<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Objectifying The Subjective</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/</link>
	<description>Smart, nimble web design by Matt Brown and Tiffani Jones Brown.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 02:11:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith</title>
		<link>http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/comment-page-1/#comment-685</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/?p=1910#comment-685</guid>
		<description>Oh, I totally agree with you about documents, deliverables and diminishing returns. In an idea process you&#039;d have no need of them. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I totally agree with you about documents, deliverables and diminishing returns. In an idea process you&#8217;d have no need of them. <img src='http://thingsthatarebrown.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Brown</title>
		<link>http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/comment-page-1/#comment-684</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:01:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/?p=1910#comment-684</guid>
		<description>@Keith — Great point.  There&#039;s definitely a point at which you can&#039;t continue to &quot;hide behind process&quot; and have to address the subjective tastes of your client.  Just a few styleboards is usually all it takes.
Typically, we try not to spend all that much producing these documents because they have rapidly diminishing returns — they start a good conversation, but don&#039;t solve the problem.  Like most things with design, there&#039;s never a silver bullet :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Keith — Great point.  There&#8217;s definitely a point at which you can&#8217;t continue to &#8220;hide behind process&#8221; and have to address the subjective tastes of your client.  Just a few styleboards is usually all it takes.</p>
<p>Typically, we try not to spend all that much producing these documents because they have rapidly diminishing returns — they start a good conversation, but don&#8217;t solve the problem.  Like most things with design, there&#8217;s never a silver bullet <img src='http://thingsthatarebrown.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiffani Jones Brown</title>
		<link>http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/comment-page-1/#comment-683</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiffani Jones Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/?p=1910#comment-683</guid>
		<description>Keith: Yep. The idea that subjectivity might be insight, disguised—couldn&#039;t have said it better. It&#039;s like a good conversation—you have to let it proceed at least a little bit organically and naturally, or else it will feel rigid.
The tools Matt&#039;s been using lately help lend some structure to the chaos of design conversations, but they also seem to produce better discussions, by getting &quot;subjectivity&quot; out in the open.
Thanks for your thoughts!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keith: Yep. The idea that subjectivity might be insight, disguised—couldn&#8217;t have said it better. It&#8217;s like a good conversation—you have to let it proceed at least a little bit organically and naturally, or else it will feel rigid. </p>
<p>The tools Matt&#8217;s been using lately help lend some structure to the chaos of design conversations, but they also seem to produce better discussions, by getting &#8220;subjectivity&#8221; out in the open.</p>
<p>Thanks for your thoughts!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith</title>
		<link>http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/2010/07/objectifying-the-subjective/comment-page-1/#comment-682</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:11:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thingsthatarebrown.com/blog/?p=1910#comment-682</guid>
		<description>I love the way Matt uses those styleboards and think things like that are a great way to add some context to subjectivity.  And lets face it - you&#039;ll never, ever, ever, EVER be able to completely remove subjectivity from the process of design.  I don&#039;t care how much data you&#039;ve got.
And, IMHO, I don&#039;t think you should.  Sometimes what we think of as subjectivity is actually insight.
As much as we make fun of terms like &quot;make it pop&quot; and &quot;crunchy&quot; some times they really do make sense.  Most experienced designers will either understand what is meant by those comment or have the sense to clarify.  The real key here, as you talk about, is doing the research, adding some context and understanding your goals.  When you have that and you&#039;re client or co-worker or whomever says &quot;make it pop a bit more&quot; you will most likely know what they&#039;re referring to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the way Matt uses those styleboards and think things like that are a great way to add some context to subjectivity.  And lets face it &#8211; you&#8217;ll never, ever, ever, EVER be able to completely remove subjectivity from the process of design.  I don&#8217;t care how much data you&#8217;ve got.</p>
<p>And, IMHO, I don&#8217;t think you should.  Sometimes what we think of as subjectivity is actually insight.</p>
<p>As much as we make fun of terms like &#8220;make it pop&#8221; and &#8220;crunchy&#8221; some times they really do make sense.  Most experienced designers will either understand what is meant by those comment or have the sense to clarify.  The real key here, as you talk about, is doing the research, adding some context and understanding your goals.  When you have that and you&#8217;re client or co-worker or whomever says &#8220;make it pop a bit more&#8221; you will most likely know what they&#8217;re referring to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

