Linear design vs. minimalism, brutalism, and neumorphism
Linear design could be compared to other minimalist design trends, such as brutalism and neumorphism, as well as minimalism in general. Let’s take a look at the differences.
Linear design vs. minimalism
The linear design trend could be described as the result of decades of collective UX research, not intentionally designed to be an implementation of minimalism, but culminating in a design trend that we could easily categorize as minimalism.
One example of a minimalist trait in linear design is its limited, monochrome color palette. While its color palette isn’t specifically designed to be minimalist (I think if it were, it’d sport even fewer colors between black and white), there’s no denying that a minimalist approach to color helps users to focus on the content.
Other minimalist traits in linear design include:
- Its typography, which typically features just one sans-serif font, but does allow for more, should some creativity be needed
- Simple content design featuring an elaborate but logical (accessible) heading structure and clear type scale overall
- Frequent use of satisfying animation but in a very subtle way
Linear design vs. brutalism
Like linear design, brutalism also incorporates minimalist traits. However, it abuses a fatal loophole. By leveraging extreme contrast, brutalism can retain a limited color palette and a limited number of fonts (to give just two examples) while using colors and fonts that juxtapose each other heavily, leading to visuals that are so bold that they might not seem minimalist, even though they are.
For this reason, while linear design and brutalism both incorporate minimalist design principles, brutalism tends to be bold and creative, whereas linear design is typically minimalist in a more traditional way. To add, brutalism often misses out on key visual affordances, affecting usability and accessibility, whereas linear design considers usability and accessibility non-negotiable.
Linear design vs. neumorphism
Neumorphism’s standout trait is that it uses shaded and tinted ‘shadows’ to create artificial lighting that makes it seem as if components are embossed or debossed, depending on the direction of the shadows. This is in contrast to linear design, which uses backgrounds, borders, and other styles that form more clearly defined boundaries, resulting in significantly more clarity and visual affordance.
So while neumorphism and linear design are both examples of minimalism, neumorphism’s minimalist traits are purely artistic, whereas linear design’s traits enhance usability, accessibility, and the UX overall.
What makes Linear’s design minimalistic yet effective?
Linear’s design is minimalistic but effective for multiple reasons. Given that most design styles carry a meaning that users have to understand and remember, one of the reasons is that the reduced number of styles makes understanding and remembering easier. The most obvious reduction of design styles is the significant lack of color, which carries heavy meaning and even different meanings to those of differing cultures. In short, the reduced cognitive load makes the design/usability better.
In addition, the section layouts are pretty exciting despite being fairly minimal. This is because of Linear’s refusal to adhere to a strict grid system that limits choice. However, their layouts are still minimalistic as they reuse rather simple design tokens. One of them is their use of an 8px-spacing scale regardless of grid direction, item count, and card style.
Other design choices, such as their monochrome colors, modest border radii, sharp borders, and illustration style, and subtle transitions are also reused to maintain consistency in a dead-simple way, but when it all comes together, it forms a focused and razor-sharp design language that isn’t trying too hard.
The post Linear design vs. minimalism, brutalism, and neumorphism appeared first on LogRocket Blog.
This post first appeared on Read More