January 11, 2004 | View Comments (42) | Category: Design Critiques
Summary: A new series involving design critiques for major websites. First up is Zeldman.
Due to the recent discussions involving opinions on the web and offering criticism I thought I would start doing some design critiques on sites to hopefully provide a nice skeleton for others who wish to offer their opinions and to also provide feedback to the designers of the sites. With any luck, some quality discussions will follow. My first critique: Jeffrey Zeldman Presents: The Daily Report.
Let me begin with something that everyone will have an opinion about: the HUGE header that he uses for all of his pages. To be honest with you I rather enjoy it for its visual appeal. It helps to maintain his brand while allowing for a "something different" type feel that you have to respect as a designer. With that said, looking good and trying cool things does not mean the world, especially on the web. The problem that I encounter with the header is that it repeatedly draws my eyes away from the content, which I am assuming is the main draw of the site. I try to read some of his wonderful prose, but my eyes keep telling me that there is something more interesting at the top of the screen. I guess I could say that another problem has to do with the fact that on smaller resolutions the header can take up the majority of screen real estate (e.g. if you were on 800x600), but I don't think his intended audience, designers, should have a problem with small resolutions. It is something cool to try, but in the end I don't think it has its intended effect, whatever that may be.
I am hoping that it is something to do with my monitor, but there is this "background effect" where towards the bottom of the screen the yellow color fades to white. This kills me, because I keep on thinking that my monitor must not be working properly. Maybe starting off with white and then fading to yellow would do a better job of drawing the eyes down the page, but the yellow to white makes my eyes do a complete stop and no longer do I worry about the content or the generously sized header, I begin to have concerns about my eyesight and my monitor.
A big issue with the background has to do with the "try to find me" syndrome that it creates. As a designer their is always an internal battle between usability and aesthetics. It is possible to make something extremely usable and look good at the same time. However, for me, the navigation's color scheme is neither. The non-active tabs are hidden not really because of their background color, but because of the light border that is used and the background color of the rest of the site. The exact same thing could be said of the right-side bar. A third color added to this scheme (ignoring white and black) would do wonders for the whole site I believe.
A better example of how the navigation can be improved with a small color change can be seen on the Designing With Web Standards page. The same yellow and orange are used, but this time with a white background allowing the navigation to standout and become usable.
There are two different navigation systems in place. Neither of them seem to be related. I guess my only question would be why not either put all the sections on the top or all the sections on the right? Because of the navigation system, the site becomes severely disjointed. If you click on the about page, then nothing is highlighted in the top navigation, therefore implying that I am just completely lost with no where to go. Even with a personal site such as this, it is important to give the user a sense of where she is at and if you can't do that at least let the navigation show that it is one site and not two sites sharing the same domain name.
Note: Currently my own site does not offer a way for users to know where they are at via the navigation, so this critique applies to myself as well.
Another issue with the IA involves the ability to go through Zeldman's archives or lack of ability to do so. The only way I could figure to do this was by clicking on the small "Previous Reports" button at the bottom of the site. If I wanted to view what Zeldman wrote on my birthday (Aug. 14th) for example, it seems there would be a lot of clicking involved. It's possible that I am missing something here however.
I do like the color scheme and the fact that this version is more readable as compared to the previous one.
Hopefully, I have offered a constructive piece outlining the issues that I believe could be improved with the site. This is not a critique on Zeldman's ability to design websites, because he has proven himself time and time again, but on this particular design of his website. I believe with the most recent design he was going for more of the "art" and less of the "design" of the site and simply forgot about his audience.
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/102
"I am hoping that it is something to do with my monitor."
It displays as white on the bottom fn my screen too. *rubs eyes*
The navigation starts to make a bit more sense when you start the click around. The links on the right lead to the pages which are almost standard on an personal site whereas the top navigation is for the real content.
Overall, I agree with the points made. Was there any reason why you chose to critique Zeldman's design first?
Jack (http://boxofjack.com)
I really like boldness of the banner and think it makes a strong branding statement. But you are right, it is distracting. I just did not realise it till you pointed it out. I just visited the site again and what I seem to have been doing is subconciously scrolling down to hide the banner while I read. Anyway, I like this redesign, espcailly the use of space, but I think you make a fair and balanced critique.
dez (http://dezwozhere.com/blog/)
Is it possible to give a first-time visitor point of view for a site you visit a lot? For me the problems I express exist whether you are a first time visitor or daily visitor.
