|
Welcome
Guest
|
Register
| Login
|
|
|
| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Online | User List | Help |
Killersites.com Forum
General Web Design
Beginners to web design.
Thread: Print vs. Web ... Diazmedia vs. LSW
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Thread Type: Sticky Thread Total posts in this thread: 11
|
|
| Author |
|
LSW
Advanced Member USA Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Post Count: 6285 Status: Offline |
I'm good at rivalries, Stef vs LSW is always a good one, basically realism vs. Idealism/standards. Stef leans towards doing what is working today (but use standards as much as possible) and I am use standards and pure code, because if we do not use it the browser builders will not find it worth fixing. Another one that we have going is Joe and I. Joe of DiazMedia comes from a advertising/graphic design/art background. I have no background, I learned graphic design at the same time I earned programming, but lean towards programming. Joe feels that the Look of the site is really important due to his background. I feel the code and content is most important as that is what the user is after, the content... and neither content or design will show if not for the code. (This may be sort of dramatic and not to belittle Joe who is good at what he does.) But it sort of sets the field. The thing is Joe and I have on occasion gone back and forth with his arguing and comparing web to print rules and practices and I arguing that content and structure are top and design is just an "important" supporting role. Basically I want to combine our rivalry here. Joe's makes some good and valid arguments as do I (I hope), but these are on various different threads so I would like to link those here and use this as a reference to the basic question... is web an extension of Print/advertising or is it it's own animal? I do not think that print/advertising practices really transfer over to Web, which I argued in a post he started on Awards. So here is the latest volley between Joe and I, it is still going on but maybe some of it we can transfer to here. Question about web design award sites Joe, I do not have access or time to go searching for our other matches, so if you remember where they were (I just recall the first was your critique request), feel free to PM the links to me. I will have a look and maybe copy the relevant points pack here or just link to them. I am closing this thread at this time to keep any fluff from it. Once I have worked with Joe to bring about the relevant points I will open it so others can make their points as well, but till then I would like to have nothing between our matches until they are tgether to be read and decided on. Cheers |
||
|
|
LSW
Advanced Member USA Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Post Count: 6285 Status: Offline |
FOR DiazMedia: Thanks for starting this post LSW (Kyle). As far as older posts really the only other one worth bringing up was my first one which I'm reluctant to bring up again because I got a major tongue lashin?.  . But really I don't see us as having that different of ideals other than me believing that rather than design being a "supporting" role I see it as equally important role. I am now very much aware of my weaknesses in the coding aspects of this business but I also realize that in good time and with the help of "discussions/arguments" with people like Kyle I will grow as a coder. I'm eager to learn.I can't really speak for Kyle, but I can explain myself and my own beliefs. Like Kyle stated, I'm a graphic designer but I would definitely not consider myself a print designer. There is a lot of gray area and we do print design on occasion but we are so much more than just that. So calling this post print vs. web is a little insulting but I get what you are going for. The fact of the matter is that our business started out as a sign business long before I was born by my father. I was brought up soaking in every bit of information about the industry like a sponge. And with the advances in technology the sign industry has had to adapt and as I grow I have learned how to adapt with it. Now that anyone with computer, illustrating software and a plotter can call them selves a "sign artist" we have been forced to adapt our business to reach a level that people like this can't compete. We have done this by offering a wide verity of services (including web design) and by strengthen our abilities to design. We have successful built our family owned business into a one stop shop for all of our clients advertising needs. Now I realize that I'm no where near my full potential as a web designer but I'm young and confident that I will improve. But being called a print designer isn't accurate. What we are offering is full identities for our clients. Kyle stated in an older post: "web is different than TV Commercials, fliers, pamphlets, billboards, magazine ads, or even book covers in that those are all targeted at people mostly just passing by, so you want to get their attention." But are websites really that different. You see not all websites are the same. They all have different goals. Some are informational like books, which I believe is what Kyle seems to focus on. Some are really geared towards selling products or services. These are the