/ot/ - Off-topic

I've always regarded minimalism as a `safe' style for designers who don't have the confidence or talent to create something more interesting.

That said, I am a great admirer of simplicity and constructions built from a limited set of basic elements. I read a blog a while ago in which the author said he preferred to call himself a maximalist because he sought to get the very most of out the limited equipment he had. I thought that was a nice description of the difference between simplicity and minimalism. One is striving to live with only what you need, the other is painting over the details and pretending they don't exist.

>>18851
I get what you mean. Simplicity is where beauty comes from. Is it any wonder that the more wrinkles and creases and small details on somebody's face, the uglier they are? When you look at your smooth reflection in the window on a sunny day where little things get lost in translation, it's as if you're looking at your ideal self. Part of why minimalism bothers me is what it represents culturally. Death to the old and genuine, and in with the new, contrived, and risk-free. It's such a toxic, forced, repressive change to me. Just look at what they did to YouTube.

I’ve been yearning for minimalism to be applied to everyday things in a more standard way for years, and we’re finally having that after only seeing it in futuristic games, movies and other media. But as with every style, it can be applied wrong. I believe it puts more thought and pressure on the function and intent of a design rather than the aesthetic and when used well it feels right, as if it can both give enough space to the mind and eyes, while still keeping them occupied and satiated.

For example, when you have to place furniture in a small room, I’ve seen big improvements when people took out the somewhat overbearing 80’ and 90’ furniture out and placed instead minimalistic ones like IKEA and the likes. To a small place this can make a big difference, it makes the place seem like it has more room than it actually does, more light, more inviting because the atmosphere isn’t as heavy as before. If feng shui is real, minimalism does help a lot.
But it must be well done, it is not just taking things out and using the bare minimum that you can. If you try to work with minimalism this way then you have what you complained about. Things like windows 10's blue screen is this, it forgot its intent in favor of aesthetic. Minimalism isn’t simple because of the look, it’s because of the composition. If you confuse these two then you have a lazy looking design that doesn’t do what was supposed to do.
Sadly, a lot of stuff that utilizes minimalism chose it because it looks easy and simple, but it isn’t supposed to be used this way, its intent was to put more thought on how things work with each other, how each form, texture, colour can affect the composition. And when you try to use minimalism as a simple and easy design, if it ends up looking bad, you don’t have any of the eye-catching details that other styles do to pull the mind away from the ugly composition.

Minimalistic work is supposed to look easy but have a lot of complex ideas behind it. If you make it because it’s easy, then it looks empty and lazy because it lacks that complexity.
A software design example I can think of is Microsoft word 2016’s look. It looks so much cleaner and less tiring to use, the focus is all on the area you’re writing on, and the tools’ header seems less invasive and build around being more functional than pretty. But in aesthetic is a bit lackluster. It’s missing something, either in its shapes or a texture.

Youtube has worst problems than its design. It has been dysfunctional for years. Windows’ blue screen was already minimalistic, a simple blue screen building focus to an enormous text wall written with a basic dull font. They didn’t need to alter it. You don’t simplify with minimalism, you’re supposed to use it to build focus for complexity. If you simplify it you take away its essence, what its intent was.
Or maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about. Every person has a different understanding of what art is and what it is supposed to do. This is just my opinion.

Anyway, you only need to wait some years OP, and the messy aesthetic will be back. It is always like that, each simplistic art phase is followed by a complex one, and afterwards the complex art phase is overthrown and the simplistic erupts again. I think the last simple art phase was during the 50’ to 70’, I’m not exactly sure.

Sorry if it’s hard to understand me, English is not my first language and I drank a cider before writing.

>>18853
I've personally been dreading it. I'd probably kill myself if I had to stay on one of those futuistic ships. Interior design is an integral part of life. I've always preferred my grandmother's tiny brooklyn apartment to any hotel room. Harmoniy and being not over-crowded is great, but individual objects should have intricacies to them. A small table can be better, but why not get something small and intricately carved? Why not put a nice, impressionistic painting on the wall rather than some abstract shit?
I get that less is more, but joy comes from fullness. Could you point me to some good examples of minimalism?

I totally agree with you, if we're talking about minimalism as in modern mostly-corporate aesthetics, but there have been minimalist movements that are creative and interesting.

