Design as a mean to effectively communicate, should be a linear process of cumulative conceptual integration.

From the initial ideas to the deepest formal expressions in more or less fashionable graphical elements and certainly, given the author, design should evolve the existing procedural elements and trends while still following the basic principles of generic graphic communication, in order to be effective. A cumulative linear process starting with the briefing, ranging from the decisive idea, initial trial and structure, advancing vigorously to the proven concept and technical rational development, thus providing the means to materialise the desired execution.

This approach, my approach towards the profession, makes me think if we are indeed near a re evolution and critic by innovating the way we arrive at a final solution or simply delaying the advances in traditional print and digital media in order to become obsolete later in time. This also troubles me because the constraints of the designer are not formal or conceptual, they are technical! Designers don’t accept being technicians of broad communication by formation.

They reject it only to become failed artists of shape and color. We all know that a common designer lives in a chaotic search for answers, in the troubled deadlines, irreal clients and briefing requirements. A true problem solver, but with deadlines in mind. He needs help. So when will come the messias? The rational, calm, prolific and integrationist methodist adventist designer that will provide a new age in design.


This features are not in the designers DNA and above all they are not taught as a prerequisite in his formation. Sure there some who follow some rules, regulations, procedures and methodical approaches, but they are rarer than Krypton, and only follow their own rules. They are bonded to the flat thinking critic that structures their minds since the early formatting of the first work experiences. Designers are flat and should watch the way media is constructively evolving.

So, why graphical media is trying to leave it’s bidimensional structure for such a long time and never assumes a direct composite approach of full subject immersion in the process? And I’m not trying to confuse digital 3D immersion media with some graphical elements that are already in use. Because i am saying loud and clear to designers to get to know better your geometry bases and use perspective in the way it represents accurately some given formal concept or principle such as: depth.

This is the distance from the top or surface of something to its bottom.

The distance from the nearest to the farthest point of something or from the front to the back. It’s used to specify the distance below the top or surface of something to which someone or something percolates or at which something happens. Is the apparent existence of three dimensions in a picture, photograph, or other two-dimensional representation; perspective.


  • complexity and profundity of thought. synonyms: profundity, deepness, wisdom, understanding, intelligence, sagacity, discernment, penetration, insight, astuteness, acumen, shrewdness;
  • complexity, intricacy;
  • extensive and detailed study or knowledge.
  • intensity of emotion, usually considered as a laudable quality.
  • intensity of color.
  • a point far below the surface.

Design needs to leave the comfort zone defined by flat bidimensional thinking. Designers need to embrace the world as we sense it. Complete and utterly material. Interpolating the codes needed to decypher communication in a real and evolved reality, approaching, at the verge of the re evolution.