It's not that difficult to piece together.
Nike have a lot of great media assets easily available for anyone to play around with and a culture of experimenting with different ways to do stuff so it's not a massive stretch to think that although these are just speculative and "fun" dribbble shots, that Nike would potentially commission an agency or freelancer to do something a little out-there.
That said, there's a lot of old fashioned like hunting going on with this sort of shot but again - it's not a mystery as to why - the more likes and views you get, the higher your profile becomes on what is a busy site and the more leads you'll generate for work.
I saw this a while back about the recruitment process at Nike which might be an interesting related bit of content for those who've not seen it - http://www.vanschneider.com/how-to-get-a-design-job-at-nike/
I understand the whole trying to get more likes with it and so on. But can someone really get worthy work proposals with it? I mean, even fake weather apps give more insights into someone skills and creative process than this.
For me, this kind of shot just screams lack of creativity/originality, as is borderline a copy and paste.
I think it can definitely work. If something is a ripoff of a popular item/style, it still sells. I mean, look at energy drinks, there's Monster, Red Bull, Rock Star, and dozens of even smaller brands. There's little to no variation, and doesn't seem truly relevant. But a lot of those are multi-billion dollar companies.
Maybe a designer mimics a popular/trendy style, gets a little Dribbble buzz, they get found by a potential client easier, and then boom business. Or there's the original designer who "invented the Nike pop-up card style" and then a dozen imitators. The original designer charges say $1,000 an hour. The mimic charges say, $100 an hour. Hmmm... I'm a small business owner, who will I use?
The key would be gain popularity, gain traction, and be the first thing a potential client can find.
I see. Although I feel this to be a waste of talent, I can the understand the rationale behind this perspective.
Thanks for adding to the discussion :)
Nice article, never saw it before!
…plus most people like shoes. It's a subject that resonates with everyone. Trying the same with IKEA furniture wouldn't get as much traction.
Best tweet so far "The only problem Dribbble designers are trying to solve is how to get more likes." by @tvrdek
It's the age old problem of amateurs trying to get likes by creating the flashiest, GIFiest, most useless 800x600 image they can.
The images are pretty useless for implementation and actually selling more shoes (because it's just an 800x600 image), but they're pretty useful for practicing visual design and to attract more clients. James Young put very well:
the more likes and views you get, the higher your profile becomes on what is a busy site and the more leads you'll generate for work.
Besides If you actually take a look at those images, some of the designers are far from amateur visual designers.
I can't even say if they are good or not visually from this kind of post. There are 1000000 shots extremely similar and is really hard to see if they really have good skills or just copied others.
I am super curious on why so many "pro" designers on dribbble have some sort of reinterpretation of this same UI? It just feels so random and empty as a design problem...
I am not against visual design explorations but is super curious that, from all things you can explore, so many people choose "designing" a nike shoe popup.
Anyone can guess why this happens? Is it simply some sort of bandwagon effect?
That and generally the fact that there are good looking product shots easily accessible. Also: People love their sneakers. It's weather apps all over again. Easy to bring something to canvas that looks good, no matter if it makes sense.
Not much of a stretch to say some designers are also insanely into shoes/fashion, so it's just low hanging Dribbble karma.
They simply go for the combination that looks best. Since these are not real projects and have no real purpose, the goal is to get them look as appealing as possible, and good looking nike shoes + fake store UIs offer a lot of freedom and almost do all the work for you.
Sneakers and athletic-wear in general has picked up big time in last couple of years, Nike leading the way. People see one good shot, and with availability of high quality photos available like @marcel said, it’s an easy pick. Add to that the fact that Nike has a “Design your own sneakers” feature, and you have a use-case designers want to salivate after.
Guilty of working on a concept of Nike shoes AR app. :P
Let people make cool looking things. Pretty simple. I never understood this dribble drama
I get it, it is funny how many similar Nike UIs have been created on Dribbble. But you could pull out dozens of other trendy UIs being copied all over the place on there. Dribbble is an easy target, but it may be easier to just accept it for what it is and not expect anything more from it.
What's with people paying hundreds of dollars for shoes that have "Kanye West" in the name? ¯\(ツ)/¯
my words exactly... illustrations like these also seem to more frequently come from asian designers. Maybe its just a trendy thing there. I have been mocking this for years.
this is a good observation and good self promotion ;)
but practice on what exactly? because most of these shots just copy other shots... If the goal is to practice their visual skills, isn't it better to do it by creating something original?
I would argue that copying visual styles can be good practice. Use of gradient, colors, element positions, typography, etc. I would say design is hardly original.
but practice on what exactly?
It doesn't matter what.
When I started making music in 2001, I would just copy beats to see if I could reverse engineer how famous producers constructed their beats and mixed their songs. I would try and figure out exactly what instruments they used, how they used flanges, delay, and all other types of effects. I copied beats for almost two years until I understood what principles of composition made a beat great.
One of the last songs I created sounded so authentic that I got an RIAA takedown on my YouTube video because the video reached nearly 400k views. People thought it was a real song - https://vimeo.com/35949550
If the goal is to practice their visual skills, isn't it better to do it by creating something original?
No. Humans learn by copying... You don't learn the alphabet and language by making up something original — you copy. Then once you've copied, you start generating your own slang and accents.
Look at the similarities between two designs of two complete different companies and products.
And weather apps?