What is the thesis of this article?

Chimero’s article encourages the reader to rethink how we use screens. He argues that in order for the screen to be focused on what we want and not on “what screens want”, we need to be open to changing the technology (making a new “map” as he calls) and not basing that change on old concepts or values:

“We can produce a vision of the web that isn’t based on consolidation, privatization, power hierarchies, and surveillance. We can make a new map. Or maybe reclaim a map we misplaced a long time ago. One built on: extensibility, openness, communication, community, wildness.”

To communicate this point, Chimero identifies two opposing ideologies that have presented in computer design: skeuo designing and flat designing. Flat designing sticks to the idea that because the computer is flat, so should the designs be. Skeuomorph is centered on the idea of creating a new package for the computer, often involving interactive and three-dimensional designs. Chimero argues that neither ideology is correct. There is no right way to do things with the screen - it doesn’t want anything at all. What the screen becomes is entirely up to us. And we need to create new dialogue with shared understanding in order to make it something that is better.

Where do you stand with the two ideological camps: flat and skeuo?

I believe in the idea of moderation in all things. While there is a great value to those who think and design in “skeuo”, if we let those designers run wild, we would see a lot of over-designed, non-navigable websites. Flat designs are always going to be easier to understand for a user, but they don’t reach the full potential of the screen or leave much lasting impact for the user.

I would agree with Chimero that there is no correct way that digital design must be handled – a computer screen is about as opinion neutral as it gets. I think that flat and skeuo design each has its proper place and time. For example, an interactive game might be better with a skeuo design because it will do a better job of pulling the user into the world being portrayed, thus making it interactive. In contrast, an online obituary page would probably be inappropriate if not designed flat.

I think that pushing the limits of what the screen can offer is an important part of developing technology. Moving away from the idea of flat, two-dimensional output as the only method of output is probably a good idea. So is detaching from the idea that skeuo is the correct way.

What is a zoopraxiscope and how does it relate to web and interaction design? Find another example from filmmaking or another medium that has inspired digital design.

The zoopraxiscope is an old-fashioned projection device for displaying moving images, or in essence a very short movie. It works by mounting a disc with printed images into the device and turning it. As it turns, the images are projected, and when done at a certain speed it appears as if they are moving. The first zoopraxiscope was created by Eadweard Muybridge and depicted a horse and rider. He took 12 separate photos, and when those 12 photos were viewed in a rapid sequence, it looked as if the horse was moving. This marked the first time that photography was able to capture movement. Muybridge’s invention is the predecessor of the movie projector and the screen itself. With this historical context in mind, it becomes evident that web and interaction design are successors of both graphic design and filmmaking. This means that the screen is not only related to design and aesthetics, but also to the idea of showing something, and the idea of change. Chimero draws this comparison to illustrate what he thinks is the inherit nature of the screen: flux, meaning the capacity for change.

Another example of filmmaking inspiring digital design is the use of framing. Framing in cinematography refers to the way elements are arranged in the frame. This impacts what the camera sees, and thus what the user will see. It involves specific and intentional placement of props and actors to guide the viewer through a scene. Though a scene can be viewed by any number of camera angles, framing it properly plays a large part in how well the visual story is communicated. Similarly, “framing” a website would involve planning out how a user is going to navigate the page to best understand the visual narrative being portrayed. How designers arrange the elements in the “frame” of a webpage will create a specific user experience.