type of sites that we build. And some sites are tools used to find other information. We view websites a lot like a store front. Picture yourself in a mall. You see two clothing stores. They both are selling the same thing but you can be sure that a good majority of the people are going to enter the store with the more attractive professional Looking store front. My goal as the advertiser is to create that initial feeling of "man that place looks like a nicer store" Because lets face it I have no control over what is inside of the store, in this example the clothing. I can't tell my customers what services to provide or what products to sell I can only help them sell it. Once their customer is in the store the only way I can help is by making the store easy to navigate and the products or information easy to find. I agree about the importance of coding. Let's use the clothing store analogy again. The average customer has no idea that the clothing store has all of their clothes sewn by slave labor. Just like the average internet browser has no idea what the code looks likes, or do they even care. Right now I have slave labor coding my website and I need to improve the quality of that work. Even though I can easily sell websites at the level I'm at now I do want to improve and start selling pants made in the USA. (I just realized that not everyone here is from the states so I apologize. It's just an analogy folks.) The point is I am fortunate enough to be doing what I love. But lets face it I'm also very much in the business of making money. It may work for Kyle but if we didn't look at websites like another form of advertising we wouldn't be able to market websites with the rest of our services. To us, and obviously our clients, their websites are a form of advertisement, were the best looking, easy to navigate, most creative sites leave the longest impression and results in their sales. When you stop and think about it this all seems very political or religious. At the root we both want to accomplish the same things, making the best website we can, but minor differences in our beliefs cause us to not always see eye to eye. Again this doesn't bother me for I rather enjoy a good debate once in a while. I feel that it helps me grow as a person. I like to see where other people coming from. |
||
|
|
LSW
Advanced Member USA Joined: Nov 27, 2003 Post Count: 6285 Status: Offline |
In reply I am just going to add a post from the awards thread. Also to clarify, I do not really see all web sites as books, but for simplicity I lump them all under "Content," or information. It may be information as in text, it may be a service or a product, but face it, before they buy the service or product they want information on it. That is why it all comes to the same thing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Point taken, however web is different than TV Commercials, fliers, pamphlets, billboards, magazine ads, or even book covers in that those are all targeted at people mostly just passing by, so you want to get their attention. Anyone coming to your web site has already chosen to go there, so a catchy look is after the fact. The person will not go to the index text to see if it suggests they will find what they want there and then the navigation to find it. The looks will not get their attention because they have to be there first, they already chose to go because the SE entry got their attention, the name go their attention or word of mouth. The choice is not made by you design because the design is not visible until the choice has been made. Once in the site, they will go straight for the content and decide. here image is important, if the site looks cheap they will expect the service/product to be cheap. So it has to look professional, but the sell will be done by the content at this point. This leads me to one of my main issues with search engines. In order to get ranked highly you need to have a wordy web site. But the average person is turned off by large quantity of text. They want you to get to the point, which is difficult to do if you are concentration on key words. So we rely on visual stimuli to hold the attention of our viewers. This is all a little off topic but if any thing it proves that these award sites are at least telling us that we are capturing peoples attention. SEO need not be wordy... just word rich. But it these words that catch your attention in the SE results and that and maybe the name of the site are what get you to think you will find what you want there. Again, only a couple of SE will offer you a thumbnail of the site so the look is irreverant until the person already decided to go there. The person will read the content and decide that the site offeres what they want... then things will move on and the professionalism of the look of the site will work on them... but I cannot see visual stimulation holding my attention... getting the information I want holds my attention. A book cover catches my attention but does not hold it, that is the content of the book. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think this answer qualifies here with joe's comments on a shop. Only with the web it is more like you stand before two shops with a hood over your head. Some one is telling you what the two stores offer and you choose a store not because of the looks but the description form the search engine, once in you look for the merchandise you want and if you do not find it you go to the second store... but the decision is based on the merchandise. Yes, maybe once in you would leave if the place was ratty... but in the end the user will not see the site till they have already chosen it. |
