalist design is a reflection of the true essence of the personality.
However, I agree that many web designers appear to share this fallacy that personality and minimalism clash. I suspect this is nothing more than a retreat into false values, simply not being bold enough in one's minimalism.
all the best
Joel
Joel (http://biroco.com/)