Motion graphics vs animation in science communication

When you’re commissioning or creating your next video, stop to think about what format will help convey the information best. Do you want emotional and empathetic storytelling (‘animation’), or efficient communication of facts (‘motion graphics’)?

For the purposes of this conversation, think of ‘motion graphics’ as animated graphic design, and ‘animation’ as animated illustration.

Take these two excellent examples of what I’m calling ‘animation’:
Watch this Chipotle advert — an example Jonathon mentioned…

…and this animation from Andrew Khosravani at the Royal Institution:

Then compare to the ‘motion graphics’ sequences in this ACS Reactions video (skip to 45s for a particular example):

…and this Crash Course episode (skip to about 2:30).

In the context of science communication, think of ‘motion graphics’ as an simply applying the philosophy of graphic design to animation and timeline-based communication. That is, design specifically aiming to convey accurate information as efficiently as possible. It uses visuals specifically to enhance and accelerate understanding, combining language and iconography in a way that maximises information transfer and retention. It aims to convey a specific, ‘correct’ interpretation of a concept or image.

In comparison, other forms of animation allow more scope for interpretation and emotion. In the Chipotle advert above, the music, personality, and style are all crafted to elicit an emotional response (ultimately to sell the nobility of Chipotle, but the principle is the same if you’re selling science or burritos). The particle accelerator video is jammed full of technical details, but the visuals don’t aim to perfectly portray reality — after all, this isn’t exactly how microscopic particles are manipulated in an accelerator:

These allow for a different type of educational storytelling. They have learning outcomes, but lean heavily on emotional engagement. Which is right for you depends entirely on the story you’re telling and how much empathy you’re hoping to draw out.

Heavy causes often need human personality, individual narratives and a more dramatic lean, which conventional ‘animation’ is so well suited to. On the other hand, more technical content might require less empathy, meaning you can do without characters, dramatic tropes and big scenes (all of which cost time and money), leaving you to focus on simplifying and heightening what’s being said.

It’s important to see that neither type is better than the other, and these largely sit on a spectrum rather than two distinct formats. But ‘We want an animation’ is an incredibly common cry at the start of scicomm projects, and it’s worth stopping to think what we actually mean by that (and indeed, whether video is the right medium at all). Decide what you want to achieve, then decide how best to go about it.

Related posts:

The search for a lover had me perusing r/adultery late at night. I was horny and frustrated. Why did I want the guys that didn’t respond? “I’m in the middle of an affair partner search and find…

The Montessori approach to math interests me because students are able to work fairly independently on math tasks and have some choice on the math work they’re doing at any given moment. These…

The organisations and businesses that deal numerous accounting functions in their daily routine, need to have robust accounting software and quickbooks accounting software is the one that caters all…