The reason I went with Zeldman mainly is because Dunstan mentioned it over at asterisk* and I figured it was a good starting point. Also, since not too many people give critiques of Zeldman's work (that I know) why not start there. I do occassionally see the "his site sucks" type comments, but obviously those help no one.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
To be honest, I liked the old Daily Report better. Still, the new design has its merits as well.
I agree on the banner. I'd also say that the graphic on the front page seems a little weak in comparison to those on other top-level pages. The front page banner is just a head floating awkwardly within the orange. The other section banners, however, seem to make better use of the graphics.
While the navigation is split logically between main content and background content, it also seems to somewhat confuse common browsing. Either menu could easily qualify as being the important one, from a purely visual standpoint. If the background content sections were separate enough to merit a completely new menu, they probably shouldn't appear as dominant.
The tabs don't appear to be attached to the banner unless they are hovered over. This is a sort of odd visual cue. Also, and purely subjectively, the corners of the tabs aren't antialiased.
While the color scheme below the banner looks nice as it is, it's perhaps a little too light. Very slightly darkened color (like on the yellowish color) could create contrast and visual interest, as well as separate the page background from the content.
Truthfully, the site is quite fine as it is, but these are the things I notice when thinking about ways it could be even better. To level it out, here are some of the things I like:
Anyone who's looked at any portion of Zeldman's work will be able to note two things: he has a definite style, and he likes orange. The new design really strengthens the sense of style and branding, making sure everyone knows it's the work of Zeldman.
Just when you think it's a little duo-tone, you rollover the links and see a very nice shade of blue. One can only wonder why blue was chosen for such a small detail as link rollovers when everything else was orange and yellow, but the effect works very well. Subtle compliments are the best ones (as opposed to, say, a huge blob of blue in some corner screaming, "Look at me! I'm complimenting the color scheme!!!").
The way the information is organized on the page is perfect. The "highlights" section on the bottom of the Daily Report, though it could use some visual separation from the Report itself, is a great way to fill in some context. Strangely, I actually like the use of a button widget for going back a date, though there should certainly be a more "overseeing" archives navigation in place. Then again, the guy codes his pages by hand (not using MT or the like). You have to respect that (one must wonder when he'll finally buckle).
I like the subtle little clock icon by the date.
I like the visual formatting of the actual content.
Anyways, that's about all I can say at this time of night (3 am where I am). To sum it up, I don't think this particular incarnation of the Daily Report is Zeldman's best work, but it certainly isn't bad, and I enjoy its appeal.
I look forward to future critique entries, Scrivs. Good idea! We can all learn from these; this discussion alone has brought many of my own design flaws to the surface.
Dris (http://dris.webhop.org/)
You bastard Scrivs, I was just about to do my own critique of zeldman.com! :o]
Anyway, whenever you change a site it takes a while for old users to become adjusted to the change, irrespective of how good the new design is, but even taking account of this I just get a vibe about the site -- that it feels slightly unfinished.
It could be just my dislike for the colour "cream", but there's a few other things that put me off:
- The tabs are a bit simple and jagged. I haven't checked whether they're images or use CSS rounded corners, but they have that pure-CSS border look that I don't like on major site elements.
- The tabs also incorporate weirdly with the content of the site. They're not separate and they're not joined, they feel like they're floating lost.
- The header picture on the home page looks first year Art school. It's easily changed and he'll probably cycle it regularly, but it influences your thoughts about the rest of the site.
- The contrast of the background yellow with the white isn't strong enough, particularly given the background fade-out at the bottom of the page. This makes the page feel too wide (a challenge you have to meet when using a fixed width page).
Sure, Zeldman himself has said it's his site, and it's his experimentation, but he also has to understand that his site gets a LOT of traffic and a lot of respect, so his design has to be sharp and on the ball.
Cameron Adams (http://www.themaninblue.com)
I agree with a lot of what Cameron mentioned:
[1] the execution of the graphics on the site seem to be very poor - maybe that's just an arty effect I don't get, I mean, really it must be, he's perfectly capable to doing well finished imagery, he just seems to have chosen... not to. Or to finish things in an unconventional way.
