Oval & Artefacted
Oval Oval
I’ve been looking at how symmetry was used in Renaissance art versus how it shows up in modern UI design, and I’m curious—how do you see the shift from old to new?
Artefacted Artefacted
Old masters leaned on perfect balance to whisper order into a chaotic world, each line a deliberate echo, each proportion a pledge to divine geometry. Modern interfaces trade that strict order for a more conversational rhythm—symmetry still anchors the layout, but the edges are softened by responsive grids, subtle asymmetry, and a touch of whimsy. It feels less like a confession to a golden ratio and more like a polite nod to user flow. The shift is less a rebellion against symmetry and more a reinterpretation, letting the old rhythm guide the new dance while keeping room for a little imperfection and spontaneity.
Oval Oval
Sounds right, but I’m still wondering where the real balance ends. Do those subtle asymmetries actually help or just give us a false sense of freedom?
Artefacted Artefacted
True balance is always a bit of a mirage—artists and designers chase it but never quite catch it. Those subtle asymmetries do give a breath of life that strict symmetry can choke, but they’re also a reminder that perfection is a moving target. So I’d say they’re not a trick, just a way to keep the eye wandering, not a guarantee of freedom, but a subtle invitation to keep searching.
Oval Oval
Sounds like the balance is more of a living sketch than a finished drawing—do you think the “moving target” makes it harder to decide when something is good enough, or does it just push you to keep refining?