So /g/, what's next after flat design?

I hope nothing.

>>45405469
post-minimalism then skeuomorphism will make a comeback.

I think our civilization is at a creative limit, amongst other things. Expect a global societal collapse sometime within this century.

Black and white flat design.

>>45405469
it's called Material Design

>>45405603
Yeah, that's not catching on.

photorealistic

>>45405469
Imho hyperrealism. Once the screens and renderers become even better they will show it making the UI real life looking, like it belongs to the real world. Thats how trends work, they go from one extreme to another. See how they introduced gradients and transparency 10 years ago?

>>45405469
That new google design thing.
I hate it so much that I deleted gapps from my android.
Jelly Bean style is the best.

>>45405583
Agreed.

>>45405469
I hope it is holograms

>>45406002
the future is now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNnWXbuvAA8

>>45406044
>hologram

Clearly, simply a flat screen playing a video. Have I wandered off to a cringe thread?

>>45405469

Is flat design putting many designers out of work?

It just seems so easy to do.

>>45406154
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxeLapeNwy0

clearly its some sort of projection from the monolith thng behind it

>>45405583
More than likely we'll vary between forms of minimalism for a while, eventually we'll probably end up with some kind of geometric design and pseudo monochrome designs.
Flat as an umbrella term is here for a long time

>>45406192
No. A good designer would probably be setting his own trends and not following what's 'hot'. Remember guys, all these cool things we think are cool have been implemented and enjoyed by people before us. Unless someone steps up and integrates computing interface with the human brain, then we are still as slow (if not slower) than our thoughts.

>>45406313

So are most designers being put out of work?

pictures of yourself with real items as icons.

File: oblivion02.jpg (55KB, 640x359px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x359px

When will we go through the "futuristic" UI phase?

Gnome3. I'm not kidding. Instead of complete flatness they use the exact amount of depth illusion (bevels, gradients) necessary to effectively indicate information hierarchy and interaction (what's clickable; buttons and other widgets), both, for the light and the dark theme variations (whom each serve it's purpose). One of the reason why I, as a fa/gd/ick, appreciate that project.

File: oblivion_1080p_rip_137_905.jpg (164KB, 905x509px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 905x509px

>>45406407

>>45406375

What I mean is, it seems like logos and icons required a good deal of creativity and effort.

Flat design seems to have simplified the process because many things like shadows, gloss, or detail in general are no longer taken into consideration.

>>45405610
>>45405643

Why? I like it.

>>45406434
It doesn't mean that everyone has to do it.

>>45406407
Because normalfags certainly have to care about that huge amount of information.

File: oblivion-2013-oblivion-movie-still-2650552-2048x852.jpg (245KB, 2048x852px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 2048x852px

>>45406425
table sized tablets when?

>>45406375
Good designers will always be working. So yes, most designers will put themselves out.

>>45406407
>>45406425
>>45406482
"Moon" was a really good movie, indeed!

>>45406482
Pretty sure Microsoft tried that already.

>>45406503
>Good designers will always be working. So yes, most designers will put themselves out.

But is this happening now? Have you ever heard of anyone being called in for just an hour?

>>45406522
Microsoft "invented" tablets like 20 years ago but it didn't catch on until relatively recently. I feel like tabletop PCs will be the same way.

File: 1024px-Bell_System_hires_1969_logo_blue.svg.png (54KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1024x1024px

>>45406192
>>45406430
This is a good logo. It was designed in 1969.

>>45405627
>>45405620
I hope so, I've been waiting for those for years.

>>45406430
yeah but they're so hit and miss. colors and line still account for your visual elements in UIs.

File: linux-logo.jpg (13KB, 400x297px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 400x297px

>>45406616
This is (imo) a terrible logo. It was probably designed somewhere in the 2000s. It has all these nice gradients and a shiny 3d look, but it's awful.

Simple designs don't mean simple work. There might have been hundreds of revisions before settling on exactly the right look. The mark of a master is to make difficult things look effortless.

Good ol' ascii art

File: pepsi_logo_golden_ratio.png (29KB, 610x420px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 610x420px

>that fucking awful kerning on OP
This is why no trend will put good designers out of work

A pro company is not going to put up with lacklustre work like that. When you look at what goes into a properly designed logo and branding, you'll see it's not so simple

>>45406647
It's the CrystalXP Tux. Personally I loved it.

File: ui3.png (147KB, 831x1851px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 831x1851px

UIs are going to get so dumbed down they're going to eliminate typography altogether, everything is going to be represented by a rough shape drawn in MS paint

Black and white.

>>45406482
We already have that. MS' first product they called the 'Surface' was a touchscreen table/PC. Also if you search for 'touchscreen table' you'll find all sorts of neat stuff

>>45406616
>>45406626

So are designers getting less hours now?

there will be no design, everything will be text based and it will finally be the year of the linux desktop

oppai design

>>45406407

Jolla is already there

>>45406797
my nihongo is a little bit rusty, does that mean titties?

>>45405469
Construction paper textures.

>>45406784
Dream of the world in which services like facebook would provide their own, open source cli clients and normalfags would be using them.

