Are Image Reflections A Cliché?
Posted Thursday March 6, 2008
Or, when is a cliché, not cliché?
I’m working on project where we will be displaying images. And I’m probably going to recommend adding a reflection to the images:
Yes, the played-out, trite design aesthetic: the reflection. Made popular by Apple and (in their wake) every other ‘Web 2.0’ styled site . So popular in fact that there are a variety of different scripts written to make it effortless to add a reflection.
So, being aware that this is not a unique visual signature, and that it seems to have peaked as far as visual trends go, why am I recommending we add reflections to our images? Because it’s natural.
Shadows, reflections, translucent surfaces— we interact with these in the real world, and there are very real cognitive (and emotional) associations with these visual elements. Aside from attractiveness, a reflection is associated with clean surfaces and high style. Long before Apple, most luxury product shots for the last 30 years have included reflections. Reflections communicate class. Also, to have a reflection (of the variety we see today) implies that the object is standing up. If these images were laying down, on a table surface for example, we’d invoke a shadow— another cliché, right?. But they’re standing up, which means reflection (if the surface is at all reflective). Again, these interfaces mimic natural design patterns, and carry with them the same real world functional qualities. I might argue that the concept of affordance, while typically associated with more directly actionable things (like buttons), would also apply to this ‘styling’ decision, given my views on how aesthetics— for information or style— contribute to function.
In this sense, I don’t see the use of a reflection as a trend, but rather a small part of a steady, longer-term progression in interface design. Albeit one that could stand to be refined and served up in a variety of ways— different reflections for different surfaces, for example.
But, consider this: Can a visual element become so trite that the ‘Ugh, here we go again’ response overrides our natural, biological response? Can we reach a point where it is ‘classier’ to not invoke a reflection or glossy surface? I start to think perhaps so, that we can, through overuse, create a learned response that overrides our natural response.
And then I waffle on that position.
Spending just a few minutes on a photography site such as Strobist makes me reconsider this position. Skilled photographers use lighting to accomplish a particular effect, or communicate a particular tone. Watch the end of this video on lighting (about 6 minutes in), and consider our natural response to the different lighting setups. Harsh lighting suggests cheap (by learned association) or naturally suggests harsh weather conditions. Dramatic lighting can be a bit… ominous. Diffused lighting creates a smoother, softer effect. And so on. In a century of photography, our natural responses to lighting conditions haven’t changed. Don’t misunderstand me. Personal preferences for or against these treatments have come and gone. But the effect of these lighting treatments has not changed. And as an interaction designer, I am concerned about the effect of visual treatments, not the artistic merits. Aesthetics—whether through emotion or cognition— play a functional role in how easily something works for someone.
Still, a bit torn on this, I looked up the term cliché. While mostly used of phrases, a cliché is just about anything “that has become overly familiar or commonplace.” I think the intent of something being cliché is that it was original at one time. The first time someone used an expression it was quite charming, and it went downhill from there. But can we ever label something that is naturally occurring as cliché? Is the sun rising and setting cliché? Can the effect of a squat, boxy shape making us feel safe become cliché?
Or consider the reverse: Would we ever say making alert messages red or yellow has become passé? Or that we’re sick green meaning ‘go’ or ‘move forward’—let’s change all our green street lights to brown?
Using a trendy typeface, that might qualify as cliché. But how something is lit, meanings we associate with colors, imbued meaning in shadows and reflections— higher order cognitive patterns govern our response to the deign elements, and for that, they can’t be cliché.
Or can they?
The “Web 2.0” design aesthetic gave reflections a bad wrap (just like round corners and big type).
Any design element can be overused, especially when use in “decorative” capacity. However, as mentioned, the reflection can communicate space, surface material, and orientation – things that might elude to how a person might interact with the element.
— Travis Isaacs Mar 6, 02:36 PM
Yes.
Although… there are times when a cliché, used in the right context and delivered well, makes sense.
“Tomorrow is a new day.” on a hallmark card is tired and annoying, but one friend consoling another who says “Tomorrow you have another shot at doing it right,” still technically a little cliché but I wouldn’t roll my eyes at that. It fits the situation.
Likewise, you could argue the grunge look is getting old too with worn fabrics and paint splatters, but used on the right site within an appropriate context… it can work with a good implementation by a good designer.
It’s not the element itself, the technique, the font, the color, etc.; it’s the implementation of it.
— Natalie Jost Mar 6, 02:37 PM
Yes, they are cliche. Yet, it depends on the audience. For us, who design things day in + day out, we’ve probably had enough. For the general public, maybe it might be an okay metaphor, if not over-done.
— Nathan Smith Mar 6, 07:36 PM
Great post as usual! Reflections aren’t cliche. The reflection effect on 40 different websites is. I agree with Natalie on that as long as the use of the effect works with the setting (like luxury goods) then nobody should really care if it is cliche.
— MediaMisfit Mar 7, 06:56 AM
Yes, I think that something can be so oversaturated that it overrides your natural response. However this diminishes over time as overuse dies down and a design technique becomes a tool rather than a trend. In this case, the inappropriate use of reflections has created this problem, but I don’t think it overrides appropriate contextual use.
I also agree with Nathan that what is overused and trite to us as designers may not necessarily be so for a general audience.
— Stephen Thomas Mar 9, 07:36 PM
Yes, they become cliche in the true sense of the definition (“that has become overly familiar or commonplace”).
However, it’s not about the implementation or frequency, rather always about the invoked response. Apple’s heavy use of Aluminum in their product line is cliche (familiar, commonplace). However, that does not change the response that it invokes.
Creating an experience is all about just that, the experience. So if a “cliche” element adds to an overall meaningful/pleasurable/positive/insert positive adjective here… experience then my thought is that there should not be a struggle to decide to use an element if it is “cliche” unless it has a negative impact on the overall experience.
And if there is question as to it having a negative effect on the invoked response then there are probably other issues at hand (“We also need to be seen as ‘innovative’, so yes, the reflection effect will give the impression of our high style, however, we need to communicate our high style thru another method…one that is unique to our brand”).
— John Weiss Mar 16, 09:27 PM
I think your comment about reflections communicating luxury is really important. Imagine if the next redesign of eBay or craigslist included reflections?
— Keith Mar 21, 08:59 AM