[2] I find the nav on the site utterly confusing, the DWS page you link to Scrivs has three sets of navbars on it, it's really too much (for my brain anyway). Don't Make Me Think.
[3] Never liked the archiving system he has there, seems daft you can't get an overview of things.
Frankly I've never got on with his site - there's a few little features I like (like the tiny menu) but otherwise the design, writing style never made a positive impact on me. (I also can't stand the 'we' thing.)
If it wasn't 'Zeldman', I wouldn't ever visit the site. Unless something wonderful happens, I think I shall drift away altogether.
But I think you're right Scrivs, he does seem to be moving more and more towards the obscure and arty side of things... perfectly reasonable when you've been doing (succesful) web things as long as he has, it's always nice to experiment.
He's not holding the design up as a model of usability or function, but as a personal playground, which makes everything a lot more subjective. I can't stand it. He obviously likes it.
p.s. one excellent thing is legability - nice font sizes.
Dunstan (http://www.1976design.com/blog/)
I've noticed the background colours before, (also see the ALA mini-redesign), I've noticed the same anti-usable dual navigation system (maybe if the right hand side was longer it could warrant its inclusion).
The header: Maybe it's because I'm still caught up in the pastel coloured older JZP:TDR, but the header seems too dominant compared to the lightly coloured content.
I've also thought about the general shape of the site seems so different to other sites... so wide at the top and then so narrow (if you don't get the same feeling, try scrolling down a bit).
Positives: I do like the colour scheme, I believe that blue makes a very effective contrast colour and so I'd like to see more of it included.
I don't like the fact that sometimes I don't know where one post finishes and one starts.
David House
Hmm, I think my post earlier might have come across as a bit agressive. I think that's because zeldman.com is one of those sites I feel ought to embody everything I'm into - and it doesn't.
I think that kind of annoys me :op
Like being a musician, going to your hero's concert, and finding that they've given up playing the music you like and are now playing asynchronous Peruvian Jazz.
You recognise that it's a valid music style, and that they must have a good reason for doing it, but since you're not in the decision-making loop you just think, "What the hell is this?"
I'm sure he's achieving what he wants to achieve. But from a cold, clear look at the site, it doesn't do an awful lot of things _I_ would expect from a site.
There, I hope that's a bit more relaxed :o)
p.s. I still feel very odd critiquing someone's site when they're not taking part in the conversation. Are you going to write to JZ and let him know what we're saying?
I also feel odd because Zeldman is there to be shot at. I feel like I keep having to apologise when I say something negative, but really, I don't think that should be the case. I feel guilty, and I'm not even Catholic ;o)
Dunstan (http://www.1976design.com/blog/)
"I feel guilty, and I'm not even Catholic"
Nice.
Anyways, I think Dunstan has a great point in his parallel to your favorite band's concert. Also, we shouldn't feel guilty for an honest critique. Nobody here is bashing or flaming (yet), so this is nothing but positive.
I'm sure Zeldman's either noticed this or is about to; if Scrivs emailed him, that's probably one out of a bajillion emails Zeldman has to go through as it is, but he seems to keep tabs on the Internet pretty well (known from being an old reader of the site).
I think it would be better to have the designer as part of the discussion, but I've never seen Zeldman's comments on other people's blogs. More than likely, he'll respond on his own site if he thinks it merits a post.
Dris (http://dris.webhop.org/)
The curious thing is that he devoted a lot of his book "Designing with Web Standards" to how he put together his previous design. While he shouldn't be bound by that to keep the old design forever, it's odd to jettison that design so soon and not make it available any more to those who may want to examine it after buying the book.
He clearly wants to make his site look like his book, but has gone overboard. The large masthead looks atrocious. The site breaks in Opera 7.11 in Windows (as does your 9rules Paul, incidentally), and while he was aware of that initially he doesn't seem too bothered about fixing it.
The site seems to me like the kind of design you might come up with if you had just started designing websites, but would eventually decide looked ugly. I've learnt a great deal about web design from Zeldman, and the neatness of his hand coding is an inspiration (amazed by that comment about people using MT, many people still hand code don't they, I certainly do), but this site doesn't cut it visually.
