February 06, 2004 | View Comments (20) | Category: Our Thoughts
Summary: Ripoffs, inspiration and taking CSS beyond its limits.
It all started when I posted SKKS over at the Vault. When I first saw it of course it reminded me of Andy Budd's sub:lime entry over at the CSS ZenGarden. Andy recognized the similarities as well. Before that I posted the new AOL site and people mentioned that it looked like the Macromedia site. I have gotten a couple of emails from individuals telling me how a site I posted on the Vault is a complete ripoff of another site and that maybe I should consider taking it down. Some people take these things as compliments and others get thoroughly upset. I however see a different problem arising.
I receive around 20-30 Vault submissions a day. Obviously not all of them get posted. Some get posted that many people like. Some get posted that "resemble" other sites. Some get posted that are complete ripoffs of other sites. (Sidenote: I am not a policeman, so if a site I post is a ripoff of another site, don't think it is my responsibility to take care of the situation. I am just the curator of a gallery. Nothing else.) Very rarely do I post a site that pushes the limits of CSS. That is the problem I am seeing.
At the rate we are going, the only thing that is going to differentiate the way our sites look in 2 years are the header graphics that we use. If you need an example of taking CSS and design a step further then Didier shows you an example with navigation. Bowman laments about the same thing. Are we just getting comfortable with doing sites that are inspired by others, either because they look good or we know we can easily do the layout in CSS?
I freely admit to have fallen into to the same trap of designing a layout based on designs that I know I could easily do. Rarely do I think about pushing the envelope or innovating when it comes to design. Sometimes we have the time and resources to do this and other times we don't. Take note that I am not even talking about the "all CSS designs are boxy" argument, because we all know that the box has its place on the web.
The Vault has been both a gift and a curse (thanks Jay-Z) to me. The gift is that obviously now I have a repository of sites and resources that I can easily go through to provide me with inspiration. The curse is that I have seen all these sites and all the layouts and designs before it seems. I run the Vault, but I don't visit it. I am scared that if I go to it I will constrict my own creativity into falling into what I see on the site, instead of what I can achieve. Maybe I just notice this stuff more because I am involved with it everyday. Also, the new grid view helps you notice a disturbing pattern through the sites, especially since most of them are blogs.
I encourage people to visit the Vault and take inspiration from it. However, when you are taking inspiration from any site, maybe instead of tweaking it to your style, we could begin to push the design passed the limits that we thought it originally had. Of course, stuff like this will always be easier said than done.
The most exciting web design news for me this year was when Zeldman mentioned that he was creating some new layouts with CSS. Who knows and who cares if they will really push anything, but it tells you something when that is the most exciting thing for me.
I know all of this can seem like a contradiction from someone who loves minimalism in design, but I also love innovation. Not every site created will be the "next coming" but it's always fun to see a site popup here and there that takes us in a new direction.
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/140
I'd have to agree with the "pushing the limits of CSS" part, definitely. Although Didier Hilhorst seems to believe differently ( http://superfluousbanter.org/archives/000142.php ), I believe that CSS is a very powerful tool... especially within the browsers that properly support it.
Now, I'm not particularly good with creating graphics. Although I'd love to have more of them, I'm not yet very adept to making them with the available tools. If someone could invent a mind-sucker device to take the ideas from my brain and turn them into actual digital graphics, that'd be fantastic!
I spent a lot of 2001 and 2002 looking all over the internet, trying to get inspiration from a really good looking website. I didn't find any. Not until I came across Zeldman's site (two or three revisions ago) did I find something worthwhile.
Nowadays, I find myself at awe of some simpler, more minimal sites (Signal vs Noise, Elementary, Andy Budd, TheLandOfPlenty.org), as well as a few of the more complex sites out there. Most, however, do not push the envelope. These days, the only place where I see people pushing the envelope is at the CSS Zen Garden.
I'd like to see more of that going around...
Ryan Parman (http://www.skyzyx.com)
The sites in the vault do offer different looks and feels. Maybe it is the fact that the majority of them are blogs, so the layouts are consistent with all of them. As I mentioned it is a different perspective when you actually have to look at these things daily.
