hey all I am looking for words that describe form. not sentences. just words.
IF YOU ARE READING THIS NOW i KNOW YOU CAN THINK OF AT LEAST ONE SO THERE BETTER BE AS MANY RESPONSES ARE INQUIRIES!!!
to start:
rounded
square
curvalinear
rectalinear
puffed up
slim
fat
accelerating
etc.
I would like to develop a huge list here. If anyone knows of a website that already does this (concisely) please let me know.
Fast
Anemic
Dynamic
Pinched
Geometric
Amorphic
Faceted
Organic
Structured
Grounded
Tense
You mean like that?
If you ask my previous Marketing Department:
Brain Dead
Brick
Red or Blue
phallic
Unless, of course, it was their idea and then it was:
Sleek
Womanly
Like Butter
…but I digress
Agile
Sleek
plump
rotund
why bother ?
as it’s been said before:
1 drawing = 1000 words
yes one drawing is worth a thousand words and all of those words can be different. form is a visual language. many people don’t speak the language and there are many different interpretations and understanding of that language with many different cultural expectations. command of interpretation hinges on a designers command of the language that it is translated into. developing a vocabulary to describe your intent benefits you and your clients and brings focus to design endeavors.
likewise, it helps the designer to get out of the designer trap to understand the core expectations of the end user and not the singular desires and personal affections of the designer.
and last but not least in a less designerly manner of speaking, don’t be a sh*t. developing ways to talk about form makes designers more effective and relevant to the outside world. that is why there are crits in school. like it or not dealing with the outside world is a reality.
btw, I am not a teacher, I am not a student, I am a professional building a list for an idsa workshop. if you would like you can come. It will be at 3pm friday the 20th at the IDSA Midwest Conference, Kohler, WI.
yo, thanks for the words.
question for you since you are a moderator.
I have a list of about 200 words from email chains to friends.
Is there a way we can post them on core in a more concise manner than the blog allows?
Just ‘edit’ your original post and keep it up to date with the complete list of words.
hmmm, I think that would probably be the easiest way as well…
is it possible to build a dictionary then…?
because some words are precises, like triangular
while others are open to interpretation, like Agile
this is where i wonder if 2 designers describing a form as agile, would be speaking of the same form ?
a wiki might be more appropriate.
can’t almost any adjective be used to descibe form?
ie-
average
big
colossal
fat
giant
gigantic
great
huge
immense
large
little
long
mammoth
massive
miniature
petite
puny
short
small
tall
tiny
boiling
breezy
broken
bumpy
chilly
cold
cool
creepy
crooked
cuddly
curly
damaged
damp
dirty
dry
dusty
filthy
flaky
fluffy
wet
broad
chubby
crooked
curved
deep
flat
high
hollow
low
narrow
round
shallow
skinny
square
steep
straight
wide
ancient
brief
early
fast
late
long
modern
old
old-fashioned
quick
rapid
short
slow
swift
young
abundant
empty
few
heavy
light
many
numerous
Sound
cooing
deafening
faint
harsh
high-pitched
hissing
hushed
husky
loud
melodic
moaning
mute
noisy
purring
quiet
raspy
resonant
screeching
shrill
silent
soft
squealing
thundering
voiceless
whispering
obviously just a short list from all possible adjectives I found on the net…
what is the point of developing such a list? More interesting I would think would be a word/visual dictionary with pictures of a shape/form/design and an adjective to describe them. Would be interesting to see how different designers describe the same form.
In an slight tangent to this, anyone have good juicy designer-ism form descriptions? ie.-
a foowear first pullover (that didnt turn out so hot) that a colleague described as
“an alien-impregnated potato with laces”
R
PS. this thread reminds me a little bit of the previous design-ism thread i started with the quote “talking about design is like dancing about baking”. 
Now when is someone going to add definitions to the words? Any word can be used to describe form, detail, surfaces and lines used in a design, but they are just as often mis-used or at the very least, mean something different to different people. I remember many times hearing people say modern in place of contemporary or free-form in place of organic. They all should mean something very precise, if the words are to be useful at all!
there was a time, when modern art was contemporary art…
so both terms could be used…without much thoughs.
that was about 100 years from now, but they are still being used such.
now only people with an interest in art do know that modern refers to an
art movement known as modernism…
for all i know, languages, and therefore meanings of word evolve and change…just think of mouse.
Would be interesting to see how different designers describe the same form.
Dead right. Whenever we create Moodboards on for ongoing projects we post them onto our intranet which is shared with our offices in Asia, US and Europe. This way we get to see three different interpretations of words like ‘robust’, ‘dynamic’ or ‘masculine’, and it often gives a brief insight into how the different cultures interpret the words.
Because we designers are so visual, I find Moodboards (or style-boards) a better way to define a word, particularly if you are trying to explain visual features or expressions.
I remember many times hearing people say modern in place of contemporary or free-form in place of organic.
Researchers spend a lot of time battling with this problem, and I’ve often seen very confused focus-group results because of this. Here are some common misused adjectives thrown around the focus-group room when describing a design:
“Classical” or “classic” (used in the same way referring to anything geometric or old).
“Traditional” (read: old-fashioned, conservative, generic. A focus-group favorite).
“Modern” (usually nothing to do with the art movement, and often not contemporary in the way we see it either…)
“Geometric” (Applied to anything they don’t like including organic forms, ie. “it’s too geometric for me”)
“High-tech” (generally used negatively, often followed by mentions of ‘Star Wars’ or ‘Jetsons’ by fellow focus-group attendees)
and my favorite, “Ergonomic” (usually referring to an obviously unergonomic design that has finger-grooves, soft grip or some other pseudo-ergo-semantic.
I’m not bitter. Just focus-group weary.
This could produce a very interesting book. An adjective dictionary exclusively for designers, each word matched with a page or two of works of architecture or products that exemplify a specific word’s characteristics.