If you want a current example of the value of infographics look at this.
Based on structured content, simple visuals and intelligent interaction it delivers its explanation effectively.
An explanation of ranked-choice voting by Kevin Schaul, Star Tribune
It goes back to (my) first principles: Done well, infographic design clarifies, explains, reveals or adds meaning. As well as being clear, relevant, engaging, useful, original, elegant. Lovely.
I saw two things on Twitter recently that got me very excited but that also might sound the death knell of my blog.
Telling Information came about through my desire to rationalise all the things that contribute to the making of good infographics today and give me more of a clue about where the future might be heading. (With hindsight I think that might have been more accurate written as ‘where my future might be heading’.)
These two things I’ve just seen on Twitter crystallise my take on those two questions. So maybe the blog’s job is done?
The making of good infographics
So important that Design + Writing work together. Odd to think they work any other way.
— Ben Terrett (@benterrett) June 11, 2013
This was a tweet from GDS Head of Design Ben Terrett fresh off the back of winning their D&AD Black Pencil for doing exactly this.
It really chimes with what I was getting at by recently changing my Twitter bio to saying something about working to combine words, images and numbers in such a way that they help each other out. It runs the risk of sounding trite but this really is the essence of what I have learnt about how infographics can be best applied in journalism. It is the essence of a good infographic. It is what is lacking in infoguff. I’ve alluded to this previously on the blog in terms of ‘saying what you see’, integrated editorial design and the difference between infographics and illustration.
And I recognise that design and writing working together is a lesson that can be applied much more widely than just journalism. It’s something most people in most workplaces have to grapple with yet bizarrely it’s not a skillset our education system serves very well.
Where the my future might be heading
The second tweet I saw was Bret Victor’s most recent presentation at MIT’s Media Lab which – through my interpretation – takes this idea of design and writing working together and runs with it into the future.
Media for Thinking the Unthinkable: @worrydream's talk @medialab on the design of graphical forms of scientific ideas http://t.co/lj5aMeGRsZ
— MIT Media Lab (@medialab) June 17, 2013
His talk is fascinating, posing the challenge that we need a new way to think about systems. However it’s the demonstrations upon which he builds up his argument that have got me so excited. They provide solutions to problems I have come across as an infographic designer.
I’d recommend watching the full 40mins but if you’re short of time first hop to 3:20 and watch for 2 minutes to see ‘words and pictures very tightly intertwined’ such that you don’t have to construct a picture in your head, you can just see it. *Vigorous head nodding* (Spot the same the principle of using design and words to work together from earlier? That’s integrated design.)
Then hop to 16:45 and listen for another two minutes. He demonstrates five representations of the same system and you can see how they all dance together. In the past I have linked to data that sings and the magic of data. Let’s have it dancing now too. You see the system from so many different angles that you can feel your way around it. *Envious sigh* The importance of getting a feel for data and the value of getting users to interact with the data have long been pet themes of mine.
And if you’re a designer with some mathematical nouse who’s ever daydreamt of a more dynamic version of Illustrator that would allow you to manipulate visualisations once they’d been created rather than laboriously creating one-offs every time (quite possibly due to using AfterEffects’ much more intuitive, scrubbing interface, a blog post I nearly once wrote) watch from 29:30. This might be equally appealing for coders who find themselves working in an indirect, non-visual environment to create visuals? He showcases a tool for creating data driven pictures by direct manipulation of the picture itself. *Excited squeak*
This blog’s job done?
I had to write this blog post to explore why those two tweets got me so excited, and it’s only by doing so that I realise I am close to answering the two questions I posed way back when. This has quite surprised me. In truth I don’t recall writing them down thinking I’d ever find answers, more that they would serve as a point of reference for what I put on the blog. But having just been able to link to so many prior blog posts shows at least I have stuck to them, and done so to the extent that some answers have emerged.
Shit. It worked.
So now I understand why I got excited. It feels like it might all be coming together, pointing in a specific direction. Though hang on, I’m not ready, I’m busy over here doing these other things.
I guess it’s part of my ongoing journey, but what I’ve just had is a glimpse of a new and enticing horizon. Just need to think about building the right ship to get there…
BTW I don’t imagine the blog will be going anywhere. I enjoy a rant. And I find it to be a useful repository.
(And thanks to a wander around Bret’s website there’s one more of my blog posts I want to link to. I think I was too harsh on myself for stumbling at the first hurdle of trying to learn to code. Turns out it wasn’t necessarily my fault.)
As 2013 starts I thought I’d pull together some of the best things that I’ve said, seen, heard and learnt in 2012.
Starting with a definition of infographics I still stand by my first tweet back in March that stemmed from an exercise I created for some students: The INFO gives the GRAPHIC its form. Otherwise the ‘graphic’ is most likely acting as an illustration.
