Nice article below…

Design Psychology

Insights into the purpose and effect of physical elements, design, and layout of web pages …and why clients should let designers handle design.

The left-to-right and top-to-bottom real estate that fills the browser window on a computer monitor is a very delicate and treacherous space. While this idea rings true in a host of contexts, it is especially true for web designers and the individuals and companies that hire them.

The task of designing a web page and/or website to work properly for the client’s aims, the client’s purpose, the client’s identity, and especially for the user, is one filled with opportunities for success and grave missteps. Given the tasks that a website must accomplish, web page design is a job for no one less than an artist-psychologist.

Okay, that may sound like histrionics, but the job of designing a website is an exercise in promoting a brand or idea in an appealing manner while also eliciting specific human emotions and behaviors. The designer must know how to accomplish these aims within a host of constraints, including those presented by the medium, the physical space, the client’s specifics, the relevant social environment, and the content and purpose of the site. In some cases this job is like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. In others, it is like pulling an elephant out of a thimble. Clearly a job for David Copperfield. See what I mean about the need for an artist-psychologist?

A few words about trust

Just as there are ways that a composer can communicate sadness or anger in music, just as a painter can communicate confusion on the canvas, just as a an actor can communicate love without speaking, the web designer can communicate on the web page with layout, form, color and design. If the designer is allowed to.

That last bit is important because in order to be able to effectively represent and communicate for a client online, the designer must be allowed to do so. And this is likely the most difficult part of doing good work for a client needing promotional design work. So it is no surprise that often the most successful design work comes from projects with the highest degree of client/designer confidence. Trust is worth its weight in gold in any design project. Well, any design project involving competent designers.
Page Purpose

You never get a second chance to make a first impression

Given the facts about first impressions, a site’s index page is clearly its most important page. Of all of the pages in the site, the index page has the biggest job to do. If the index page fails, so does the site. And when we’re talking about a retail or brochure site this can be a catastrophic failure.

It must be understood that a site’s index page has a specific purpose. What makes this sort of a tricky fact is the reality that this page’s specific purpose is not necessarily the same as the site’s purpose. In other words, if the site’s purpose is to sell merchandise, the purpose of the index page may not be directly involved with selling merchandise. Working against the better function of an index page to have it try and do the site’s overall job is usually detrimental to the site. This is a hard pill for many non-designers to swallow.

In a very general sense, the purpose of a site’s index page is to convince visitors that they should venture further into the site. In order to do that the page must engage in advisable psychology (through design and copy) while avoiding distracting and irrelevant purposes that run counter to the primary function of the page. In other words, the index page must not attempt to dump the entire site’s content into the viewer’s eyes in one fell swoop. Rather, the page must make a concise and clean first impression – an impression focused on a specific, rather than all-encompassing, purpose.

For clear examples of this sort of function we can look to how things other than websites work to engage individual or public interest. For instance, the prologue or first chapter of a novel does not tell the whole story of the book, but rather presents a compelling and concise feature of the story that invites the reader to maintain interest. Done well, this sort of introduction leaves plenty of space for questions and does not confine the story into a pre-defined box. Possibility is far more enticing than limitation.

Another good example would be the entrance area of a successful high-end retail chain store. The front area of the store is going to be dedicated to a specific theme and product offering, and is laid out so as to lead visitors by one or more specific paths into the store. However, the theme does not fully describe the store’s entire product offering and the influence directing the customer’s path into the store is brought by the advisable use of open spaces rather than cramped avenues.

It is worth nothing that the novel eventually presents a specific scope and storyline and the retail shop may have cramped avenues, just neither of them at the entrance.

Once the site visitor has seen the main/index page of the site and has been interested enough to venture further into the site, content presentation becomes the main purpose of pages. After all, the visitor is coming to the site in search of something to see, read, hear, or all three of these things. The interior page design and layout should generally be a slave to that fact and be all about presenting the content without distraction.

As a consequence, the interior pages often have a design and layout that differs from the index page. Granted the look and feel should be consistent and the branding and identity message should carry though strongly to these pages, but in such a way as to emphasize the content.

