Skeuomorphic Design 2.0?

One of my friends sent me this Star Trek trailer because he knew I would love the ‘analog’ feel of it.

I feel like we are seeing an unexpected return to skeuomorphic design but in the design process itself. I’m seeing so many young designer’s work where they are digitally imitating canson renders and roughness. I think because the digital tools seem to make things look so ‘finished’ so early, and this may be a visual cue to non designers that ‘this isn’t done yet’?

Maybe it’s just a case of where the technology is. It took time, expensive tools and a light touch to get many of those effects to look good before. Now, phones have some great filters that are nearly a button push away.

You are right, it has become a lot easier… but a LOT of effort went into making it easier to turn something digital into something more analog, and somebody paid for that development. Does this hint at a desire on the part of people for things that have more of human touch feel about them (feel because it is faux). Simultaneously, UIs and screen based device design has moved in the opposite direction to more austere and reserved. Maybe that is the right thing so they can be blank vessels for the content?

Video is busted.

Not sure about a trend towards analog or not, but I can just say for the record that I’m really sick of seeing “fake” analog sketches on instagram. Digital sketch or rendering, photoshopped onto a sketchbook with markers and pens strewn about? There is no reason for it and just looks bad.

Markers, Proceate apps, whatever are all just tool. No need to pretend what tool you used. I have no issue with digital rendering that look painterly of have a similar feel as analog markers. Just don’t fake the output or process.

If you fake the process, why should I believe you even did the sketch in the first place?


That all being said, I personally am in love with more hand crafted work. Sign painter script and gold leafing, (real) brush pen lettering. Hand made pottery… but that’s maybe just me.


Or its a desire to convey a ‘hand-crafted, artisanal, bespoke, deeply personal’ feeling to a mass-produced object.

Or its a desire to convey a ‘hand-crafted, artisanal, bespoke, deeply personal’ feeling to a mass-produced object.[/quote]

hmmm, put that in your latte and steam it :laughing:

It’s common in the UK from Loughborough students in particular but in reality the vast majority of people interviewing in this country will never be able to tell the difference.

I see students from all over doing the fake analog sketch thing. Even a few “professionals”. It’s terrible.

I have no problems with an analog sketch photographed/scanned and then added to digitally in PS or Procreate or something, BTW. But I’ve even seen a key shot type 3D render photoshopped onto an open sketchbook with markers trying to make it look like some amazing hand rendering!

I can only hope that the people doing this have no actual idea what markers…


First, I’m old. I’ve actually lived through the transition from analog to digital – starting long, long before there was even the thought of digital. In crossing over to digital, clients wanted more and more to see photoreal presentations, of course we were eager to show off new technical tools, but the problem quickly became one of client buy-in. They felt they were looking at finished products, too late for input so instead of participating, buying-in, they felt only left with a yes/no or like/dislike decision. Many times stopping really good concepts before getting started.

Process is important – I’ve thought about this since we started using 3D Studio in the early 90’s. It’s an ongoing dilemma. No answer, after all these years, other than continually educating and explaining process to clients to keep them engaged.

I know, a little tangental – forgive me. :wink: