Babble v1 111

babble-digest Monday, January 5 1998 Volume 01 : Number 111

In this issue:
Delivery Report
Delivery Report
Message not deliverable
Re: Your opinions/Is presentation imoprtant?
background image-map
Re: Visual Basic or C++ or...
designers,good sites, and David Siegel fray
Re: Your opinions

- ------------------------------

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 21:19:38 -0600
From: Darrel Austin <daustin@isd.net>
Subject: Re: Your opinions/Is presentation imoprtant?

>For one thing, there is nothing wrong with getting
>a design up and running, meeting marketing goals, and then improving on
>the presentation as time permits.

But the presentation *IS* everything!

We get bombarded everyday with people trying to sell us a product. Do we
look at every offer? No. We usually pick out (whether consiously or not)
the ones that have a presentation that interests us. A place selling
off-road vehicles known for their dependability and luxury needs a
presentation that says "hey, we are dependable and elegant". A quick look
created to "just get up and running" isn't going to cut it. And no one is
going to stick around waiting for the "presentation" to get better. If you
don't draw them in the first time, you've lost them.

There are a lot of Target and Kmart stores around here. For the most part,
they have a very similiar product assortment and price structure, so you
would think they would draw the same kind of consumer. Do they? no. Why
not? PRESENTATION.

Over the years Kmart has tried to "up" it's image to bring in a younger,
hipper, crowd that may have a few more bucks of disposable income to spend.
But consumers have had the stereotypical "Kmart presentation" stuck in
there mind and its not going to be easy to change it.

>Have you worked in a "results
>oriented" enviroment at all?

Don't we, as graphic designers, ALL work in a "results orientated" environment?

>Or do you possibly have all the time you
>need to become well versed in the art of site design before you produce
>anything?

Isn't our job, as graphic designers, TO BECOME well versed in the art of
site design before we sell our services?

If we are not, than we are doing a great disservice to our clients.

Now, as for the http://www.jeepwarehouse.com site, I have a few suggestions.

As for being a "Siegel" site, well just read the book and take it for what
it is. He has some good advice, but that's all it is: advice...not rules!
(Just as I'm about to only offer advice:)

As for the look of the site, let's start with the splash page. Why is it
there? Probably to draw the visitor into the rest of the site. I don't
think what you have is going to accomplish that. You have the site's logo
across the top. That is good, as an overall identity needs to be initiated
from the start. But perhaps you do not need to be quite so obvious. "Tease"
a bit, offering a hint of what's inside.

Why do you have a "YES, we're open" sign? Arent't you ALWAYS open?

The background tends to be a bit obnoxious. I'd rather see a nice photo of
the autos on the front page highlighted, rather than a tiling background.

The splash page can do a few different things, but it needs to do
SOMETHING. Maybe tone down the page a bit and use it to pique the users
curiosity. Or maybe highlight a "special offer of the week" or "what's new"
for those they may view the site regularly.

The home page has a lot of text on it...a letter from the owner, a list of
capabilites all intertwined with various links. Seperate and highlight
these indivisually...not as one large column of text. This will make it
easier to quickly find what you are looking for.

I don't quite get the road border on the secondary pages. Aren't these
vehicle known for being "off" road vehicles?

Overall, I think your biggest obstacle is trying to get the site to feel
cohesive. As it is now, there is no real solid design elements that tie the
entire site together as a whole. As previously suggested, try working on a
color scheme to start with. I'd like to see some more "action"
shots...outdoor scenes that would appeal to the purchaser of a Jeep
vehicle. Be sure to target you audience.

Remeber, these are merely suggestions. I hope they help.

- -Darrel Austin

..H5 Babble Design List Info: http://www.highfive.com/h5/babble.html
..To unsubscribe, send the following one line to majordomo@highfive.com:
.."unsubscribe (babble or babble-digest) (e-mail address)"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 23:28:07 -0500 (EST)
From: "Michael Patrick Fegan II" <feganmic@pilot.msu.edu>
Subject: background image-map

Hola - Could anyone tell me if you can image-map a background image. If so,
how the heck do you do it?

thanks

michael fegan
feganmic@pilot.msu.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 4 Jan 98 21:58:34 -0800
From: Craig Hockenberry <craigh@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Visual Basic or C++ or...

On 1/4/98 08:01 PM TJ Hemingway wrote:

>Thanks Craig,
>
>> Your best bet would be to learn about Java. It's syntax is very similar
>> to C++ and the object oriented design concepts are identical. The
>> transistion from Java to Javascript is easy.
>
>> Learning programming in Visual Basic will teach you basic concepts. It
>> may be difficult for you to change syntax and apply the knowledge to web
>> page functionality.
>>
>> Programming is easy once you get the concepts down. Getting the concepts
down
>> takes a lot of time, so don't give up in frustration.
>
>That's encouraging! I can take most javascripts and adapt them to suit
>my needs and I have dabbled in Java just a bit. I am anxious to learn.
>I forever feel that I am 6 months behind in what I need/want to know!

Make sure to get as much object oriented concepts as possible. It's
possible to look at Java as a procedural language (lots of it-then-else
stuff). It's better to look at Java in the object sense .. actions cause
things to happen.