I think for Zeldman the benefits of branding have become a nightmare, seeming to dictate his design choices at the expense of aesthetic quality. His attempt to brand his site in step with his book lacks subtlety in my eyes. Mind you, the design of the book cover leaves a lot to be desired as well. Zeldman was better when he preferred blue. Seems he will be stuck with that out-of-focus bad self-portrait for evermore as well.
In print publishing it is well-known never to use orange unless you can specify a Pantone ink, because it always comes out dirty-looking, but on the Zeldman site the shade of orange he has chosen on my monitor certainly looks a nasty brown. To have that much of an ugly colour was a bad idea.
Joel (http://www.biroco.com/)
Just thought I would chime in and say that I have emailed him to let him know what is going on here. Of course it would be nice to have the man himself come here, but I really think these might work best if the designers of the sites waited a couple of days till the discussion died down and the posted a reply either here or on their own site. That way they do not constantly have to come back and explain their reasoning behind everybody's dislikes.
Excellent thoughts so far by the way.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
I wanted to post my comments on this topic. To me, Zeldman is one of the greats of web design, and like all greats in any field, they always seem to be one step ahead of everyone else. The initial reaction to many things they do is questioned and debated over and over until a little while later when they have time to explain their actions. Then most people sit back and go "OHHHH, now i get it. That really makes since, i will go copy that style now." And that leads to the copycats that, in our case, flood the web with lookalikes.
I agree with most of the comments and critiques posted so far, but have one comment to add. Could any of us do much better? What if we were this great web designer that everyone looked up to like a big brother or a famous movie star?
Everyone has different tastes, I dont think there are so many problems with his new site, as much as there are many personal touches that Zeldman uses to experience and show what he likes and how he likes his webpages to look. It is all about your point of view.
Are there really any set rules for a personal site? I like how Zeldman is expanding his designs and testing the waters of what really does or doesnt work in real world web design on a site that pulls the kind of traffic as his site does.
Long live King Zeldman!
Josh Jarmin (http://www.radiantrock.com/blog/)
Josh, this isn't people making criticism of a film as non-film-directors, this is a selection of web designers making criticism of a web design. So I would hope that it is implied that yes the critic could do better, otherwise it would be disingenuous of them to comment.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
Josh: I can understand where you are coming from and I am sure the others can also. We all have high regards for Zeldman and to be honest I don't expect ridiculously awesome designs out of him. I guess I kind of expect something more functional. As a designer there will always be a need to try new things and stretch the boundaries, however his site is more of a landmark site. For the independent web and its designers, he has taken the role of spokesperson, so a critique by other members of the community is not a diss towards him, but a simple critique of his site.
The same kind of critiques will be done on other sites as well. Simply because someone is regarded as "godlike" does not alleviate them from some constructive criticism. Everyone so far has done an excellent job of providing informed opinions without going to the "your site sucks" range. As a designer these things are meant to help us grow as is the process of experimenting. Even Zeldman would agree with this I am sure.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
Scrivs:
I enjoyed reading your well-written critique. The area of most interest to me is your discussion of the site's IA.
About two-thirds of my visitors come for The Daily Report. The rest come for archival content (e.g. The Ad Graveyard) or relatively static promotional content (DWWS mini-site). The IA must serve both kinds of visitors and allow crossover.
Zeldman.com has icons, but it's not Iconfactory. It has interviews with movie actors, but it's not trying to become a movie fan destination site. The challenge is to unobtrusively straddle the site's multiple worlds and subtly guide visitors to the more frequently updated content without blocking their access to the old stuff.
A normal site would not have to do that, because a normal site would offer a more focused experience built around business goals, organizational goals, or a particular creative goal (join the ACLU, learn about our church, look at my photo gallery).
Doing IA for zeldman.com is like trying to do IA for a person. It's a challenge and no solution is really going to be 100% right. But that's part of the fun of it. Reading your comments and other folks' here is also fun -- and a learning experience. Thanks!
zeldman (http://www.zeldman.com/)
Are you going to print out that post and have it framed Scrivs? :o]
Cameron Adams (http://www.themaninblue.com)
What tickles my tummy is how Jeffrey names things in his code:
bravefourhundred
buttski
googoodoll
blurbomatic2
BTW Scrivs, well balanced critique, but I'd like to see you dive deeper into the code in the future.
Will (http://www.willpate.org)
Cameron: What do you mean? Mean and ol Z go way back ;) Haha, just joking, but I can appreciate the man for posting such a thoughtful response. Only helps to increase the respect.
