Two types of storyboards
UX storyboards come in two flavors: big-picture storyboards, which focus on the user's experience, and close-up storyboards, which focus on the product itself.
Both use the same panel-by-panel format, but they answer very different questions. A big-picture storyboard asks, "What is happening in the user's life, and how do they feel?" A close-up storyboard asks, "What is happening on the screen, and what does the user do next?"
The type of storyboard you draw should depend on what you need to figure out, not on how well you can sketch. Both types work with stick figures and rough boxes. What changes is the camera angle: one is zoomed out on the person, the other is zoomed in on the product.
-
keywords
- #BigPicture
- #CloseUp
- #Storyboarding
Big-picture storyboards
A big-picture storyboard focuses on the user's experience: their context, actions, and emotions. The product may barely appear at all.
In a big-picture storyboard, most panels show the user's world, not your interface. You might draw a stressed commuter on a crowded train, a parent juggling a toddler and a shopping list, or a traveler realizing their flight was canceled. The product shows up only where it naturally enters the story, often as a small phone in the user's hand.
This type shines early in the design process, when you are still defining the problem. Because the panels are about feelings and context, they force you to answer questions your wireframes never will: Where is the user? What else is competing for their attention? What emotional state are they in when they reach for your product?
Big-picture storyboards are also your best tool for stakeholder buy-in, because they sell the why of a feature before anyone argues about the how. A product manager might not care about a settings redesign, but they will care about the panel showing a frustrated user abandoning the app. When you need a team to empathize with users they have never met, show them the user's day, not your screens.
-
keywords
- #Context
- #Emotions
- #Empathy
- #StakeholderBuyIn
Close-up storyboards
A close-up storyboard focuses on the product. Each panel represents roughly one screen or one interaction in a flow.
Where the big-picture version zooms out, the close-up version zooms all the way in. The user might not appear in the panels at all. Instead, panel one shows the home screen, panel two shows the search results, panel three shows the checkout confirmation. The captions describe what the user does and what the product does in response.
Close-up storyboards work best later in the process, once you know what you are building and need to refine how it works. They are excellent for spotting gaps in a flow: if you cannot draw the panel between "user taps pay" and "order confirmed," you have just discovered a missing state in your design, like a loading screen or an error case.
A close-up storyboard is essentially a flow told as a story, which makes broken or confusing steps obvious before you invest in high-fidelity design. Reading your product panel by panel exposes the moments where a user would hesitate, get lost, or hit a dead end.
-
keywords
- #Screens
- #Interactions
- #UserFlows
- #Refinement
One scenario, two stories
The best way to feel the difference is to tell the same scenario both ways. Take this one: a busy parent needs groceries delivered before dinner.
Big-picture version. Panel one: it's 4 pm, the fridge is nearly empty, and a parent is helping a child with homework, feeling the clock ticking. Panel two: they remember the grocery app and place an order one-handed while stirring a pot. Panel three: the doorbell rings at 5:30, the groceries arrive, and the parent looks relieved. Panel four: the family eats dinner together on time. The app appears in exactly one panel. The story is about stress turning into relief.
Close-up version. Panel one: the app's home screen with a "reorder your usuals" shortcut. Panel two: the cart screen showing a delivery window selector. Panel three: an out-of-stock item with a suggested substitute. Panel four: the order confirmation with live delivery tracking. The parent barely appears. The story is about whether each screen moves the order forward without friction.
Same user, same goal, same happy ending, but the two storyboards surface completely different design questions. The big-picture version tells you the reorder shortcut and the one-handed flow matter because the user is distracted and rushed. The close-up version tells you exactly where that shortcut lives and what happens when an item is out of stock. Notice how they feed each other: the empathy from the first version justifies the decisions in the second.
-
keywords
- #Scenario
- #Comparison
- #GroceryDelivery
How to choose
Choosing between the two comes down to two questions: who is the storyboard for, and where are you in the process?
Audience. Stakeholders, executives, and non-designers respond to big-picture storyboards because they communicate value and emotion without requiring anyone to imagine an interface. Developers and fellow designers get more from close-up storyboards, because those map directly to the screens and states someone has to build.
Stage. If you are still empathizing and defining, go big-picture; you don't have screens worth drawing yet, and pretending you do will lock you into a solution too early. If you are ideating on a specific flow or preparing for prototyping, go close-up; at that point vague emotional panels stop answering the questions your team is actually asking.
You don't have to pick one forever. Strong projects use both: big-picture storyboards to frame the problem, then close-up storyboards to shape the solution. A common rhythm is to open a project with a big-picture storyboard drawn from your research, get the team aligned on the user's reality, and then translate its key moment into a close-up storyboard that drives the flow you prototype next.
-
keywords
- #Audience
- #ProcessStage
- #ChoosingTools
Takeaways
Big-picture storyboards build empathy around the user's life; close-up storyboards stress-test the product's screens.
Match the type to your audience and your stage: zoom out early to prove the problem is real, zoom in later to make the solution work. Used together across a project, the two types keep your team connected to both the person and the product.