As for offering no new suggestions, I openly admitted to not being one who has tried to push design beyond certain limits. I offered Didier's navigation as an example of new things that could be done.
When I said not all designs could push the limits, I meant not all designs could push the limits. Same with that of available time and resources. It's not always possible, but I think it is very possible to achieve here and there.
Is using a client's site time to experiment? No.
Scrivs (http://www.9rules.com/whitespace/)
I got long-winded, so I posted my thoughts on my own site instead:
http://relativelyabsolute.com/archives/2004/02/fresh-css/
Paul G (http://www.relativelyabsolute.com)
Funny, I actually wrote something similar not long ago.
There's nothing wrong with the tried and true, and conventions will catch on. However, these conventions are always started by someone who originally pushed something a little bit. Yes, I think that there were "pioneers" for the header/content/sidebar layout that's so common these days.
There's always a new way to do something, even if you restrict yourself to minimalism (not that minimalism is a "restriction" ;) ).
Chris VIncent (http://dris.dyndns.org:8080/)
I eagerly await voting day for Version2. ^_^
Will participants re-design in order to win or to be creative?
Personally, I grow tired (ok, maybe not) of the current nice stuff. Some site listed in the gallery are pleasant to contemplate, but the effect dies and I want to see more. The quest for more nicely done things is important too. ^_^ The crowd delving in Flash-based or table-based sites are good. CSS-based designers are still lagging behind I fear. Show us more of the good stuff!
When Paul wrote about being afraid to visit the Vault lest it constricts his creativity, I must disagree. Do not be afraid! We must all be open-minded for creativity to grow. Accept the fact that not all of us are pure-geniuses or blessed with too much talent. How can we design what we do not know, what we do not experience, feel for. I say that by isolating (figure of speech) ourselves, we limit what we can do. Ah, the word I was looking for: diversity. It does not stop at web design, and applies also for science and space exploration. As Mulder says, "the truth is out there".
Wasn't there a saying that went: "copying one source is called plagiarism; copying many sources is called research"? Funny.
Keywords: diversity, experience, truth.
Zelnox
I'm probably fixing to alienate all those minimal / no plug-in purists out there, but if you really look hard - most sites, (even those non-compliant table freak ones), are laid out with a header, two or three columns and a footer. It's the graphic presentation that makes the difference.
Look at some of these as examples
-----
http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/flashpro/video/gallery/?promoid=fma_homepage_wave6_gallery_020404
-----
http://www.gulfstream.com/gulfstreamg550/index_content.html#
-----
http://www.ford.com.ar/ecosite/index.htm
-----
It's really amazing what a good graphic, flash video, sound or all the above enhances the experience to what's a typical layout while giving you a completely fresh experience.
For those who would argue the plug-in factor, there is no reason why you can't provide alternate content for those in the extremely minimal category who don't have flash pre-installed on their browser.
Mark Fusco (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
I just don't understand the call to "push the envelope." There is a science to communication. If you are expecting a revolutionary design to come along that will turn the design world on its head, it isn't going to happen. What does happen is slow evolution that, through short-term observation, you will not notice. Look at the designs of a year ago, and see if they haven't evolved.
I look around the web and everyday I see something new and exciting. Take http://www.baxleydesign.com/index.html for example. Does it push the envelope? Is it revolutionary? No, it is simply beautiful design based on sound principles. If you find that boring, then I don't know what to tell you.
Clinton Barth (http://www.516media.com/nudge/)
I don't know why people are concerned with "pushing the envelope" when they seem satisfied with the kind of dreary designs that form 90% of the CSSVault.
They tend to look the same because they are the same.
I could never do a CSSVault, there are very few web designs I find exciting. To me, the CSSVault is mostly full of mediocre makeweight.
It would be better for people to do something good with simple techniques. Designing a new type of menu is not what I regard as "pushing the envelope". It's just a new gimmick.
Forget about pushing the envelope, try to do something interesting with what you already know before thinking of moving on from that point.
Get some taste.
