[Information Design] Interactive vs Infographics
Most people have seen an infographic in their life - a picture meant to convey information. For example, this infographic from the National Alliance for Mental Illness about Mental Health parity:
There are also interactive graphics, which are a kind of infographics that can be, well, interacted with - such as the (incomplete) map I created for author blog of the fantasy world found in my books:
I would not say one is better than or easier to understand than the other inherently, though it is certainly important to understand when to use each. Both require organizational skills and some understanding of aesthetics, if not specifically artistic talent (though the latter certainly helps).
Traditional infographics are better when used for a specific topic which can be easily digested in one sitting. Too much disparate information spread across too many topics can just make an infographic feel cluttered and distracting, which fails to accomplish the goal of disseminating information clearly.
On the other hand, interactive graphics can be a way to culminate a large amount of data into something more visually appealing with less clutter - for example, my map allows me to link to more information about specific countries without having the information distracting from the map itself.
Another example of how interactivity can be used is the InfoDesignResource site, which - along the same principle I outlined above - breaks a large amount of information down into smaller sections, making it easier to focus on one section at a time.
Meirelles, I. (2005 August) Information Design Resource. Retrieved from http://isabelmeirelles.com/infoDesignResource/
There are also interactive graphics, which are a kind of infographics that can be, well, interacted with - such as the (incomplete) map I created for author blog of the fantasy world found in my books:
I would not say one is better than or easier to understand than the other inherently, though it is certainly important to understand when to use each. Both require organizational skills and some understanding of aesthetics, if not specifically artistic talent (though the latter certainly helps).
Traditional infographics are better when used for a specific topic which can be easily digested in one sitting. Too much disparate information spread across too many topics can just make an infographic feel cluttered and distracting, which fails to accomplish the goal of disseminating information clearly.
On the other hand, interactive graphics can be a way to culminate a large amount of data into something more visually appealing with less clutter - for example, my map allows me to link to more information about specific countries without having the information distracting from the map itself.
Another example of how interactivity can be used is the InfoDesignResource site, which - along the same principle I outlined above - breaks a large amount of information down into smaller sections, making it easier to focus on one section at a time.
Meirelles, I. (2005 August) Information Design Resource. Retrieved from http://isabelmeirelles.com/infoDesignResource/
Comments
Post a Comment