||
|
DesignBySLS
Advanced Member Joined: Jan 18, 2007 Post Count: 541 Status: Offline |
Then again... You get someone like me who is an advocate for attractive sites with clean coding that are accessible, load quickly and market your service or product quickly. Realistically I like Joes concept of beauty in the design but I am also aware that beauty often times masks nasty things. A site should not break based on changes between browsers or cause issues for people who have disabilities. Take a look at Micro$oft. I one equated it to a nicely set table that looks great as you enter the room but has a very large pile of dog droppings underneath that really stink things up. This same analogy can easily be applied to a beautiful design with bad code, and poor accessibility. Looks great but stinks to hell and back! In MY opinion the levels of import are as follows: Content - Accurate, and original or properly cited. Code - Functional, clean and accessible. Design - Attractive, and conducive to making a profit, being memorable, and loads quickly. Considering the time and energy I put into unique designs I can say that it is higher on my overall list then this might show. I also know that with GOOD code... Editing or changing a design can be as simple a editing a style sheet while the actual pages stay the same. Nothing anyone can tell me will convince me that this isn't crucial in the design process. It saves me hours to be able to use the style sheet for modifications or updates. JMNSHO! ---------------------------------------- Why is it that our own site overhauls take so darn long? Both complete. Mmmmmm love my .com. Now I love my other one too. But Joe's logo design made it! What are YOUR favorite veggies? |
||
|
|
diazmedia
Member Joined: Jul 9, 2007 Post Count: 68 Status: Offline |
Anyone coming to your web site has already chosen to go there, so a catchy look is after the fact. The person will not go to the index text to see if it suggests they will find what they want there and then the navigation to find it. The looks will not get their attention because they have to be there first, they already chose to go because the SE entry got their attention, the name go their attention or word of mouth. The choice is not made by you design because the design is not visible until the choice has been made. In some cases this may be true. They have already chosen to type in your web address and visit your site. In some cases they are using google to find a service that you provide, in which case you have to compete with your neighbors or every other listing that comes up on that page. That "catchy look" could be the difference between making or not making the sale. Like Kyle stated: "if the site looks cheap they will expect the service/product to be cheap" this is absolutely right, and this assumption is made as soon as some one enters the website and sticks with them through out their stay as they browse through the content. I'm not talking about just getting their attention, sure that's half the battle, but you need to keep their attention also. Keep in mind just because a person has visited your site doesn't mean they have made a commitment to hire you, or buy your products. In fact, most of the time that same person will exit your site to view your competitions site. They need to have a second opinion, and if you can't compete with your competitions prices you need to do so by showing these customers that you are above the competition in quality. If a person can't actually touch and feel your product, you have to portray the quality of that product in the most professional or unique environment. If you didn't make a good memorable first impression, when that person "shops around" and goes down the list looking at your competitions website, you can be sure they won't come back to you. I want to use another analogy here. Lets say you walk into a restaurant. Once you get inside you notice that the place is a bit "shabby" The waitress is an unkempt old hag, has long visible armpit hair, smells like she hasn't taken a bath in several days. What's to stop you from getting up and going to the next place. Nothing! I mean you have made a decision to leave long before you have even tried the food. Image plays a much larger role then some people give it credit. Also Kyle talks about people already knowing about your business, so therefore they have already made the choice to visit your site, but why do think they remembered your businesses name? It's because of good advertisement. Word of mouth is one of the most powerful forms of advertising, but it usually stems from another form. It could be positive publicity from another happy customer, a sign that caught someone's eye or a commercial that captured someone's attention. It could be when person "A" visited a website you built and that site left such an impression that person "A" told person "B" the next day at the water cooler. Advertising is very much apart