For example, you can continously check the state of a button or a set of
conditions. It's better to hook the code up to the object (a push of the
button causes some code to execute).

Another important thing to remember is that designing the things you hook
together is more important than how you hook them together. If you can't
represent the objects on a sheet of paper, you're never going to be able
to code them efficiently.

And don't worry about falling behind. There is always something new to
learn.

>Thanks for the information and advice!

You're welcome.

Later,

- -ch

- --

_____________ http://www.iconfactory.com ______________

The Iconfactory -- Quality freeware icons for your Mac

"Your desktop's never had it so good" -- WIRED Magazine
_______________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 04 Jan 1998 23:42:36 +0000
From: Jason Harris <jason@meniscusdesign.com>
Subject: designers,good sites, and David Siegel fray

Well, I usually prefer not to banter all kinds of issues, and I like to
move ideas along with new threads rather than debate previous ones. But
the ongoing debate over designers building sites has gotten under my
skin, and I'd prefer to make my statement while this is still the fray
of the day (by wednesday, lets be talking about something else 'K?).

First of all, I DO NOT worship David Siegel/Studio Verso, His books are
not the bible of web design at my shop, and I've run into friction
freelancing for agencies that adhere to his words like the golden rule.
His books are however, an invaluable TOOLBOOK to efficient, targeted,
and aesthetically pleasing sites. He did not invent many of the
techniques illustrated in his books, he accumulated the basic precepts
that we as PROFESSIONAL (or at least professionally minded) designers
follow, along with helpful workarounds to web limitations that have been
developed by site builders worldwide.

To say that a database designer makes useful sites and a graphic
designer makes pretty ones is inane and misses the point entirely. We as
web designers are neither. We are in a new medium, remember? We do both
jobs and more. We balance all the factors harmoniously; content,
utility, aesthetics, all these go into "good" site design no matter
whose name goes on the credits. To ignore any one aspect is to fail in
your job. These factors need to be balanced for each site differently,
there's no universal recipe! That's why template sites or those using
tired metaphors and cliché design (counters anyone?) look "bad" to us.
It shows that the "designer" isn't in touch with why the site exists in
the first place, and can't come up with a unique, effective message.

While the design firms listed on the High5 site sometimes wander into
the superfluous, I'd be honored to be be judged as creative as my peers
and see my firm there. I don't think I'd need to buy David off, or write
the intro to his book to get there either, just make great sites. This
forum is by and for the professional designer. It is not a private club.
It does however have a stated purpose: "The nature of this list is to
address more advanced web design issues than what is often available in
most on-line resources". If you find this limiting, I suggest you try
the "most on-line resources" part.

Jason Harris
Meniscus Interactive
http://www.meniscusdesign.com
..H5 Babble Design List Info: http://www.highfive.com/h5/babble.html
..To unsubscribe, send the following one line to majordomo@highfive.com:
.."unsubscribe (babble or babble-digest) (e-mail address)"

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 16:15:07 +0800
From: Chris McLay <chris@eycon.com.au>
Subject: Re: Your opinions

Hi Phil, Dana, others...

>David Siegel's approach is that all web sites should be designed by
>graphic artists, which I personally find to be ridiculous and nothing
>more than marketing hype.

I've been following this recent banter and well... I was a software
developer (many years ago) and can appreciate Phil's points on Web
development. I am now a designer/producer in many areas including the web
and as a designer fully admit to being a design evangelist. I also should
say I am not a big fan of Dave Siegel's approach to design. I think his
overall approach has a lot of value, but is to strict too be practical in
many applications.

I hope Phil was just getting a little carried away with his comment above.
We have all seen very many poor sites, by whatever standard. When you have
a client who has a good web site concept (good content, market reach
whatever) the design of that site can make all the difference, and a
graphic designer needs to be part of that as much as anyone else. In this
day and age you can't question the value of good design and good graphic
design. Design is often the difference between a good product and a great
product. Often graphic design is all that differentiates a product from its
competitors. If you disagree look at the design that goes into some of the
worlds most recognised brands - Apple's new ad's (no product changes, just
image), the Nike swoosh (no name here).

These days, design is to often over looked, or being taken on by people who
do not give it appropriate importance or have the appropriate skills. Just
because you can "design" a web site, doesn't mean you should. People (well
most people) learnt this with the DTP revolution of the eighties.

Design (especially today) requires many talents, and much freedom. There
are no rules. Good design is essential.

Enjoy you day'/night's where ever you are,
Chris

PS Other people can say this better then me: Clement Mok of Studio
Archetype http://www.studioarchetype.com, look at his book Designing
Business from Adobe Press, also take a look at Frogdesign
http://www.frogdesign.com.

enjoy...

___________________________________________________________________________

Chris McLay E y c o n S t u d i o
managing director
3b Hubble Street, East Fremantle WA 6158, Australia
Email chris@eycon.com.au Web http://www.eycon.com.au/
Telephone 08 9339 0909 Mobile 041 123 9190 Facsimile 08 9339 0808
___________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

End of babble-digest V1 #111
****************************

Previous | ToC | Next