Sorry to take a pop at so many sacred cows in one comment.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
I think you're just going through a stage, called being jaded. It is just a stage, and it'll pass. When I reviewed games, and got paid for it, all of them felt the same to me after a while. Now that I'm not paid to do it, and I play games at my leisure, I find that there's a lot of creativity that I missed before. Our moods fluctuate, and so do our tastes for the things we become involved with on a day-to-day basis.
The problem with inspiration and web design is that as people learn, they achieve more. With CSS, I'm finding it's a step-by-step process, especially since I'm teaching myself everything, instead of going to school for anything. As I learn more, I push the boundaries more. So a site that you see as a carbon copy as another means that person is incrementally getting better - 2 or 3 months down the road, you may find that he'll have a layout that is original and fresh, only because he learned from inspirational sites.
Matt Burris (http://www.goodblimey.com/)
Clinton: I remember now that I had a similar thought as I was writing my post earlier, but forgot to write it down. I think too often we expect to see (or try to make) some discovery that will cause an industry-wide paradigm shift.
That's unrealistic. Hell, we still don't have complete CSS1 support in all the major browsers, and we expect some new technique of ours to fundamentally change the web?. Too often, our attempts in those directions aren't really industry-shaking innovations, but rather (as Joel pointed out) gimmicks.
That is not to say that trying bizzare new ideas should be avoided (seriously, who's going to recreate an image with CSS for any real project?), but rather that we should not expect every one of these ideas to revolutionize the web.
I can agree with Joel that we need to refine our use of the tools we have, but I don't agree that we should do that to the exclusion of trying new ideas and new tools. Today's idiotic idea is tomorrow's jetliner.
Like I said in my post, keep your goals in mind as you create. Your client's site probably doesn't need a slide-out menu effect with four levels of subnavigation, and your personal site can probably get away with a completely off-the-wall design full of useless little gadgets and doo-hickeys. Just remember that both aspects are valid in their proper contexts.
Paul G (http://www.relativelyabsolute.com)
I'm not against trying new things, not at all, but many who are constantly trying to do the new things have yet to master the old ones. Like, for instance, managing to put three colours together that actually look attractive.
And so that I am not misunderstood, I should say that it's worth doing the CSSVault just for the 10% that's any good. You always catch a lot of tiddlers when you spread a wide net.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
And because fate steps in to fill a void, take Scriv's latest addition to CSSVault:
http://xox.lealea.net/01/
Now that really is good. That's a design. That's not more of the same old dreary stuff.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
Joel: Again, you make a good point. I think the problem (if it can be called such) is that the web is open to anyone.
Just by extrapolating statistics, I think it's safe to assume that most of those who call themselves "web designers" (myself included) have little or no formal training in layout, color theory, etc. So naturally, with a huge field of untrained and unedited publishers out there on the web, you're going to have some horrific sites.
I would venture that, mundane as you or I may think some are, most of the entries in the vault are light-years ahead of 90-something percent of the web in terms of layout, color scheme, orgainization, usability, and accessibility.
I think the fact that many of these sites are "minimalistic" reflects that we (as a community) are trying to get back to the basics of what is necesary instead of throw in every little piece of chrome that catches our eye. I think we are a a little hung over after our binge, and there are books published with the title "Web Pages That Suck" to remind us that we don't want to fall off that particular wagon again :).
Also, just because someone can't avoid combining purple and green in their color scheme doesn't mean that they can't contribute something useful to the community. Not everyone's forte is in design. Help out where you can :)
Paul G (http://www.relativelyabsolute.com)
I'm not sure about what others mean, but when I say "pushing the envelope", I don't mean neat tricks like pure-CSS drop-down menus and translucency effects. I mean really coming up with a design that breaks the mold. There is a mold, no doubt. It's simply convention, a trend that's caught on. A year or two from now, we'll probably be over the whole light-colored, low-contrast, ultra-simple period. It will be something different, and it will become just as ubiquitous. What we have now might even be hip, "retro" design :P.
The point is, design will develop, trends will set, and they will fall. The question is, how will each designer break the trends in his or her own unique way?