Will: Since this was design critique I just didn't see the need to dive into the code. Besides, that would just make the post uber long.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
Right, a major code dissection would stretch the attention span. Perhaps I was just looking forward to a "Code Highlights" subtopic. It might only be worth it for Jeffrey's site; based on DWWS and what I've seen from his stylesheet there could be a few gems if one was interested.
Perhaps that will be enough to point those interested in the right direction if they want to check it out themselves.
Will Pate (http://www.willpate.org)
"For the independent web and its designers, he has taken the role of spokesperson, so a critique by other members of the community is not a diss towards him, but a simple critique of his site." - Scrivs
I hope that my comments were not taken as blasting anyone or bashing what anyone said. That wasnt my purpose, and I am sorry if that is how it came off. I agree that people like Zeldman should be held to a higher standard because he is a spokesman for design and web standards. Especially after just releasing a new web standards book, Zeldman has even more of a burden of proof to back up what is covered in the book with his site. I loved your review and thought it was very insightful and extremely fair and well balanced. I am sorry if I offended you or anyone else with what I said.
Josh Jarmin (http://www.radiantrock.com/blog/)
Josh: No one took offense. I just wanted you to understand that this was just a critique that even Zeldman himself liked. There will be many more to come.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
As someone who has worked along side of Zeldman and as someone who considers him a good friend... did you ask him before you did this? Did he approach you for a critique?
I am not saying you did anything wrong here Paul, I am just saying it comes across like some of the comments I see in my Wife's fashion magazines... just because someone is in the public eye a lot doesn't mean every Joe has fair license to critique them and their work.
Look, I just think that only the designer should ask for critiques, the public shouldn't issue them on the designer's behalf.
I am going to leave it at that because I don't know the full story. Maybe you did talk to him before you published this... maybe he was game for the critique… I don’t know.
Nick Finck (http://www.digital-web.com)
I did not approach Zeldman before I did the critique, but I did let him know about it afterwards. When a site is in the public domain it is really fair game for a honest, well written critique. Is it fair to bash an individual over a design? Of course not and I made sure not to do so. I understand that many people have a lot of different emotions towards Zeldman so maybe I shouldn't have done his site first, but again if you read his comments and the email he sent me, he was quite impressed by the way I handled it.
Hopefully one day I have the honor of working with him and possibly being able to call him my friend. In that respect I can see some people getting a little touchy about these critiques so in the future I will let the designer know ahead of time. However, again these are only here to help us grow, not to pull us back.
Many of us, myself included, do not like the web in its current form with too many people pawning off websites as being "good enough". The web could be a much better place, which I am sure you will agree with. These critiques in themselves are only meant to help designers see other people's opinions about how they view sites. If we keep ourselves within a bubble then none of us will get anywhere. I have been more than impressed by the comments left here by everyone, because they do show the maturity and experience of this community. This critique has only gotten better by the responses that everyone has made. I thank you.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
Sure, it's nice not to tread on anyone's toes, but anything you place in a public area -- such as the Internet -- is going to attract criticism. So I think that asking the designer's permission to critique their site is merely a way of ameliorating any politeness-induced guilt, which is exactly what DKR's article was trying to identify and get rid of.
You can't avoid criticism just by not having an outlet for it; better that it be voiced objectively by people whose opinions you hopefully value than it being uninformed flaming.
Cameron Adams (http://www.themaninblue.com)
Like Cameron says, you don't need to ask permission to critique something that's out there in the public space.
zeldman (http://www.zeldman.com/)
Public critiques without permission is gossip. I don't know about you, but I hate gossip.
Nick (http://www.digital-web.com)
Scrivs, a print stylesheet for your site would be cool! Just on my way and thought i'd print this post out to read but it doesn't work to well in print (win/firebird).
Aside from that - thoroughly enjoyable read as ever.
Guy Carberry (http://www.guyweb.co.uk)
Nick, not only is it fair to conservatively criticize someone in the public eye, it's necessary as that person has the greatest influence on others.
Lewis
I'm dissapointed I missed this conversation early on...I too have wanted to do a critique of Zeldman's site, also because, as Dustan mentioned, "I think that's because zeldman.com is one of those sites I feel ought to embody everything I'm into - and it doesn't".
