This blog is soon to get a more permanent home! I just purchased some server space and I will be transferring this blog to the new address. Along with a new address will be better looks. So stay tuned.
~Jeremiah~
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
First Real Deal Poster
This is the first real deal poster I've designed. I'm pretty happy with how it turned out and even got the my advisor's verbal stamp of approval.
Hierarchy is perfect. Notice how your eye moves from the name, to the information down, and then the building's vertical line brings you back up to the title. It keeps your eye moving around.
Inspired by the work of Scott Hansen.
I'm looking forward to doing more projects that aren't just class related.
~Jeremiah~
Hierarchy is perfect. Notice how your eye moves from the name, to the information down, and then the building's vertical line brings you back up to the title. It keeps your eye moving around.
Inspired by the work of Scott Hansen.
I'm looking forward to doing more projects that aren't just class related.
~Jeremiah~
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
What the Heck?! - Benson Communications
This is a segment I'm going to have on the blog for sites and designs that I just don't understand. What I find has little visual quality. The stuff that's supposed to be professional, but looks like the stuff I did when I was learning what a bootleg copy of Photoshop 7 could do.
My first roast: Benson Communications
I found this site through an e-mail from Twitter informing me I was being followed. I checked out this site and my jaw dropped. I was trying to figure out what they were. From the Twitter description, web design and graphics? Ok? I checked out their work and the four websites they've done aren't too terribly impressive at all. The only thing the sites had going for them is that they (for the most part) looked better than the company site. The real kicker though was their one graphic:
$10 U4? I'm guessing it's meant to be read "4U." "U4" doesn't really make sense. So I label that a hierarchy fail.
Anyway, that's all for this post.
I do want to note that I know I'm not a professional and I'm still learning. I'm not claiming I know everything. Nonetheless though, I really don't think there's any excuse for the appearance of that site since it's supposed to be a professional business.
~Jeremiah~
My first roast: Benson Communications
I found this site through an e-mail from Twitter informing me I was being followed. I checked out this site and my jaw dropped. I was trying to figure out what they were. From the Twitter description, web design and graphics? Ok? I checked out their work and the four websites they've done aren't too terribly impressive at all. The only thing the sites had going for them is that they (for the most part) looked better than the company site. The real kicker though was their one graphic:
$10 U4? I'm guessing it's meant to be read "4U." "U4" doesn't really make sense. So I label that a hierarchy fail.
Anyway, that's all for this post.
I do want to note that I know I'm not a professional and I'm still learning. I'm not claiming I know everything. Nonetheless though, I really don't think there's any excuse for the appearance of that site since it's supposed to be a professional business.
~Jeremiah~
Google's Design Problem
So Gizmodo has a post on Google's design. I won't go through all the details because that's why the link is there. In short, Google's Visual Design Leader Douglas Bowman left Google after growing tired of dealing with Engineers.
Understandable after reading what Mr. Bowman had to say.
What I found interesting were the comments left for the Gizmodo post. Few cared about Google's design. After all of the applications they've developed both online and off line, no one cares. They only care that it works. Now, I understand that it's important that it works. I use Google, Gmail and Google Reader all the time. I'm quite pleased with function (gCal needs help though). Form though is a problem.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who dislikes the looks of the over simplified desaturated look of Google. If Google is to cater to everyone they need to not just meet the needs of those who care only about function, but also meet the needs of the people who care just as much about appearance as function.
One commenter's concern was that adding aesthetics to Google would slow Google down, but I disagree. I believe Virb is a good example of a simply designed site that isn't slowed down by it's appearance. Why? Because it's done with code.
If Google would allow their existing designers to focus and put an effort into aesthetic coding, I believe Google would be even more successful than what it already is. Hard to believe? Sure it is, Google is already kicking butt. It's the little things though that grip more users.
Aesthetics for a product is a lure for people who've never used it or once avoided using it.
Final thought:
People buy cars for their performance, as they should. But if that's the only thing that a car company would focus on, they would fail to gain as many customers as the company that focuses on performance and appearance. What amount of people buy a car just for it's performance? I'm lead to believe a minority. I believe there's a large majority out there that searches for a car that has great specs, but also a great look.
Google is a high performance car that's been going strong for quite some time. Now it needs a sexy slick body to show off visually.
~Jeremiah~
Understandable after reading what Mr. Bowman had to say.
What I found interesting were the comments left for the Gizmodo post. Few cared about Google's design. After all of the applications they've developed both online and off line, no one cares. They only care that it works. Now, I understand that it's important that it works. I use Google, Gmail and Google Reader all the time. I'm quite pleased with function (gCal needs help though). Form though is a problem.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who dislikes the looks of the over simplified desaturated look of Google. If Google is to cater to everyone they need to not just meet the needs of those who care only about function, but also meet the needs of the people who care just as much about appearance as function.
One commenter's concern was that adding aesthetics to Google would slow Google down, but I disagree. I believe Virb is a good example of a simply designed site that isn't slowed down by it's appearance. Why? Because it's done with code.
If Google would allow their existing designers to focus and put an effort into aesthetic coding, I believe Google would be even more successful than what it already is. Hard to believe? Sure it is, Google is already kicking butt. It's the little things though that grip more users.
Aesthetics for a product is a lure for people who've never used it or once avoided using it.
Final thought:
People buy cars for their performance, as they should. But if that's the only thing that a car company would focus on, they would fail to gain as many customers as the company that focuses on performance and appearance. What amount of people buy a car just for it's performance? I'm lead to believe a minority. I believe there's a large majority out there that searches for a car that has great specs, but also a great look.
Google is a high performance car that's been going strong for quite some time. Now it needs a sexy slick body to show off visually.
~Jeremiah~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