In the same vein – with the goal of creating better infographics – I’ve been encouraging anyone designing them to make sure they can answer yes to two key questions: does the graphic tell a story? and is that the same story that you set out to tell?
What has emerged strongly this year are increasingly sophisticated interactive page designs and delivery (examples under my tower graphic comment further on). However the stark simplicity but instant clarity of a recent collection of animated gifs brilliantly demonstrates the power of visuals to explain things, another fundamental that underpins great graphics regardless of layers of fancy interaction or not. Yes, some are a little clunky, but they’re really effective.
A couple of other clunky-but-effective examples that crossed my radar this year show an application of interaction that I think is underused: interaction with the goal of aiding understanding. Two examples of this ‘learning by having a go’ are here, by SolutionRealm and Tom MacWright. Click on the images to have a go.
As for formats, tower graphics seem to be thankfully on the decline. Either injecting subject matter that suits the format or playing to the storytelling strengths of interactivity a new, much more engaging breed of tower graphic is emerging. Two good examples I’ve seen are featured below, from the BBC and Angela Morelli. Click on them to go to the originals.
I still love motion graphics when they’re done well. This one about the Titanic below – another BBC production – is a good example:
And if you just want one piece of guidance as to the key to motion graphics’ success I’d offer up the BBC’s Jonathan Spencer and Mark Edwards comment at the Information Design Association: The time you have to view a graphic is the key constraint for TV data viz.
Data journalism is all around us (you can find links and resources I recommend here). By way of an example, this was a simple piece of data journalism I did this year during the Olympics – click images to see full graphics – that in contrast to endless medal tables threw up some interesting and original observations, two good reasons to keep encouraging and helping journalists and designers to engage more with data.
A theme that’s close to my heart that came out of the Information Design Association’s conference was design with a cause. Later in the year this was then well illustrated by Spinifex working with the Australian Bureau of Statistics to project interactive data onto buildings to promote the release of Census data. (A continuation of one of my all time favourite pieces of work).
Some good reading will be found on two blogs that have emerged in 2012 about the design decisions behind some of the best work we’ve seen – NYT and NatGeo – and a third, The Why Axis, promises to reveal more of the same too.
After another year is done I still think the New York Times are consistently the best when measured against my criteria: clear, relevant, engaging, useful, original, elegant. And you can enjoy a review of 2012 as illustrated by their graphics.
Happy New Year, see you in 2013!
:)
Look at the six thumbnail sketches down the left hand side: I really like the use of visuals here to draw attention to where the stories are. They serve to guide the reader through an otherwise complicated and confusing landscape.
This bit of work…
By Sons&co for Mahi Foreign Exchange
…reminded me of this bit of work:
Dimensions, a set of experimental prototypes by BERG for the BBC
They’re both great for bringing things that are hard to get your head around to a more familiar level.
This combines the best of all the best things that are happening in the industry at the moment. It’s human, interactive, tells a story, uses motion graphics, has something to share at the end of it.
Of course it also ticks all the boxes that make it good in my book: clear, relevant, engaging, useful, original, elegant.
Inevitably there are bits I’d change, notably around how they deal with some of the numbers, but overall: love it.
(From Australian Bureau of Statistics but no clue as to who designed/developed it).
This title captures so perfectly a current theme in the ever more data driven infographic-land that I haven’t changed it. It’s lifted from a recent blog post from Juice Analytics that caught my eye a couple of weeks back.
Whether a data graphic is more ‘wow’ or more ‘ah-ha’ all depends on your audience and your aim. Like most things it’s a spectrum, and probably worth being honest whereabouts on it you’re aiming for when you set out creating any graphic.
In an editorial world more often than not it’s about achieving an ‘ah-ha’. And this is neatly illustrated by all the different ways I’ve heard this same thing expressed recently. I’ve pulled them together here.
‘What do you want to find out from the data?’ not ‘what can you do with the data?’
Simon Rogers, Guardian Datablog (related post)
Less noise, more story
My observation from this year’s Malofiej infograpic conference
Not ‘what does the data show’ but ‘how did the data get that way’
Joe Ward, sports graphics editor, New York Times (interview)
Start with a concept to pilot you through the data
David McCandless
And since it’s always good to have an example, here’s an interactive graphic from the OECD that conveniently illustrates both concepts. Click on the image to go and explore it.
Designed and created by Moritz Stefaner, Jonas Leist, Timm Kekeritz (for Raureif design consultancy)
Being both ‘wow’ and ‘ah-ha’ clearly isn’t something every graphic needs to do but happens to be something this one manages to do well. Which is impressive given it’s a fine line to tread stylistically too, with ‘wow’ being easier to make engaging and playful and ‘ah-ha’ which can err on the side of dry.
Why I blog. I also freelance. I run workshops too. Who I am (LinkedIn). Some of my work (Flickr). Contact me via contact at lulupinney dot co dot uk.