Although there's no question about why on would refer to the guy as "King Zeldman", I don't believe that one's contributions and excellent reputation should make them infallable by default. A review of his site can be constructive (and has been here) and should not be viewed as unthinkable.
Aside from technical and even usability concerns, the thing I like least about zeldman.com is the header graphics. Who are those people? Why are they there? Zeldman's own head on the DWS page makes sense...the others are distracting, and in my opinion, weaken his attempt at branding rather than strengthen it.
Are they just chicks? Is he trying to appeal to the male portion of his audience? And if he must go with random female headshots - I think they would benefit from the same effect/treatment. They are very inconsistent.
Is this a big deal? I think so. Since so many people do revere Zeldman as a web standards god, and in order to perpetuate that reputation, he doesn't benefit from amateurish, non-relevant graphics. The orange is bold enough on its own - better to have no graphics at all.
mahalie (http://www.mahalie.com/blog)
"A review of his site can be constructive (and has been here)..."
I totally agree with this point. This reminds me of English class where we had to critique some elses paper and tell what was good and what could be improved. Scrvis has done a great job on this critique and I think Zeldman has taken it very well. It will be interesting to see if he does decide to change anything about the site, either based somewhat on this review or because of his own design process. I cant wait to read more of these critiques of major design sites, it should be interesting.
"The orange is bold enough on its own - better to have no graphics at all."
I would tend to disagree. I think that the idea behind using the graphics is great, but like you said, they dont make since (well except for zeldman's pic on dwws). It would be hard to figure out what would be appropriate there, but I would like to see whatever goes up have the same effect as Zeldman's book cover image.
Josh Jarmin (http://www.radiantrock.com/blog/)
>The thing I like least about zeldman.com is the header graphics. Who are those people? Why are they there?
Why is there a zeppelin on Airbag.ca?
http://www.airbag.ca/
What has a zeppelin got to do with web design, which is primary the subject of Airbag?
What is the deep meaning behind the blue plaid shirt at http://www.blueplaidshirt.com/ ?
Why are there background tiles on http://a.wholelottanothing.org/ ?
Why does the sea meet the shore?
zeldman (http://www.zeldman.com/)
I actually like the header graphics. They add life to the site. I just like to click through pages to see different graphics. In fact, I was so inspired the first I spotted them, I wanted to redesign my site applying typography on the headers. And so I did.
donny (http://www.visualgui.com)
Actually, that's true. Just look at brands all over the place. What does a swoosh have to do with a shoe company? Nothing, but we all know what Nike's symbol is.
When I think of Zeldman, I think of two things: the color orange, and women. Several of his designs have featured seemingly random women in the graphics, from the current one to the one before (with the alternate background), to the front page of Happy Cog.
Truthfully, design graphics don't have to be there for a real reason. That's what the aesthetic side of design is all about: beauty. Many designs feature artwork. Does it add meaning? No, but it's beautiful.
Dris (http://dris.webhop.org/)
This reminds me of a similar topic from a few months ago: http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/our_thoughts/too_much_hype_is_no_good.php
Anyways, I've been following Zeldman's site since two designs ago (the one that had "zeldman.com" along the top left). THAT design was the one that really got my attention. From then on, I've learned a lot from Zeldman's work (although I wasn't really a fan of "Pinky").
Zeldman's new site is very good. Different than most SCD sites, but still good. The only thing that irks me about it is the typography.
I know he uses a Mac... which is excellent. And I'm sure that the font he uses looks excellent in Mac OS X (just like everything else does). But on Windows, it just looks *okay*. Not good, but tolerable. Personally, I find that I prefer Verdana or Trebuchet the most, but that's just me. They look *good* in Windows, and they look good on a Mac... instead of *excellent* on a Mac, and *tolerable* on Windows.
Also, as I've said before, some horizontal lines to create logical breaks in content (border-bottom on tags for example) would make reading it much easier... for Zeldman.com as well as ALA.
Ryan Parman (http://www.skyzyx.com)
That *should* read: "border-bottom on <h?> tags for example"
Ryan Parman (http://www.skyzyx.com)
I took Mr Zeldman's reply to mahalie's question to mean he isn't obliged to answer it -- which is a fair and valid reply.
