The direction I want to go in is function.
“Isn’t that what design was meant to be in the first place?”, you may think. Yes. However, the visual component is what has come to be most closely linked with the practice itself. Unsurprisingly so—it’s what garners attention by its very nature. There is assuredly nothing wrong with the visual, yet I’ve been noticing a certain kind of fatigue in dealing with predominantly graphic solutions to deeply rooted design problems. I suppose these issues aren’t necessarily solved by creating better customer touchpoints, but by optimizing what guides you to them; the flow of a system, a concoction of patterns, timed influence. In a way, branding — an identity system — is such a guide. So are software interfaces. I want to try my hand at coming up with something slightly innovative in that regard and have been collecting all sorts of ideas, particularly in anticipation of near-future AR/VR possibilities.
Interaction design. UX. I’ve already studied those as a part of previous work. My impression was that these subfields are mostly digital product design, spritzed-up and packaged as en vogue. Behind the plastic wrap, however, is something that I’m going to make an effort to explore in its fundamental depths: user-centrism, data humanism, a sympathetic behavioural approach. Psychometry and ethics are exciting areas I’ve run into while in college that also now find their way into software development, interpreting data and creating personas. Tristan Harris only recently unveiled The Center for Humane Technology’s new agenda for dealing with our God-like technology, which inspired me to look much further into how and what I design. I warmly recommend watching his presentation.
Unfortunately, considering how busy things are at the moment, releasing a new UI/UX project is going to take a while.