» Since When Does Minimal Mean Shitty?

First off, I just want to preface this article by saying that this is in no way an attack on anyone however I have become outraged with the large number of sites on the web that label themselves as “minimal.” In the majority of the cases, these sites are a half ass attempt to disguise under designed and under developed sites with the term. What we see in these designs is clutter, poor execution, and a lack of defined hierarchy. The goals of any minimal design is to distill the message down to only the most essential items, however that is not an excuse to avoid design all together. I think that this is a simple case of an uneducated group of vocal “designers” who refer to these designs as minimal and thus create a grouping of trends that are passed down by example regardless of how successful they are.

When designing anything that will carry the label of minimal, particular attention must be given to detail. This is because every small mistake will be blatantly obvious. Originally I had planned to give examples of websites that ineffectively execute the minimal look. However, I now feel that it would be more appropriate to share those designs which are successful, in order to educate rather than chastise.

A Brief Message
http://www.abriefmessage.com/

A Brief Message

David Sutoyo
http://david.sutoyo.com/

David Sutoyo

Maqina
http://www.maqina.ro/

Maqina

Poccuo
http://www.poccuo.com/

Poccuo

Thinking for a Living
http://www.thinkingforaliving.org/

Thinking for a Living

03/31

ADD A COMMENT

12 Comments

Share This Page: Tweet this // Stumble It! // Del.icio.us // Float It! // Digg It! // Reddit

12 Responses to “Since When Does Minimal Mean Shitty?”

Grant
March 31st, 2008 at 7:45 pm

Who cares?

This is quite a poor ‘article’. There is no context or substance to your argument other than ‘this is what I see people doing, which I am not going to show you, but here are some minimal sites that I like…’

Furthermore, your opinion on what minimal should be could vastly differ from that of the ‘vocal’ designers you’re berating - which might mean that your claims are also ‘vocal’.

I think that ‘A Brief Message’ breaches a lot of your minimalist guidelines (‘What we see in these designs is clutter, poor execution, and a lack of defined hierarchy’), as the design is top heavy, the whitespace is poorly executed and then we could move on to the accessibility issues. But! It is just my opinion and after all, what is art?

Publicly berating people for being uneducated is not very effective when your ‘article’ is also written without proper grammar, fails to distill (sic) the importance of spelling or context and paragraphs.

Perhaps the title of this article is only appropriate for the article itself?

Grant
Zinni
March 31st, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Grant,

thanks for your comment. I reread this article again for the 4th time after your comment, and I have come to a conclusion. I think that by not specifically citing some examples of sites that have been annoying me, my argument has become pretty ambiguous. I wanted to put a positive spin on this article, but I see that all it did was create a less than optimal outcome.

What I meant by “vocal” was galleries of free themes and other sites that push their “minimal” designs as good examples. I hope that this clarifies my argument somewhat, and you can see where I am coming from.
Tony
March 31st, 2008 at 10:58 pm

Indeed, not one of your best posts to date, though it wont keep me from frequenting your blog. Your analysis is correct. Basing your arguments on examples that aren’t there doesn’t make good practice. Looking forward to your next post.
Joram Oudenaarde
April 1st, 2008 at 12:26 am

Wether or not the article itself isn’t entirely correct, you’re definately hitting the nail on the whole minimalism-trend.

A lot of people/designers/designwannabe’s think that if you have lots of whitespace you have a “good” minimalistic design. What they fail to see is that minimalistic design is one of the more difficult (if not thé most difficult) to accomplish. They forget that if you leave unneeded elements out of the design, you’re putting the emphasis on the content that matters… which in turn makes every little mistake all the more apparent. Objects that aren’t 100% well aligned or proper placed will be noticed in an instant, so everything you do has to be done 100% right. With minimalism there’s even less room for error.

http://www.shauninman.com is in my opinion one of the best examples on a good minimalistic design. Everything’s just right, regardless on wether or not people like the design. Technically and optically everything is placed with a reason and is simply put on the right spot
liam
April 1st, 2008 at 3:39 am

Well, I enjoyed it anyway. & Your opinion is as valid as anybodies, so why people are telling you what you should and shouldn’t write I don’t know.

I wouldn’t change a thing.
tripdragon
April 1st, 2008 at 5:20 am

Awe, is someone bitter. Do you need a lollipop
Zinni
April 1st, 2008 at 6:19 am

Joram,

I agree with everything you said. Unfortunately (for me) you have stated it far clearer than I did. I still believe that this is a valid point and thank you for summing it up so well. Once again, thanks for commenting.
David Sutoyo
April 1st, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Thanks for including my site! I’m honored

Just want to add that I applaud the decision not to use “bad” sites as examples. Even though I think it might have been quite educational, it doesn’t score high in the goodwill department
ditto
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:12 am

Its true. Some people just cant make complicated designs that look good - so they think theyll go minimal. Theyre content but we notice. Yes we notice - and it takes someone with years of accumulated silent bitterness to point it out
Brad C
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:17 am

I have no real comments about the post itself, just a general comment about blogging in relation to some of the comments above. It’s pretty hard to think of something new to write everyday, especially since it’s clear that this blogs author has a full time job and plenty of other things he could be doing. I think we should take a step back and appreciate how many good articles Anthony has written on a consistent basis here. It’s easier to write a negative post so I think it’s pretty cool that he turned it into a positive article instead and took the time to find some good examples for us all.
Joram Oudenaarde
April 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 am

Well said Brad C

If you don’t like the blog don’t read it… personally I enjoy reading these kind of articles. You can never have enough articles that explain the “rules” (guidelines, tips or whatever you want to call them), because for the so-called “designers” out there, they can actually help them understand what they’re doing wrong. Or rather, what they’re failing to see.

In the past 12-or-so months there have been a lot of new design/inspiration blogs, such as Smashing Magazine (a mastodont), or the smaller but still very nice inspiredology.com… all of them have their share of tips, resources or other kinds of articles.

All of these articles have one thing in common; they help others by either inspiring them, giving them the necessary recourses, or by helping them understand the way some things work (like this article on minimalism for example). I absolutely love reading stuff like this or simply be amazed by the good stuff some people make. And I bet for “wannabe” designers it can be an amazing asset, because they might see what they’re missing, or maybe even help them on their way of being a better designer. In the end it will benefit us all

p.s.: Zini, sorry about that, hehe. I didn’t mean to
Zinni
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 pm

Wow solid comment again Joram… I am glad that you comment here!

One thing I think that the site you mention (other than mine of course) offer is the ability to continually learn new things, or revisit past knowledge in a contemporary manner. As designers we should never stop questioning both design and the world in general. The more knowledgeable a person is, typically the better designer they are as well.