If the argument is that everything that requires creativity (read: requires independent thoughts and conclusions) is art, then the definition starts to become useless.
UX design is creative, but it isn’t always art, following rigid accessibility guidelines set by governing bodies isn’t art, even if you sometimes need to be creative in your implementation.
A good UX design will guide the user’s eyes to certain places, just like a good painting.
I think we can both agree that graphic design is art, and UX design, in my opinion, is an extension of graphic design, with the requirement that the user be able to navigate and interact with the graphics, not just receive and understand the information it contains.
I don’t think that terminal interface design, even though it requires creativity, is art in this sense, because the creative expression is solely meant to be functional. In a good UX design, the creative expression is not only meant to be functional, but also to evoke certain feelings and convey certain attitudes. Think about how the McDonalds self order kiosks need to both be functional, in that you can find what you want and place your order, but also evoke feelings about each item and convey an attitude of friendliness to the user. This is a different type of UX design than, say, a bank, which needs to convey an attitude of professionalism and evoke a feeling of safety.
I am a software engineer, and when I used to design a user interface, it was always pretty terrible for your average user. For an example, look at PNotify, which I designed over a decade ago. I am learning art (I’ve been painting for a few years), and through that, I think I’ve gotten better at UX design. You can see the progression in SMUI, which I made several years later, around 2018, then in Port87, which I made recently. I’m still not great at UX design, but learning more about the visual arts has definitely helped me improve.
A good UI has nothing to do with art. In fact, art leads to terrible UI.
UX designers are artists. UX design is art.
This is too philosophical to be practical imo.
If the argument is that everything that requires creativity (read: requires independent thoughts and conclusions) is art, then the definition starts to become useless.
UX design is creative, but it isn’t always art, following rigid accessibility guidelines set by governing bodies isn’t art, even if you sometimes need to be creative in your implementation.
A good UX design will guide the user’s eyes to certain places, just like a good painting.
I think we can both agree that graphic design is art, and UX design, in my opinion, is an extension of graphic design, with the requirement that the user be able to navigate and interact with the graphics, not just receive and understand the information it contains.
I don’t think that terminal interface design, even though it requires creativity, is art in this sense, because the creative expression is solely meant to be functional. In a good UX design, the creative expression is not only meant to be functional, but also to evoke certain feelings and convey certain attitudes. Think about how the McDonalds self order kiosks need to both be functional, in that you can find what you want and place your order, but also evoke feelings about each item and convey an attitude of friendliness to the user. This is a different type of UX design than, say, a bank, which needs to convey an attitude of professionalism and evoke a feeling of safety.
I am a software engineer, and when I used to design a user interface, it was always pretty terrible for your average user. For an example, look at PNotify, which I designed over a decade ago. I am learning art (I’ve been painting for a few years), and through that, I think I’ve gotten better at UX design. You can see the progression in SMUI, which I made several years later, around 2018, then in Port87, which I made recently. I’m still not great at UX design, but learning more about the visual arts has definitely helped me improve.
Sometimes terrible art, but still art.