Chris Vincent (http://dris.dyndns.org:8080/)
Practice make perfect, eh?
We should not strive to downplay "different" stuff, because most of us do not understand (that is also why it is different). It is highly possible we just never thought of doing things some way. Open mind.
Of course, there are obvious ways to do things wrong. Nevertheless, it can conflict with the previous paragraph.
*whispers* Some of the oft-visited weblogs I visit are ugly. >_
If what the Vault holds is not good enough, then where is the good stuff? Table-less, please.
Finally...
Avoid stagnation!
Zelnox
The truth path to glory is through stealing, killing and css. Find a way to combine all three and you are set for life. Fuck the critics.
submunition (http://www.submunition.com)
The problem, of course, is that the web is no longer new. We are all used to a pace of innovation that is unsustainable (at least without browser wars fueling the possibilities).
We have to accept that the future evolution of the medium will be much slower. Also, you can't expect the most talented artists and designers to flock to standards-based design. Debugging CSS to work moderately well across browsers is enough to kill anyone's creativity. The reason most sites don't try something new is because of the incredible amount of work that has gone into getting the existing layouts to work as well as they do. The Web is about information, and the tendency is to get information up as fast as possible, which precludes endless css hacking.
If you want to see ground-breaking work, you're much better off looking to Flash designers. Flash is a tool that honors creativity instead of bludgeoning it to a bloody pulp like Internet Explorer. And even flash is limited compared to pre-rendered animation and composite video. When browsers support CSS to the letter, then creativity will once again flourish, but until then it will be confined to the experimental.
Gabe (http://www.websaviour.com/)
To address Joel and Paul G's comments: I did go to school for graphic design, where they taught us about layout, color, typography, etc. I've done almost as much print work as web work. So usually, that's where my first and foremost priority is. For CSS and XHTML: I taught that all myself through the wonderful resources on the internet.
I think the problem with "originality" is that a lot of people don't seem to want to step out of their comfort zone in their aesthetic knowledge. For example, if all they know is clean, simple web design, they don't want to try a grunge treatment or assymetrical layout. Or vice versa. There's not enough experimentation. There's a lot of variations of one style. Which may be fine to some (and sometimes necessary, especially in the corporate world), but occasionally, you need to break the mold in order to open your and others eyes. There's been a lot of brouhaha over how Print is not Web and Web is Not Print -- and it's true. But the mistake occurs when a person believes that the design principles of one and the other are completely separate.
Just to let you know: I'm neither punk, grunge nor goth, and purple is not my favorite color. ;-)
Lea (http://xox.lealea.net/)
Hi Scrivs,
Just to say that I really wasn't that bothered by the SKKS site as both that and my initial Zen Garden site are non commercial, and in all honesty the sub:lime CSS (although not the design) are released under a creative commons license. I'd probably have been more bothered if either sites were commercial sites. The reason that I mentioned it was mostly down to me finding it a little amusing. Clicking on a link in my RSS reader to see the latest great site you've come across (where do you find them all?) only to be presented with a slight feeling of deja-vu.
I think you're right about the homogenisation of CSS design though. Every new site I see these days is a fixed width, centred site with a drop shadow. I quite like this style, but it's starting to get stale quite quickly. Rather than people complaining about CSS sites looking boxy, they will start to complain that they all look the same.
Andy Budd (http://www.andybudd.com/blog/)
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
I don't quite follow you when you say that all of the designs look the same. If you mean header, sidebar and content, then yes, they are similar. But blame that on the tried and true conventions of the web rather than CSS. There are still thousands of combinations based on type, color and organization alone. The sites in the vault give very different looks and feels, regardless of the similarity between layouts.
You ask for new designs but don't offer any real suggestions. When someone like Zeldman does something different he gets bashed for it. Or someone tries creating something new and they get the usual "usability" gripes. In most real world situations, you are just not given the freedom to push the envelope and if you are, it's seldom the responsible choice.
Form follows function, and on the web the function is severely limiting. Job number 1 is to convey a message, pushing the envelope should be considered far after.
Clinton Barth (http://www.516media.com/nudge/)