Re: Flat out loud

My first instinct was to lean towards skeumorphism, simply because I enjoy it, even when it is a bit campy like the faux wood on an old station wagon. However, after reading Nathan's post, I found myself more torn. His point about fighting skeumorphism if it's not perfectly to his taste is extremely valid and a great way to approach this debate. If knowing your audience is so important, isn't every designer taking a risk when using skeumorphism. It's impossible to design for your entire audience.
There are always going to be a few stragglers who do or don't know what an 8 track is. That's not to say using it is such a bad idea, but it should certainly be used appropriately, with your audience at the forefront of that decision.

I found a great article at uxmovement.com that outlines good and bad uses of skeuomophic design. It helped me to understand some of the reasons you would want to use it and reasons you should leave it behind. The author "anthony" points out: "Skeuomorphic design is useful when the functionality of an interface mimics a real-world object....For example, this eBook reader interface allows users to turn pages by swiping the screen....Poor uses of skeuomorphism are found on interfaces that only look like, but do not function like the real-world object it’s mimicking."

Although, I have to admit, I still like the skeuomorphized calculator in lieu of the flat design. But I totally agree that the fake paper in notes on the iphone  is tacky and doesn't add anything of value to the experience.

So I come away from this debate as an advocate on both sides. Like Tracy said in her post, "it just depends on the context of the design." I don't think you should use skeumorphism if it's going to clutter the layout, but if it makes sense for the design and your audience, why not?