Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: sketchboards vs storyboards vs cartooning

Expand Messages
  • imaginethepoet
    I am willing to give this a try. It may be tricky to pull off, but I think it is a good approach. I can see how adapative path would utilize this for web
    Message 1 of 3 , May 6, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I am willing to give this a try. It may be tricky to pull off, but I
      think it is a good approach. I can see how adapative path would utilize
      this for "web designs." This may also work for complex web application
      designs. Of course, in some enviornments you have to be careful because
      what goes up on the wall becomes part of an "unspoken" requirement.

      The design may be flawed but "we" the business users saw it on the wall
      so it must be un-changing. Of course, this could be overcome by simply
      putting a big red disclaimer "Designs expected to change, will change,
      are going to change..."

      I think a combination of sketch, story, and cartoons (where we
      required) should be used. Whatever it takes to convey your idea to the
      client / business owner is what should be used!



      --- In agile-usability@yahoogroups.com, david broschinsky <daveb@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > I have used what I have called story boards, and I know the guys at
      > yahoo have used cartoons to illustrate concepts and stories. The key
      is
      > to make sure that the story that is being told is kept in mind, much
      > like a good cartoon. I have done illustrations with stick figures,
      and
      > with cartoon type characters both with good use. It is actually part
      of
      > the contextual inquiry process as well (or at least very similar to
      > something in the CI process)
      >
      > daveb
      >
    • Markus Weber
      ... I agree that this danger exists. The effect may be reduced, though, because iterating and designing alternatives is an integral part of sketchboarding
      Message 2 of 3 , May 7, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In agile-usability@yahoogroups.com, "imaginethepoet"
        <imaginethepoet@...> wrote:

        > Of course, in some enviornments you have to be careful because
        > what goes up on the wall becomes part of an "unspoken" requirement.
        >
        > The design may be flawed but "we" the business users saw it on the wall
        > so it must be un-changing. Of course, this could be overcome by simply
        > putting a big red disclaimer "Designs expected to change, will change,
        > are going to change..."

        I agree that this danger exists. The effect may be reduced, though,
        because iterating and designing alternatives is an integral part of
        "sketchboarding" and this may prevent stakeholders from getting stuck
        on one single solution too early.

        As Brandon describes in his posting at Adaptive Path, the effect may
        be more severe with early wireframes, especially for designers, whose
        creativity can be constrained too early so that they miss the big picture.

        >
        > I think a combination of sketch, story, and cartoons (where we
        > required) should be used. Whatever it takes to convey your idea to the
        > client / business owner is what should be used!

        And whatever it takes to clarify the fact that ideas may be subject to
        change ;-)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.