We’re starting to really get into the design of phase-1 of Social Interpretation, and this will the first of a few updates on various aspects of design for the in-gallery technology and signage.

As you may have seen (here, here, here, here and, um,  here) we’re in the middle of wresting with how (or if) to best use QR Codes to facilitate physical/digital interaction. We already know from our research that part of this is to really make clear, in a small space, what the code is and how to use it. Part of that is placement, part is effective written prompt – being looked at by Claire Ross, and part is visual prompting. We’re finding out that visitors are likely to respond well to a clear phone graphic, to indicate what to use the code with. But what phone?

Which do you think it most recognisable as a smartphone?

You see, I have an aversion to using the iPhone as an icon. It’s recognisable, and definitely has a cultural recognition this definitely helps as far as being an icon is concerned.

But, I worry that it does three things:

• Alienate non iPhone users and imply that it’s an iPhone-only function
• Contribute to the public perception that Smartphone = iPhone. It doesn’t (it’s denying the antecedent)
• Contribute to the public perception that you need an Apple device to take advantage of basic smartphone functions

It’s possible that none of these matter – or that I’m just worrying about nothing. And we’ll be evaluating our choice anyway to see how people react.

But what do you think?

From left to right, which phone icon do you prefer?

• Generic, 3D (not shown) (28%, 11 Votes)
• iPhone, straight (25%, 10 Votes)
• iPhone, angled (18%, 7 Votes)
• iPhone, 3D (15%, 6 Votes)
• Generic, angled (13%, 5 Votes)
• Generic, straight (1%, 1 Votes)

Total Voters: 40

 Loading ...