But I don't think wondering his intent with the portrait and header image choices is a bad question. Displaying those particular header images was a decision someone somewhere had made for presentation.
And as "Optical illusion is optical truth," the visitor is left to interpret the results. This is true even for abstract expressionism. Even with Jackson Pollack, you can say that he disobeyed the brush stroke by dripping his line.
Mr Zeldman may not wish to answer because he doesn't want to interfere with his design's impact by explaining it. But just because we can't say for sure the meaning of the nike swoosh, I think it's a mistake to think nike doesn't know -- and that they don't know to the benefit of their brand. (wasn't exactly what was said, just thought my point needed to be made)
I take the cropped portraits in the header of Jeffrey Zeldman Presents as a statement on the effect of transition on the static nature of identity. I consider this an appropriate statement given the current nature of the Web.
Mike (http://www.hownottofly.com)
It seems I was unclear with what I consider to be a design flaw. An inanimate object, and even moreso, an abstraction or symbol like nike's "swoosh" enhance recognition. Their iconic nature adds brand identity and if they are used with consistency an established look and feel gives the consumer (or whatever your audience) confidence in your brand.
I have seen many sites that use headers with different pictures on each page, even different pictures on the same page using a randomizer - but they are usually not someone's face. A face makes me think "Is that the author?" or maybe "nice stock photo". In any case, it's the specifity of a person's mug shot that makes it distracting from the content.
If he is trying to make "a statement on the effect of transition on the static nature of identity" as Mike posited, he could do so much more effectively by aplying the same effect to each image and using head shots with more diversity. Including men or children would make it seem less inconsistent as it would convey the multiple identities idea a lot better.
To me the look and feel of the site with the headers as they are now simply conveys - Zeldman and a bunch of random chicks. I don't think they add, I think they're distracting and confusing. I don't think the "graphics don't have to mean anything" argument applies here - in fact, that is exactly what I am saying, that graphics should not convey meaning that will compete or contradict the site's purpose. Random or not, animate or inanimate, graphical elements should add continuity to a site by tying a look and feel together. In addition to adding visual interest they hopefully convey to the visitor, yes you are still on the same web site.
It's not the worst thing I've ever seen, it was just my 2 cents on what I think could be better, cause we all expect a lot out of Zeldman - he's created a higher standard for web design - for himself, too.
mahalie (http://www.mahalie.com/blog/)
Since the redesign of zeldman.com, I have stopped visiting the site altogether. The reason: the header graphics. I can't stand them. I used to visit the site often. I have since found other sites to replace zeldman.com.
Britt (http://homepage.mac.com/brittp/)
Those new header graphics at zeldman.com are worse than Hitler.
The first time I looked at them, my cat died.
My brother spotted them on a newstand and became impotent.
Since Zeldman started using those header graphics, I've not only stopped reading, I've also stopped feeding myself.
I believe that this is the most important issue facing our times.
I demand a pixel-by-pixel explanation, followed by a retraction, followed by an apology, followed by a vasectomy.
zeldman (http://www.zeldman.com/)
I'm grappling with what good this achieves. While I can see the need for, and merit of, a more honest assessment of web design, I'm not sure why it needs to take place in the public realm. Hell, my site is in desperate need of a rework, and it'd benefit from some feedback. But why not e-mail me directly, rather than airing it on one's weblog?
I'm not criticizing the critique — rather, I'm honestly wondering what benefit this medium offers over direct communication. If more reviews are to follow, what's the goal?
Ethan (http://www.sidesh0w.com/)
What this method allows is for other designers to possibly learn from the insight of more experienced designers. If I do a critique of a site and I say that most of the time its not good to mix two serif fonts together within the same entry, then maybe someone will look at that and notice how they do it on their own site.
With regards to zeldman's comment I just think he is trying to say that maybe sometimes we are too rigid in our designs and although there are good practices to follow, at times we can constrict ourselves by following rules to the letter. From now on critiques will be done when the designer knows about them ahead of time. I already have a couple of people requesting these. The benefits in which are that more people will respond. I have myself have asked for a couple of critiques over email, but I feel most of the time I can get better insight when I release the critique to a couple thousand people in constrasts to five.
I think this critique has done everyone a lot of good and with this in mind the comments are now closed. On to the next one.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
Is the critique using the first-time visitor point of view or a daily visitor point of view?
Zelnox