>>45406688
2014 is so superior. All that visual clutter reduced, looks so good
I've always hated Windows UI for having such ugly menus, their gay gradients and attempts at depth are pathetic and horrible

>>45406430
"Flat design" has forever existed in print and other forms of visual design. It's the embodiment of clarity with it's sharp contrast between shapes. Windows Vista / KDE / OSX like shiny bubbly crap going on for a decade was a trend itself in the digital realm where designers often drew shiny, reality imitating crap just because they could, because the digital medium let them do it, because it looked 'cool', not because it was really necessary. It's neat craftsmanship, in certain amount it can be used in a very good way as I said here >>45406411 , but the lack of such decoration won't put good designers out of the work, because it has never been a fundamental need. Good designers are busy with more important, content oriented considerations. And this complete visual flatness in nowadays projects is also a phase that will go, because it's not always good for indicating which elements are interactive and which aren't.

File: 1404666532876.png (152KB, 559x556px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 559x556px

>>45406688
No. The whole 3D/2D thing is a cycle. Just like the straight/rounded cycle (e.g. fonts and cars), it will continue forever.

I'm calling 3D isomorphic with slowly moving parts and gentle physics in response to input/scrolling. Even though depth will be an important aspect, people will still call it "flat" design.

Material Design will die a slow, saturated death. Hipster designers don't understand that Paper is intended to be just one facet of the idea. I think that this is good because users will hopefully get bored of Google's look and start using other services which have better designers that don't need to conform to the look and feel of all the applications in a massive suite.

File: google+search+tux.png (735KB, 1315x570px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 1315x570px

>>45406647
tux is adorable what're you talking about

File: 11-3-MarcusFigure6.jpg (56KB, 610x381px)

56KB, 610x381px

>>45406688
UI 2505

>>45406836

Yeah, so is this affecting most designers?

No one is doubting that good designers are needed.

What's wrong with material design?

Reading the spec and its beautiful...

four dimensional

hypercubes for days

>>45405469

That's not even an example of flat design, since it still tries to communicate depth. That's just semi-minimalist design and pastel colours

>>45406192
>equating design with drawing shapes in illustrator
oh /g/

>>45406688
I prefer 2010, easier and quicker to read the information.

>>45407005
It isn't.

It may affect a small minority of designers / illustrators who have been exclusively making money out of crafting complex interface icon sets, but even those will figure out how to apply their extensive digital graphics creation skills on new visual styles and other kinds of design / illustration work.

>>45405627
>Once the screens and renderers become even better they will show it making the UI real life looking, like it belongs to the real world

Won't happen, because a) rendering time, b) uncanny valley.

People that harp on about flat design don't understand flat design. It's not just a visual style, it's a way of removing superfluous metaphor from the actual UI patterns. Photorealism and its associated implementations are often less efficient.

>>45406192
>It just seems so easy to do

It's not. It's probably harder to do 'good' flat design than what came before it, since flat design is all about subtlety. You can't murder any mistakes by applying millions of filters and gloss in Photoshop.

>>45407329
"A true master does only what is necessary to win"

>>45406778
What? Depends on what they're designing.

>>45406407
Four years ago

File: as.jpg (100KB, 849x668px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 849x668px

>>45405583
>Minimalism and babby flatshit is the pinnacle of human design
I looked and I looked, but I simply couldn't find a reaction image that properly represents how I feel about what I just read. This'll have to do.

>>45406232
Not impressive until they can do that without the screen.

>>45406411
That's effectively what material design tries to accomplish.

>>45406411
Best part of gnome3 was gnome shell in my opinion.

File: share.png (1KB, 72x85px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 72x85px

>>45406430

They still do take a lot of effort. For example, if you were to communicate sharing with something pictorial, you might have a picture of someone actually handing over a document. It takes a lot of thought to create an icon that is distinctive and actually iconographic, where meaning is clear from the onset without being completely pictorial.

Shadows and gloss were very easy things to implement in reality. Stark design means that all the visible details need to be perfect.

"Flat design" as a way of removing non-necessary elements will be here to stay. Subtle, tasteful design is here to stay, and really all the "4D" icons from the mid-late 2000s were the exception compared with the fifty years preceding them.

What will change is all these horrible colour schemes. Yosemite would look nicer without the ELECTRIC BLUE in the OS. Lollipop would look nicer with a refined palette too. Windows 8 likewise.

>>45405469
Floating UI elements. Especially when devs figure out good input for AR and VR.

Also, the only thing things that would look good for floating UI are flat icons (material design) and fully 3D objects. Any previous icon standard would look retarded on something other than a 2D flat screen.

>>45407520
Why did they use the ubuntu logo for share?

>>45407537

We'll adjust for VR if/when (and I'd say it's more a case of if right now) it takes off. I'm personally yet to see anything compelling about it.

>>45407553
Ha. It's subtly different

>>45405583
>>45407387

>implying it's not happening already

>>45406673
thank you

seriously has anyone in this thread ever taken a design course
ex industrial design major reporting

File: good logo design.jpg (55KB, 736x515px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 736x515px

>>45407823

Physicist, though I like to think I've got more of an eye for design for most. Not that that's saying much - look at the state of the GUI frontends for Cern's ROOT framework

>>45407520
Is that the icon for circle-jerking?

Material design

Low-poly design.