Will Harris shares some insight on working with designers. We often read about tips for designers by designers, but not tips for clients by clients. Still, both parties should read it (and print out the PDF, too!).
Designers (and professionals in related fields) will get great gems of advice that will make them go “oh, thank goodness he said that!” because it’s so common for clients to just sit there and say “I don’t like that” without giving any real reason behind their preference. A design project (again, this can apply to other fields) is the responsibility of both the designer and the client. They have to work together.
But let me digress a little bit. One thing that struck me while reading the article was Will’s first suggestion:
Choose your designer carefully. Look at their previous work. The best designers don’t have a “signature look.” Their sites look as different as their clients do. Awards don’t necessarily mean the design worked for the client. If you’re not sure about a design, go to sites they designed and ask their clients.
Do you agree that designers with more diverse-looking projects are better than those who maintain a signature look? On the one hand, it immediately leads a client into thinking that the designer has a wider skill set and can more easily meet their requirements especially if they’re fickle.
On the other hand, clients opt for designers with a consistent style exactly because they want to emulate that look on their own projects.
I think that in general, professionals start out not knowing exactly what they want to do, and try everything out first. As they grow older they start to specialize. As time passes, you’re supposed to be more sure of yourself and should be able to hold a distinguishable reputation among your peers. This can be said not only about the styles you create, but the skills you specialize in, the clientele you work with, and so on. I wouldn’t say this is the only way to go, but it seems to be the trend.
No, this is not about plagiarism.
Imagine my surprise when Jeffrey Zeldman blogged about a list of 60 WordPress themes. A few minutes before that, I found Douglas Bowman bookmarking another list, also from Smashing Magazine. It’s like my feed reader was trying to tell me something: yes, a list article can bring an interesting discussion if you’ll just let it.
Back to Zeldman’s post, which started a discussion on whether you should use existing themes for your own design:
…Even if you are a designer, you may ask yourself if you really need to perform that next site redesign from scratch.
Every once in a while I get clients that specifically want existing themes to be customized instead of starting from scratch, so clearly there is a demand for the practice. If clients have enough initiative to choose it as a solution, then why not? Does it take more effort to find and customize than start from scratch? Depends on how comfortable you are with someone else’s code, how much you trust the other designer’s expertise, and how much you need to customize.
The bulk of the debate will probably lie mostly in this situation, but to me it boils down to don’t reinvent the wheel, but don’t get complacent either. While it is a shortcut for building a website, it is not a shortcut for conceptualizing the website.
So the other situation is this: Sometimes I envy all the beautiful themes and templates out there because I don’t really get an opportunity to use them for myself. Does choosing to use someone else’s work for a web designer’s own website make sense? It seems counterintuitive but a real problem: sometimes we barely have time to dedicate to our own projects. Sometimes we just want to use something ready-made and have fun with it.
Although there are frameworks for practically level of development these days, from CSS to JS to PHP to whole themes, they are created specifically as tools for designers; they aren’t really products for designers as consumers. What I’m talking about are the real themes that are smart enough, beautifully-designed enough to meet your discerning needs. It could be as stark as Cutline or as detailed as WordFolio: compare this and this. (Now that would be good idea for a list article: websites that are highly customized versions of existing themes. Not to mention a good source of inspiration. A niche gallery, even!)
We could probably exclude portfolio sites since web designers would prefer to show off their skills on them—but even that argument can be ruled out if the customization is custom enough. Take blogs, tumblelogs, and other secondary sites that still belong to a web designer but don’t necessarily need a design from scratch. The issues with the client scenario website still apply, but there’s the added pressure of being your own worst critic.
Would you be confident enough to use one, or would you lose sleep at night without customizing at least some bit of it to keep your design cred intact? It doesn’t have to be a bad thing; it could be a different type of challenge.
Tumblr is no longer just the home of reblogged pictures, quotes, music, videos, and journal entries of friends you follow; it’s also gaining favor with the more discerning content creators in the design and technology circles, turning it into a truly professional publishing platform. This phenomenon is thanks to its relatively easy customization while keeping its interface decidedly simple.
My question is, if Tumblr’s audience is becoming more mature, should it shift from its dead-simple appeal and grow up too? David Yeiser prefers its current approach:
What’s neat about Tumblr is it’s not only a great publishing platform but a great tool for content consumption. [...] as self-publishing has changed to shorter forms and varied media the traditional feed reader has become obsolete. I shouldn’t have to click a title of a post to read a quote. [...] I think the way Tumblr aggregates and displays blog posts is the future of feed readers. Though I’m not aware of any standalone readers that take this approach.
Personally, I disagree. I follow a lot of people (and non-people) on Tumblr, producing remarkably varied content genres (e.g. XKCD Explained, 53 Weeks of UX, Sweet Home Style) with no way of filtering which ones I’d like to view at a time. Infinite scrolling in the dashboard can only take you so far in browsing ease.
Unwieldy content consumption is a familiar problem experienced on Twitter and Facebook, and by people who want more options, more control. Except there are now methods of dealing them on those sites. It’s even a big business for third party companies. On Tumblr, that remains to be seen.
Dashboard filtering options would be a welcome addition to the site. The reason is that “following” is a one-size-fits-all option when the truth is we need many.
And there lies the rub with a hosted platform, as well as platform that caters to simplicity first and foremost. Notice that as the concept of feed reading, trackbacking, and commenting are abstracted, if not replaced with Tumblr’s own conventions of dashboard reading, reblogging, liking, answering, one is forced to adhere to a closed set of standards inside its community. For a community that’s got such a wealth of content, consuming and sharing and communicating through that content but with limiting, non-standard methods is a turn off. If I link to a Tumblr post from a non-Tumblr site, will the owner of that tumblelog even know that I did?
Again, all of this wouldn’t be so bad if there were more options available, even as premium features. Right now, there aren’t.
What should Tumblr do? Should it go the WordPress.org and Identi.ca route and provide an open, self-hosted platform? Should it take some notes from the old-but-still-strong LiveJournal? (In some ways their user bases are the same.) Should it push its API more aggressively? Should we just wait and see what they’re up to, or accept that it’s really just a different culture from what we’re accustomed to?
As someone who’s enjoyed a lot of great content on Tumblr and is tempted to migrate her personal blog over there, there are a glaring number of things holding me back.
Several design initiatives are taking advantage of the “global village” via the Web, and here’s a look at some of them. Perspectives that are completely different from your own—thousands of miles different—are just one way for you to grow as a designer, so take down some notes and get your passport stamped:
How would you illustrate your city?
CitID invites designers to honor their respective cities creating logos for them. Submission is by email and it’s a great way to get acquainted with design sensibilities from every corner of the world.
How would you create a charity site in 24 hours?
FullCodePress pits Australia, New Zealand, and the US against one another in a 24-hour race to build websites for charitable organizations. Last year’s teams designed for RainbowYouth (New Zealand) and NSW Disability Discrimination Legal Centre (Australia), with NZ coming out on top.
This year: Team USA members are already locked in, with no less than Jason Santa Maria at the helm, but applications for the Aussie and NZ teams are still open until May 5th. The showdown happens from June 19 to 20.
How would you build on an existing design?
The Exhibition Season of this year’s Layer Tennis is done, but if you missed all the live action this compilation video provides a great wrap-up. There were some interesting new matches this time, covering typography, motion graphics, photography, video editing, and the return of the 10-city tournament.
How does this color make you feel?
To wrap up this little excursion we’ve been on, here’s a golden resource for all the global designers out there: David McCandless and AlwaysWithHonor.com designed an infographic on What Colors Mean Across 10 Cultures.
Dribbble is just one approach to the feedback web app “genre”; I’ve noticed that they’re making it easier than ever to receive and leave feedback on designs, as you’ll discover when you go down this list:
Usabilla
Usabilla has the most features out of the lot, letting you test both images and live websites with click markers, notes, and heatmaps. There’s a free plan but you’ll enjoy more test participants and pages with the premium plans.
