GordonGR04

Information Design ~ Day 5 We are covering our 4th reading assignment that gives insight into the Narratives of Time and Space.

The author, Tufte, doesn’t mess around when he introduces us to the workaday reality of three-space and time. He brings in the heavy hitter – Galileo Galilei! Not a bad way to start a lesson… after all, Galileo does bring along a fair amount of credibility. But even with charts and graphs… who’d a thunk it?

Back in 1610, Galileo while using his new invention, the telescope, discovered starlets hanging around Jupiter. He noted their postion and drew a sketch to document them. He continued this nightly observance keeping a detailed diary of his findings. Galileo’s almost inherent use of the principles of Information Design is inspiring. His notes and finding – so eloquently drawn out, were the building blocks for a deeper understand of our planetary system. Tufte’s fine example in Galileo goes on through the construction of Jovilabes, a nomogram-like computation device for recounting Jupiter’s four satellite orbits. This incredible example of envisioning information was then quickly juxtaposed by the sample of the poorly designed “pocket” schedule of the New York – New Haven Timetable, Metro – north Commuter Railroad.

I’m sad to say that this little collateral piece of “traveler’s aide” was designed in 1983. In the words of Tufte “some tables are better than others…” an understatement to say the least. This bureaucratic beauty was printed by the millions and served to confuse the traveling masses for years. Now it’s easy to play armchair quarterback and point out the flaws after the fact. This piece however, is just a plain example of groupthink gone groupstink.

In the reading, we did get to see other examples of Information Design where large amounts of data and imagery were successfully united. These pieces conveyed both time and spatial experience in a flatland format. I particularly liked the design of the brochure for the Czechoslovakia Air Transport Company – flight times circa 1933.

In class we critiqued our work-in-process timeline designs. We also analyzed several other charts. I think the fact that we are designing our own charts – early on in the course, quickly immerses us in the deluge of details that one must successfully communicate in the “simple” form of a chart or graph. The key lesson for the day was to understand, recognize, and then execute the balance between “pretty” and the importance of information. The first example, “Fallout”, the information would have been more accessible had the designer incorporated layers of hierarchy. The overall information – critical to the survival of Honey and Wild Bees is downplayed by the use of soft and friendly pastel colors. A more jarring palette would underscore the impending severity of the issue and possibly elicit an emotional investment in both the document and issue. The next example “Oprahland” was a klutzy concept lost in cuteness. The game metaphor used by this designer could have possibly worked. The lack of information familiarity and the amount of data disconnects were just too much for this format. Even the mighty Oprah with her mug scattered all over the piece couldn’t save this bad boy. And lastly, the chart “The Evolution of College Going-gear” showed us - ever so clearly - what not to do. Cute, meaningless graphics along with a weak association to the topic makes for the de-evolution design of a College Gear-going chart.