serial consign

[catalogtree / desalination diagram / 2007]

In August, I came across the work of Catalogtree, a multidisciplinary design studio based in the city of Arnhem in the Netherlands. I was immediately won over by Catalogtree's clear, regimented graphic design and their ability to break down complex data sets into suites of info-snapshots had me foaming at the mouth. After I published an enthusiastic post to Serial Consign I got in touch with designers Joris Maltha and Daniel Gross who were kind enough to provide a window into their creative practice.

--

Could you talk a little about the formation of Catalogtree? What is the story behind the moniker for the studio?

We met at the Werkplaats Typografie (a 2-year graphic design masters program in Arnhem, NL) in 1999. We shared a great interest in generative systems and media independent design and worked on some web-sites together.

We started Catalogtree.net as a webspace we shared with some friends. It's a technical term for filing structures - files within folders within folders, etc. We used it as a testing site for ideas and sketches in any media. We discussed projects and shared technical knowledge. Over time, as real commissions came in, it gradually turned into a portfolio site (though we still like to upload sketches) run only by the two of us. We only started using it as a name to work under a few years ago.

[catalogtree / vinec 009 / 2006]

In examining your portfolio I notice your very distinct style of not only graphic design, but information visualization. Broadly speaking, what is your philosophy for graphically communicating data?

Our approach to design - not just in designing info-graphics - is to devise a set of rules by which the content should 'behave'. A design is a visual outcome generated by these rules. We feel this way of working might be an answer to the flow of dynamic content in newer media and might give a fresh look on the processing of content in older media.

Data sets - large once especially - are perfect for this approach: The content shapes itself into an intriguing picture.

We try not to be dogmatic however, if we don't like the generated outcome, we change either the rules or the outcome. One needs to breathe, right?

Many of your visualizations are a series of infographics that break down larger issues into numerous data snapshots. Does this have to do with the way that your studio processes information? Is this an aesthetic decision?

If the data allows it, we like to break down information into a graphical hierarchy similar to poster designs: a larger motive or trend is visible at first glance, and more detailed information becomes clear on closer inspection. Furthermore, the design should reflect some of its content. The data does not always allow for this: many times a simple bar graph is best. That said, a design cannot exceed its content: bad data sets lead to bad graphics, however simple or conventional the design is.

[catalogtree / PLANYC infographic / 2007]

I noticed two trends in your visualization work – you seem to love working with axonometric 3D information, as well as super-flat 2D diagrams. What is your strategy in determining the form of an infographic?

Volumes are a sure way to lower the contrast in data sets. See for example the small Farm Aid graph for the New York Times Magazine. In that graph the smallest number was about 500,000 and the largest about 2,200,000,000. If we would have done a bar graph in which the largest bar would have been 3 inches high (the max height of the graph) the smallest bar would be less than a thousandth of an inch. In the PLANYC graph it is a choice for aesthetic reasons: the graph mimics the body of a metropolis.

You have done a large volume of work for architecture firms. Can you provide some insight on the relationship between Catalogtree and architecture?

This is something we noticed too! We don't know really. Our first clients were architects - friends who just started their own company.

About the relationship: Architecture might be seen as the attempted programming of human behaviour. The discrepancy between architectural planning and the actual use of a building is fascinating to us and has analogies to any design discipline with an output in the public space. Even the rigid structure of a building should have some fail-safe capabilities.

When human behaviour is seen as the dynamic content of a building, the analogy to our design approach is more specific: the question of how we should treat failure and unexpected behaviour when processing content into a design. We always like to think that these errors are opportunities to show you have the right stuff ;)

Whose work is catching your eye these days?

Bernd and Hilla Becher, Wigger Bierma, Max Bill, Wim Crouwel, Thomas Demand, Anthony Froshaug, Ben Fry, Buckminster Fuller, Andreas Gefeller, Karl Gerstner, Michel Gondry, Tim Hawkinson, Martin Kippenberger, Stanley Kubrick, Mark Lombardi, John Maeda, Karel Martens, Gordon Matta-Clark, Cas Oosterhuis, Peter Piller, David Reinfurt, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Emil Ruder, Gus van Sant, Edward Tufte.