{"id":10981,"date":"2005-11-07T21:53:02","date_gmt":"2005-11-07T21:53:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.adobe.com\/jnackdev\/2005\/11\/lets-make-something-terrible-together.html"},"modified":"2005-11-07T21:53:02","modified_gmt":"2005-11-07T21:53:02","slug":"lets_make_something_terrible_together","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/2005\/11\/07\/lets_make_something_terrible_together\/","title":{"rendered":"Let&#039;s make something terrible together"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I was chatting this morning with some guys from the Illustrator team, batting around ideas for a fairly sexy feature they&#8217;ve been considering.  They were thinking, naturally and appropriately as software designers do, about how to make the feature accurate, fast, and intuitive.  The product manager in me said &#8220;right on&#8221;; the designer in me said &#8220;ugh.&#8221;<br \/>\nThe point has been made many times, but computers&#8217; tendency towards the predicable, the literal, and the repeatable often isn&#8217;t a recipe for good design, much less good art.  Yes, being able to execute each step more and more quickly lets you try more things &amp; potentially take more risks.  But doesn&#8217;t it seem that it tends strongly towards a &#8220;right&#8221; answer, producing designs that look tastefully bland?  Happy accidents grow rare.<br \/>\nI thought of this several weeks ago during a typography session at Photoshop World Boston.  The speaker listed, and hundreds of attendees dutifully scribbled down, which fonts were considered hot and which were not.  I can dig that people don&#8217;t want to look foolish, but I found the whole exercise kind of repellent.  I left the session wanting to make some killer design using <a href=\"http:\/\/www.typophile.com\/node\/9721\">that beaten-down, forlorn face<\/a> my wife calls &#8220;the yacht club font,&#8221; which suffered death by misuse on 6,000,000 soft-focus &#8217;70s paperback covers.  <i>Well dammit,<\/i> I thought, <i>all you trendies can go off and rock out with <a href=\"http:\/\/www.linotype.com\/6-1816-6\/eurostile.html?PHPSESSID=c07a1d8580f40368d989ea77d14b83db\">Eurostile<\/a> (condemning it to be the Bookman Swash of the future) or whatever; I&#8217;m gonna make the yacht club <b>fresh<\/b>.  I&#8217;ll do something so terrible it&#8217;s great<\/i>.<br \/>\nSo back to the point at hand: this Illustrator feature had a sort of &#8220;give me tasteful&#8221; button.  Yeah, but how about &#8220;<b>gimme awful<\/b>,&#8221; I wondered.  And gimme random.  I mean, we&#8217;re the company that registered <a href=\"http:\/\/www.smashstatusquo.com\/\" \/>SmashStausQuo.com<\/a>.  How about we actually do it?  We need more offbeat, playful, bizarre functionality&#8211;only when you want it, to be sure, but there to introduce some chance, some chaos, some creative destruction.<br \/>\nAnd I&#8217;ll bet that by willing to embrace the terrible, we all just might make something great.<br \/>\nJ.<br \/>\n[Thanks to <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.adobe.com\/typblography\/\" \/>Thomas Phinney<\/a> for immediately knowing the name of &#8220;that swoopy &#8217;70s paperback font,&#8221; as I described it.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I was chatting this morning with some guys from the Illustrator team, batting around ideas for a fairly sexy feature they&#8217;ve been considering. They were thinking, naturally and appropriately as software designers do, about how to make the feature accurate, fast, and intuitive. The product manager in me said &#8220;right on&#8221;; the designer in me [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10981"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10981"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10981\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10981"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10981"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10981"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}