I’ve never felt that the term “motion graphics” has been adequately defined. I’ve argued that this is a good thing, that it encourages the term to be used inclusively, in an expansive way that changes as underlying technologies evolve and our media landscape broadens.
But some feel that “motion graphics” is an outdated term. For them, it’s a limited concept that conjures up images of wedding videos and glassy 3D logos heralding cable news channels. “Motion graphics” suggests, quite literally, graphic design put into motion. And while graphic design is an incredibly huge field that encompasses other disciplines like photography, illustration, typography and more, this definition de-emphasizes the temporal aspect of the craft, downplaying its relationship to animation and filmmaking.
As an alternative, I’ve heard more and more people using the term “motion design.” The term definitely seems more inclusive. But I’m not sure it’s actually much better…
So, for our first ever Motionographer Talk Cycle poll, I invite you to answer and comment: