Welcome to hell.
Still on the subject of the dark side of the web: I found a contest for the ugliest website held last June. The winner, which turned out to be mytastynuts.com, won a free redesign package worth $1800. Now this could have been a little more buzzworthy if the contest and company site itself looked like there had been thought put into the design. Heck, if you ask me, the current mytastynuts.com looks better, and don’t really have the right to be doing redesigns.
Of course, there’s really no harm in entering a contest where a free redesign is up for grabs—even if it ends up being not much of an upgrade at all—but that’s the problem with web design: the threshold’s too easy to cross.
The ugliest website contest would also have gone viral if the site were designed in the ugliest manner possible. Something that looks like this (without looking like they’re ripping you off). But that’s the other problem with web design: not everybody “gets” good design.
- Many have high tolerance for badly designed sites and bad design in general. Put bluntly, they wouldn’t know if something looks ugly even if it hit them in the face. Sometimes design can depend on a person’s instinct and taste, but it can also suck
- Combine that with “it’s just a lowly website”, not something cooler like architecture, fashion, or an ad campaign, and it’s a steep, uphill battle.
- And to top it all off, there’s the thin line between design and decoration, which is the absence of purpose and real content. A website, more than any other designed entity, is nothing without content and function.
Don’t be such a downer
Okay enough with the pessimism. How do we get rid of said problems? Eliminate ignorance, for starters. Buckets of inspiration from CSS galleries and image bookmarking sites are always good to have, but it’s also important to know exactly what we should avoid.
I recommend grabbing some eyedrops before clicking any of the links below:
The next step is figuring out why said sites are on the list. But that’s for another (ugly) day.
Aside from creating brilliantly art-directed articles that push the limits in with the latest HTML and CSS features, David DeSandro is redefining at least two classic site features at the same time with his Portfolio page:
The portfolio format.
Most portfolios consist of image thumbnails with either short or detailed descriptions about each project undertaken. DeSandro’s portfolio, on the other hand, contains full-width, full-height screenshots with guided markings explaining the how and why of his work, not just the what. Not only can you admire and drool over the designs, but you can learn from them as well.
The HTML image map.
The concept of image maps is sound but its execution isn’t so exciting: you don’t exactly know where to click and if you do, you don’t know what you’re clicking on. DeSandro created annotations that are intuitive and easy to navigate.
Does your portfolio need a refresh?
Your portfolio is your resume. Presenting your work and communicating your design view is critical to how others perceive you and shouldn’t be an afterthought. David’s portfolio isn’t so complex as it is well thought out. The designs are in full view; the details are straightforward. No distractions, no hype. Reexamine your portfolio page and see if yours is the same.
A “website designed by…” link is like a Louis Vuitton monogram. It’s your brand. Let your clients wear it on their websites as proudly they would with a designer handbag.
Is this always true? What makes this practice highly recommended or downright tacky?
It depends. It always does.
Your brand should never hurt your creations, it should enhance them
I bumped into this post: You Will Never See “Designed by Atrick Design”. I totally respect everything he wrote there. And I am not going to say I am completely against it. In fact, I have avoided placing links, logos, and attribution for things I’ve done in the past. But some things struck me.
In Pat Dryburgh’s post, he points this out:
I will never let a “designed by” link do my marketing. I wouldn’t want to take that away from my clients.
A link does not have to be your only way of marketing. You can always do it at the same time you’re promoting yourself in the real world.
But what does that link take away from your clients? Why does does this awful perception exist? If you’re a good designer, (1) you will find a way to place your link so that it fits nicely into the design; and (2) visitors will consider it either convenient or eye candy.
more
A little while ago I had a brief discussion with an online contact over at Pownce. It was about web design, and how he felt that it was something that had totally degraded. In his point of view, designers just didn’t try hard enough, they just went with the current flow, sporting a pretty one-sided canvas.
I agree to some extent, that’s why I bashed the rounded corners in one of my first posts here at Wisdump. It’s not that I hate rounded corners, if they’re warranted in a design then that’s fine, but more that I think that too many uses them just because that’s the current craze. Just like the fresh Web 2.0 pastels and whatnot, we all know the look, and we like it. If all aimed to achieve it, the web would be a bit boring, however.
more
With all the sidebar (and footer) bashing I’ve been doing lately, I thought I’d share a nice sidebar design with you, and tell you why I like it.
Enter Blog Perfume, which has a decent design overall, clean and sober, yet modern and with things happening. I’m no fan of the header, the background makes it a bit too busy, but other than that it’s nice enough. Also, the search bar needs to pop more.
And the sidebar is great.
On top, the subscribe graphic, precisely where you expect it to be.
Under that, a nice two column categories menu, with a separate background plate to really stand out. It works well with the Feedburner flame in the subscribe graphic above, very nice.
Two ads follows. I see them, they don’t annoy me.
Then the sidebar gets a little more anonymous, something I think is on purpose. Light grey boxes for popular posts and recent comments (which has an overuse of bold type, unfortunately) offer deep linking to the readers, and they do it in a sober and clean manner.
Finally, there’s a bigger square ad at the bottom. I think it’s OK to end the sidebar with a bigger ad, I have no problems with that. On this particular occasion, all ads fitted the layout nicely as well.
Watch and learn, people. No crappy widgets, just clean functionality for the readers, and the necessary ads. A good utilization of the sidebar.
*/