of web business and without it the internet would be nothing more then a glorified library. Also here is where I think Kyle is confused. He speaks of content like it is separate from images. But content is not only text but it is pictures, movie clips, music, shopping cart products, links, icons, symbols and so much more. Basically, I believe the whole site could be described as content. As web builders we need to get away from trying to separate our site into layout and content and start thinking of the site as one entity. There needs to be a flow and a balance between all elements of the web page. If you don't, you will always be confined by these imaginary lines that separate them. SEO need not be wordy... just word rich. But it these words that catch your attention in the SE results and that and maybe the name of the site are what get you to think you will find what you want there. Again, only a couple of SE will offer you a thumbnail of the site so the look is irreverant until the person already decided to go there. The person will read the content and decide that the site offeres what they want... then things will move on and the professionalism of the look of the site will work on them... but I cannot see visual stimulation holding my attention... getting the information I want holds my attention. A book cover catches my attention but does not hold it, that is the content of the book. I want to get to this point too. I feel like I rushed through that point before because it was a little off topic. Which is another reason why I don't like going back and looking at old posts. I feel like some of what I said was off topic at the time and is usually taken out of context. Had I spent more time on that thought I would have chosen another word besides "wordy". I like "word rich" so much more. In the advertising biz we are also taught to keep the word count to a bare minimum. Because I view some websites as a form of advertisement I like to use this same concept. The reason why is the average consumer doesn't want to read a book or a long manual when shopping or browsing. They just want to get to the point. Some times they don't have the time. It is very difficult to get to the point when you have to find ways to be repetitious. For instance if I'm selling a "books on cassette service" on my site, I need to state so in several different ways to increase my ranking. Shouldn't once be enough. A lot of times when you read some of these sites that are ranked highly on search engines, they say the same thing over and over. But in saying that and because now I have spent more time on this thought, working with SEO is a necessary animal. I understand why we need to do what we do to rank well, and we have used strategies to do this without appearing to be "wordy" by using visual layout strategies. We sometimes separate long bodies of text with images and other breaks to give the illusion that the text isn't as long. We strengthen the visual appearance of navigation so that viewers can easily find their way to the information they really need and avoid reading information they already know. Like Kyle said in some cases they already know why they are visiting a site. In my website's case most of the time people already know what services I offer they might want to just see my portfolio. Which in a lot of cases does happen. (At least that is what Google Analytics is suggesting.) So I have several different ways to get to that section of the site by using visual stimuli. They don't always need to read a paragraph or two of information that they already know. Anyway I don't really see Kyle and I as rivals, In fact, I have privately told him that. I have learned a lot from him and may others on this board, and for that I thank you all. I hope that I can offer ideas and opinions that you all can learn from as well. If not, no big deal. Thanks for your time, I will try to keep it shorter next time and throw in some pictures or two to keep your attention  (actually that was me making fun of myself)---------------------------------------- [Edit 5 times, last edit by diazmedia at Sep 15, 2007 10:31:19 AM] |
||
|
|
diazmedia
Member Joined: Jul 9, 2007 Post Count: 68 Status: Offline |
Realistically I like Joes concept of beauty in the design but I am also aware that beauty often times masks nasty things. A site should not break based on changes between browsers or cause issues for people who have disabilities. I agree and sometimes we have no control over what product our client is trying to sell so "masking nasty things" is an inevitable evil, and unfortunately it is a part of the job. If I %100 don't morally agree with my client I can refuse to take the job. In MY opinion the levels of import are as follows: Content - Accurate, and original or properly cited. Code - Functional, clean and accessible. Design - Attractive, and conducive to making a profit, being memorable, and loads quickly. Here I disagree. Only until recently have I discovered that all of these factors are equally important and don't make for a great website without each other. Without proper code your site is outdated and can't reach audiences everywhere. Without good content your site is irrelevant. And without design it doesn't matter how great the code or the content is people won't take the site seriously. Really it's the game of what came first the chicken or the egg. Without one of these factors there is no way the other two will work. |
