c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
esc
cancel

Latest Updates: interaction design RSS

  • Zach Blank 2:28 pm on August 18, 2008 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , interaction design

    Interaction design has its place, it beautiful dabble point between idea and execution. It is the crucial bridge that takes idea to reality.

    I have been thinking about my understanding of interaction design as I am preparing for a BIG round of interviews starting Monday in New York. I still haven’t quite gotten over my Jeff Benjamin SNAFO and I am trying to make sure It doesn’t happen again. So with that this is my idea of interaction design’s place in the process and why I take to it.

    Photo by: isabelle boring
    Photo by: isabelle boring

    I am passionate about strategy. School pounded it into my head and it is almost all that I think about on projects. But all too often does a great idea fall to pieces because of poor execution. And what a disappointment it all becomes.

    With regards to interactive assets for brands the piece that takes idea into execution is interaction design. It is the liaison between the two and done properly can drive the execution to success. Interaction design allows for so much input into strategy and execution it is the obvious spot for me.

    The happy medium is the wonderful squeeze between idea and execution where interaction design lives.

     

  • Zach Blank 2:55 pm on July 24, 2008 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , interaction design

    Jeff Benjamin from Crispin, Porter + Bogusky asked me the other day what my interaction design philosophy was in a phone interview. I totally dodged the question, I didn’t know anybody could have a philosophy for interaction design. Hell, I’m still not exactly sure what all interaction design is.

    I figured this is probably something I should think about. After a bit of searching I found Chad Vavra’s Philosophy. I like it, and it lead me to come up with my own:

    “Complexity, born out of straightforward technology, creates meaningful connections between the human mind and the technological brain. Users and their technology are melded together as the later becomes aware of the formers expectations, desires, and necessities.”

    I think defining or philosophizing about ID is a bit cliche among digital people. That is to say, how do we come up with something unique or innovative and not just come back to simplicity? It seems to me that when talking about digital assets we always come back with simplicity being the shoe that fits best. Clearly I think this comes from people with little knowledge & desire to explore technologies and become comfortable. Eventually we can throw the simplicity model out the window. Probably not until all the oldies are dead and we only have the generations who grew up with this stuff. But until then - SIMPLICITY I guess.

     

  • Zach Blank 4:55 pm on April 20, 2008 | 0 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: interaction design, user experience

    Interaction design, or user experience (UX) should influence product design. Or visa-versa. Talking with an old friend who is the Director of Interactivity at a ‘brand advocacy’ agency in Portland lead to the topic of what elements are involved in interaction design. The main take away from that is product design should be the lens by which interaction design is executed or even just though about.

    Digital interactive experiences for a specific brand should be on point with that brand of course, but it should be take one step further and be on point with the particular product and its design. Try thinking about interaction design through this new lens, it has defiantly brought new thought to the front of my mind.