
Two Different Kinds of Illustration - kawera
https://www.subtraction.com/2018/01/03/two-different-kinds-of-illustration/
======
matrix
The main point they author is making is:

"the prevalence of a single, monocultural aesthetic that seemingly almost
every startup and tech company and would-be industry disruptor out there has
adopted, it’s worth wondering if there’s some other voice—or even a different
modulation of this same voice—that could be appropriate."

This, of course, extends far beyond illustration (the topic of the article -
the examples provided are striking). I would love to see more variety -
especially for styling UI components because I think we can do so much better
than Material Design/Metro or Bootstrap.

~~~
richforrester
Don't mind having a go at answering the appropriateness of this vector-based
style, from a design/psychological perspective;

It might be inherent to the mathemetical precision of this drawing style. The
clean-cut shapes and geometrical shapes imply a strict adherence to rules,
purposeful determination and look clean, clear and predicatable.

In short: they make your product look well thought out.

As opposed to a sketchy drawing style. (Sketchy. What's in a name?)

~~~
protoplant
I do not think "they make your product look well thought out." is why.

I think the need is to read a clean, clear symbol instantly. Apple, Golden
Arch, Handicap-Sign. Because of this, a lot of design majors learn this
branding style. Readability is super important in mono-culture, so is clean
interface.

Furthermore, vectors are used due to their ability to scale to any-size, and
the standard tool, Illustrator, just more naturally makes this look than say a
St Gaudans Buffalo Nickel design.

It's a typical copycat style that happens in design and art. Around 2005, I
noticed flying bird silhouettes everywhere.

------
siidooloo
I think the one word that sums it up is ‘safe.’ Few people would be willing to
spend millions developing an app, then risk it all letting someone express
themself. The NYT lower stakes lets them be better.

~~~
ssivark
I think you're on to something here. An image on the NYT website has a
viewership that decays exponentially over a couple of days. And NYT gets to
cycle through dozens of articles every day. So, images are designed to hook a
user's attention, and even if happens to be annoying, nobody looks at it after
a day or two.

On the other hand, an app's interface is something the users look at for a
much more extended period.

To compare with newspapers, think about the web interface of different
newspapers (or even the layout of most print newspapers) -- you'll be amazed
at how similar they are! I just looked at:
[https://www.nytimes.com/](https://www.nytimes.com/) ,
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/) ,
[https://www.bostonglobe.com/](https://www.bostonglobe.com/)

So, while I would like more variety in interfaces, I think it's a very hard
problem.

------
ahdroit
"Step back and you might mistake these as excerpts from a children’s book,
except that they depict grown adults doing ostensibly grown-up things. One
could argue that they effectively infantilize their intended audience,"

------
forgetfuldino
The real reason the author doesn't even touch on. They are viewing it from an
artistic angle rather than a marketing angle.

A consistent style of illustrations is part of the guidelines for most online
brands. All the illustrations need to share a common language across the whole
product.

* Atlassian has a style-guide

* OK Cupid has one (they just changed it and had to redo all their illustrations)

* Trello has one

* Tunnelbear has one

Having a traditional artist involved in these illustrations rather than a
designer means that the 'hit by a bus' factor is much larger. It is much
easier to imitate a vector art style than it is physical technique.

Furthermore, these illustrations have to share the same guidelines as the app
itself, which is limited by CSS rules. Natural textures are hard to do in CSS
and wasteful, wheras flat colour, borders, and gradients are all up for grabs.

On a similar note, one could complain that the New York Times have terrible
consistency with their illustrations, and the differing illustrations fail to
portray a cohesive brand image.

So ultimately the author is saying that marketing != art... No shit...

------
yardshop
One is a collection of very interesting and diverse styles and approaches to a
subject I can't stand looking at. The other is a collection of interesting and
useful products in a narrow range of styles that I am completely tired of. But
both seem more effective for their intended purposes than if the boring style
was representing the abhorrent subject matter, and vice versa.

~~~
itronitron
so the illustrations of the subject that we can't stand to look at must be
specifically made to initially appear as something else in order to capture
our attention, that explains the diversity. the 'boring style' is just the
design equivalent of WWGD, What Would Google Do...

------
dylanrw
From what I've read I don't get the feeling that he has considered that more
often than not, illustration in products often serves as an affordance. As
such it needs to be highly legible and brief. Sometimes similar to editorial
artwork, but usually with entirely different needs.

------
Gravityloss
It's not just people working with computers. Stuff like the demo scene is
quite different, and games too. Or at least used to be.