||
|
|
DesignBySLS
Advanced Member Joined: Jan 18, 2007 Post Count: 541 Status: Offline |
Considering the time and energy I put into unique designs I can say that it is higher on my overall list then this might show. I also know that with GOOD code... Editing or changing a design can be as simple a editing a style sheet while the actual pages stay the same. I should have clarified. As I said... Higher on the list then this may show. It is in reality a: 35% 33% 32% Content: If the content isn't accurate the product may sell until found out, or may cause legal ramifications. This is why it is so important to me and for me. I often work on designs where accuracy and representation are very important. More so than many other areas. You've likely not been around long enough to get the full scoop but I am sure you could if you googled my company. It is a two part search. Code: Code is a sore point for me. I actually have a few of the items people like Kyle advocate for. I am not the only designer here who has them or other uniquenesses either. In that it rates above design. Without good code... A good design will fail because it is never seen. Never ranks high enough to be seen, never meets the needs of visitors, etc. Not to mention that good code can assist in changing the look and feel of a site as much as changing the graphics. Until January of this year I wasn't aware that I shouldn't be using layout tables. Since then I have gone to the opposite end of the spectrum, sent myself on a crash course to learn what needed to be learned, and now am comfortable in saying I am very proficient in HTML and CSS, with a growing base in JavaScript, and PHP. This isn't to say I am perfect in HTML and CSS but I can tell you that I have some amazing people who have taken the time, energy and effort to teach me that which I didn't know, as well as the fact that I have modified and enhanced many features and items designed by people who are considered gurus or experts. Kinda fun really! Graphics: A beautiful site is a great thing; however, if the code is bad then the beautiful site will break based on browsers, or accessibility issues. This is why graphics rank lowest for me. Graphics should be easily edited and updated as well. You should be using a style sheet to lay them in place (which again comes back to code). You should effectively be able to change the entire appearance of a 60 page sheet within hours based solely on editing the style sheets if you have coded it properly. This is why I am going back through all of the sites I created pre-Jan 2007 on MY time and bringing them up to MY current standards. No small task I assure you. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I can tell you Joe that I think much of your work is visually attractive, and you do well in that regard. I haven't looked at your code as I am wary of doing so. I find myself sucked into code as much as I am sucked into my Inkscape, Photoshop, Irfanview, Fireworks and Flash. There is rarely a day that goes by that I am not into at least one or two of those... Even if it is a "coding" day. Unfortunately as designers we must factor issues into our designs such as focal points and not all designers do so. I have a serious problem with a few site designs based on that. It is part of my own uniquenesses. I don't like using disabilities because they actually cause me to be more detail driven and focused on things of import. So in reality... I would rather a cleanly coded, content rich site that I can remove the styling if it is causing me to read the same line for the 5th time or drawing my eyes away from the content. Selfish of me I know but I am most definately not the only one who feels this way. ---------------------------------------- Why is it that our own site overhauls take so darn long? Both complete. Mmmmmm love my .com. Now I love my other one too. But Joe's logo design made it! What are YOUR favorite veggies? |
||
|
|
tank
Newbie Joined: Jan 24, 2008 Post Count: 27 Status: Offline |
wow  You guys are writing like a page worth of replies, I could never sit down and do that.  Sorry if this post was a little off topic, I just admire your writing skills. |
||
|
|
jennesmith6
Stranger United Kingdom Joined: Jul 2, 2008 Post Count: 14 Status: Offline |
I was just reading and find it extremely interesting ..........thanks for sharing ........... |
||
|
|
avengingwatcher
Stranger Joined: Jul 9, 2008 Post Count: 4 Status: Offline |
I think the issue here tends to be muddled by separating the elements of design. As web and print design will eventually merge and become more interactive the need for standards will inevitably force some order to the chaos, however with order tends to be a rigidity and lack of fluidity. This is where the design element is most important, if it were not we would still be reading all of this on a text screen. The coding though makes the design possible and the design makes the coding relevant. Neither is really more important. Good design lends itself to good code, because you don't want to have to change your design every time you add on or upgrade a design. |
||
|
|
|
|
Current timezone is GMT Jun 18, 2013 9:09:37 PM |