ConceptFeedback
ConceptFeedback anchors on a thriving community and and offers special perks for both individual designers and businesses, including compensation for giving feedback. Not only can you get reviews for your current work and inspiration for your next one, your profile, design, or product can get featured to earn better exposure and business—but you need to jump in with both feet and register.
fivesecondtest
As the name implies, fivesecondtest focuses on first impressions as a test-takers look at designs for no more than five seconds and answer custom questions from test-makers. This means judgments can be rash, but the barrier to entry is very encouraging. For extra good measure, the app runs on a karma system where the more tests you do, the more test results you can make.
FineTuna
The Flash-based FineTuna creates a link for every image you upload, which you can send to specific people for feedback. That link is a space where one can insert notes and doodle on the image. You won’t have a community of users at your disposal, but you have complete control and privacy over the feedback process. It’s also available as a Firefox add-on.
CritiqueTheSite
CritiqueTheSite uses hackable URLs, iframes, and JS-Kit’s Echo to let visitors leave comments on a currently loaded site. Append a URL of any website (like Aviary Screen Capture does) after the slash and it loads that site, ready for critique. Public, no-registration-necessary feedback makes the service prone to abuse, but it also means it has a low barrier to entry.
No clear winner here!
If you want a more detailed level of testing, Usabilla is the way to go; if you need something lighter and more accessible, the likes of CritiqueTheSite, FineTuna, and fivesecondtest may be better for you. If you’re all about building your reputation and relationships as an added bonus, pick ConceptFeedback. Or why not use all of them? Using all these tools for online critiquing lets you reap the unique benefits for each.
Dribbble is a finely crafted community for designers, by designers. It’s invite-only in order to maintain high quality work on the site, but that doesn’t mean you can’t browse around for inspiration. Give it enough time to fine-tune the tagging and search features (color search is already there; UI patterns, textures, etc. would be great) and we may have the most useful, A-grade design reference out there from people who know their stuff.
There are several things that set it apart from generic portfolio and gallery sites, as it is also dubbed the “Twitter for designers”. From the tagline “what are you working on?” to its system of “rebounds” (basically a response to a “shot”) to uploads of 400 pixels or less, Dribbble is focused on brevity and the right now even when they could have entertained the whole spectrum.
Of course there’s the basketball metaphor working all around too, which when expanded even further can create some interesting activities and interactions for the community: think games, collaborations, meetups, leagues, merits. Think social games like Foursquare and BarStar, only more productive.
People have been complaining about the quality of a lot of things in the design community lately, whether it’s resource articles or the actual interactions within the community, and I see Dribbble as a partial solution to that.
Or as a like to call it: podcasts that have caught my eye in the past week or so. And they differ in several ways, so there’s sure to be something for everybody. Take your pick:
Confession: It took me a while to realize that this podcast is actually the previously-named You Suck at Web Design, relaunched as a new brand with a new site design. This show isn’t so much a bag of tricks on web design as it is a quirky, personal storybook told by Matthew D. Jordan, but still a must-listen.
This is not just one but seven shows tackling different topics, from photography to Ruby programming, founded just last year by Dan Benjamin. I love the idea of a whole network of shows about the internet, on the internet, and here we have a whole suite for people who make websites. I can think of few things better than that. More networks and more topics, perhaps?
In light of the “circuses” happening in both the Hollywood late night talk show circuit and the web working groups, standardista slash comic strip creator Kyle Weems aka CSSquirrel announced this:
I am in the process of devising a “late night” talk show that the Squirrel will host, featuring interviews with cartoon representations of various web designers/developers/standardistas. It’ll draw from the mighty traditions of the Tonight Show, The Daily Show and Space Ghost: Coast to Coast, and in theory will be a plug-in free experience brought to you in part by HTML5, JavaScript and vector tree-climbing rodents.
Check out the podcast over at SitePoint, titled HTML5 is a beautiful mess:
The podcast touches on that matter, and spins out to the state of the actual implementation of HTML5 itself, whether there’s a challenge in getting designers and developers to start using it, the issues of accessibility in <canvas>, and how delightful it’d be to move past plugins.