>>18852
>Is it any wonder that the more wrinkles and creases and small details on somebody's face, the uglier they are?
I think a wrinkled old man is far more beutiful than some smooth model slathered in makeup, because his face is tells the story of his life. Beauty is too often confused with sexuallity, I think.

>>18854
>Why not put a nice, impressionistic painting on the wall rather than some abstract shit?
But abstract art is where you get some of the most visually interesting pieces.

>>18860
I'll admit to being materialistic. I haven't yet seen any instance of minimalism that appealed to me. Motivations behind making a piece or design simply don't matter to me. I wont think something is worse only because it was produced by a cooperation, even if they do make worse stuff more often. Debating ideas of beauty is pointless. There's appeal in an old man's face, but the word beauty already has certain connotations to it that an old man does not fit in. Trying to change the meaning or usage of a word to fit your preferences isn't something I like to do. Beauty means ornate and healthy and in prime condition. I care less about how, "visually interesting", something is and more about how good something looks. I can appreciate depth in meaning sure, but I prioritize visual appeal over all else. A certain degree of realism makes art capable of having meaning if you ask me. Surrealism has the most interesting visual ideas.

I rather like certain types of minimalism. Not in the corporate, airbnb type lifeless design, but instead in that there is less to worry about. Certain minimalist aesthetics help my mind feel less cluttered, and enable me to live life in a way that is more focused. I think a lot of minimalism is very contrived and uninteresting. However, minimalism can be calculated and intricate and have a positive effect. Consider traditional Japanese housing: I feel it forces one to focus more on life itself. This isn't Lain, but I know a lot of the same users intersect here. Isn't GNU/Linux ricing (a weird example) an example of minimalism and focus? You can have minimalist aesthetics that facilitate feng shui that present as much information as you want. It lies in how that information is presented.

>>18863
>Isn't GNU/Linux ricing (a weird example) an example of minimalism and focus?
I guess arranging girls and terminal emulators is kind of like zen gardening.

>>18852
>Just look at what they did to YouTube.
why are you only mentioning youtube? there are plenty more examples of what minimalist design has done. also, thoughts on circle profile pics? it's a common theme going with the minimalist style, and it's only going to expand

>>18865
>thoughts on circle profile pics?
Really reeks of faggotry. Square is objectively superior to circle in displaying images and space, and if someone wants to use a for-circle profile image, they can always just go on paint and draw a circle border around it. Options matter.

>>18866
Yeah, nobody cares about options anymore. It's all about forcing their shitty aesthetic down people's throat. That really reflects on their entire mentality if you ask me. The first thing that put me off from vid.me wase the circle profiles. When youtube rolled out their newest, superfluous design change, I actually used adblock to neuter the site just to make it less of an eye sore. The first thing I got rid of was the new subscribe button. I only mentioned that one example because I use it the most.
>>18863
Again, I can't really think of any positive examples. Traditional Japanese interior design is simplistic and purposefully avoids decadence and unnecessary complications, but it still has a unique style and feel to it that goes beyond that. Japanese houses look quaint and cozy to me. It looks like home, unlike what describes itself as minimalist, which does not go beyond being as plain as possible. Really it's apples and oranges. Japanese houses having a lot of color in them is the most obvious difference. Soothing beige and vibrant orange and brown.

Minimalism is fine

>>18850
You are describing a different type of "minimalism" than (what I consider to be) actual minimalism.
Taking the bluescreen as example: it isn't "minimal", it includes useless graphics like the smiley and, as you noted, the utterly unhelpful text.
Compare with the other bluescreen: it includes some actual instructions and technical information to help troubleshooting. It also doesn't try to be fancy, it's just plain monospaced text on a plain blue background.

Same with modern UIs: they're not actually "minimal", they're way more complex than old-style UIs and includes lots of useless animations. It's especially apparent with many websites includes tons of JS garbage when just writing some HTML manually (or using pandoc to convert Markdown or whatever) is plenty for presenting static information.

Another related thing that bothers me is "simplicity", like how GUIs, "visual programming" or whatever is supposedly better than plain text shells/editors when the actual issue is that people fail to grasp how their tools function. No amount of bandaid can fix lack of understanding.

It bothers me how terms are applied to things that are anything but what the term describes. It makes it hard to communicate. I'm digressing though.