Truthfully, I’m trying to avoid getting caught in the sticky details of how HTML5 is developing at the moment because it only adds to the anxiety (isn’t stressing over Internet Explorer enough?) and diminishes hope (we’re supposed to be moving forward with these technologies already). But it also helps to stay realistic not just idealistic, and drawing back the curtain on how the working groups are actually working on the HTML5 standard is a good way to do that.
I’ll get straight to my answer: very.
More specifically, I’m quite excited about what this league is doing for a branch of typography which seems almost mythical. We know about paid fonts and free fonts, but what’s buzzing big right now is the use of fonts on the web with the emergence of @font-face embedding, webfonts, and services like TypeKit. But what about usage and modification of fonts in general?
The open source debate is always tricky when creative works are in question, but the case shouldn’t be different for typefaces. The League is going beyond that debate, but still has some tough questions to be answered:
Is open source typography important enough to fight for? Are we all brave enough to do something to change the status quo? Is the status quo okay, do we really need to change anything at all?
What is the status quo? If this 3-year old post is any indication, it looks like a sleepy town that needs some jazzing up. The Open Font Library is more closely linked to the open source software community than with the open source design community, but they mentioned Lettercase being a Github-like tool, so it looks like they’re taking steps towards that already.
Should we fight for open source typography and change the status quo? It could potentially compete alongside the hosted font embedding services and create a fine alternative for web designers using custom web fonts. Options are good.
Sound off with your thoughts there!
So many people admire Andy Rutledge and his insightful articles at Design View; but that seems to have changed overnight with his latest offering, USA.gov Redux.
It’s a thoughtful look into the redesign of the USA.gov website, but what has got people irked—primarily in 140 characters or less—is the deliberate sprinkling of provocative political views against Barack Obama and his brand of “Change”, from start to finish. It’s present even in the final mockup.
I’m not sure if the article was written in all seriousness, or hilarity, or satire, which makes me hesitant in even asking, was Andy right to mix design and politics in such a sour tone? We certainly have seen it work well in a hopeful context.
But we can’t try to pretend that design is pure and free from any sort of intent—whether at the hands of a designer manipulating the vision of his client into what he deems fit, or a designer who sees eye to eye with his client one-hundred percent. It seems the latter is impossible, but the former should not be laced with malicious agenda.
Devlounge has posted an interview with Mubashar Iqbal, creator of the increasingly popular color-oriented website Cymbolism. It’s an initiative to gather data on how people associate words with color.
If you’ll spend a fair amount of time at Cymbolism, you’ll find out that despite all preconceived notions tied to the different colors of the rainbow, people still think differently. For example, red is the dominant color associated with the word “powerful”, but only by a little more than 50%. The word “bold” shows a similar trend, with the color black in second place.
Now when you take a look at “new”, there are at least four major colors showing relative popularity: red, green, yellow, and white.
Based on the results, if you’re going to design one of those typical Web 2.0 badges that say “NEW!”, which color are you going to go with? It’s harder to choose now, isn’t it? I’m not implying that the site is useless in helping you decide colors. In fact, it teaches a very important lesson in color sensitivity. As the latest article in Cymbolism’s blog points out:
It can be a poor choice to assume that you know what another culture means by a specific color, so asking questions is a good idea. You can also do some research if you’re planning a trip to another country so you know a bit about their culture before you leave. You can avoid offending people that way, get a better understanding of culture and how color affects us, and have a more enjoyable trip.
Because the web is like one big country anybody can visit, web designers should be aware of yet another factor that affects the experience of their virtual audiences. And another issue you’ll have to deal with as a web designer, as opposed to a print designer.
What are other color-related factors can affect how a website is perceived? Aside from the psychological, how about the physical? Here are some questions you might want to answer before rolling out that website for public consumption:
- What does the website look like from the eyes of someone who is colorblind? Note: there are different types of color blindness.
- What does the website look like from an uncalibrated monitor? A monitor that is different from your own? (e.g. LCD, CRT, plasma, projection) A monitor running a different operating system?
- What does the website look like in low light? In bright light? In low contrast? In grayscale? In black and white (i.e., does the design of the website rely on color alone)?
*/