Additionally, there should be a clear suggestion (or two or three) for “where to go from here” on each of these pages. This is especially true for retail and brochure sites. The designer must not assume that good navigation provides suggestion enough for site visitors to continue further into the site. This sort of call to action can be accomplished in all sorts of ways, but it’s best if it is done in a way that is contextually appropriate to the specific site (hint: this is why designers are better than off-the-shelf template packages).

In any event, the interior pages need to be just as compelling as the index page. A dead end one page into the site is not much better than a dead end on the index page.
Whitespace

If there is one kind of comment that I have grown to expect in feedback on initial website design comps, it is the comment that goes something like, “there’s a lot of wasted space on the page, isn’t there?” or “I like the colored areas, but can’t we put something in them?” I seldom have to work to convince a client to choose a design that I suggest, but often have to work to convince them not to fill up every inch of page real estate with content.

The fact is that in the context of the specific aim for a website or an individual page, there are advisable uses for whitespace (colored or white) in the page layout. As in the examples cited before, whitespace works to set off and lend gravity to those areas that are occupied with content. So, using whitespace appropriately helps us to keep the page concise, simple, comfortable and focused.

True, we could cut back on whitespace and put more content on the page, but that content would likely be far less effective and work to rob the page of its intended purpose. Besides, humans don’t generally respond well to clutter, as we can see from other examples in life.
Breathing Room and Context

Or, “Hey, why are you wasting all that valuable space!”

Back when I was a retail manager I had to constantly fight the owner’s desire to pack the checkout counter with mountains of impulse items. Crowding the register area with all of that stuff did present a host of tasty, last-chance choices for customers, but it also created a dizzying array of visual clutter. Furthermore, it made it difficult for both the seller and buyer to use the area for its intended purpose. This resulted in dismal sales of those impulse items.

By contrast, on those occasions that I was allowed to get rid of the clutter and make a display featuring one or two seasonally relevant items (and lots of open space surrounding the area) we sold out of the featured items. Every time.

What this example helps to illustrate is the effect that space and contextually appropriate presentation can have on the human psyche. In a very general sense, a contextually inconsistent environment, clutter and cramped quarters tends to encourage a lack of interest while open space and a consistent context in the environment tends to encourage interest and openness to suggestion.

Part of this sort of response has to do with how we associate open space with emotional or physical comfort and part owes allegiance to human survival instincts. A very basic way of explaining the latter factor is the fact that when we feel hemmed in or cramped (spatially), our primary concern is for finding and getting to the exit.

As for the contextually consistent environment part, that has more to do with openness to suggestion. For instance, let’s say you’re standing in front of a movie theater deciding what to do. You’re offered the following suggestions:

• How about seeing the new sci-fi movie?
• How about seeing the new mystery movie?
• How about a game of basketball?

Notice how the last suggestion is not likely to have many takers at that particular time, given the context of the situation. Okay, it’s an obtuse example, but you get the point. When we’ve got our minds working toward a specific aim or are anticipating a certain conclusion based on our surroundings or activities, suggestions that don’t figure into the context are less likely to be successful.
Eye Flow on the Page

With any medium that people are expected to look at or read (books, movies, paintings, magazines, advertisements, web pages, etc…), artists, designers and/or directors work to ensure that it gets read or looked at the right way. This means that the path that the viewer’s eye should follow is carefully planned out. Then the design is composed and laid out such that it will work to influence viewers’ eyes to follow that path (to some degree).

So part of the web designer’s job is to design and lay out pages so that the site visitor’s eyes will go to specific areas and do so in a predetermined order. Depending on the kind of content that will occupy a web page, this task of directing viewers’ eyes can be a simple matter or a difficult one. This is part of why good design I s so powerful and poor design is so useless. In truth, whether we’re talking about a landscape painting or a web page, it is the basic fundamentals of artistry that are employed to direct a viewer’s eye.

The web/screen medium has its own set of viewing and use conventions and conscientious designers keep up with the latest data from usability testing. It is important to understand just how the general public tends to look at web pages and what they generally tend to expect from them in terms of layout and interaction. So in the hands of a competent designer all of the fundamentals for eye flow direction (artistry) are tempered by this sort of information, too.

In any event, designers and their clients should understand or appreciate the fact that the task of laying out a web page involves far more than presenting content in an appealing manner. The layout of the structure and content should address specifics of influencing the way that viewers approach and consume it.
So…

Okay, so when we’re set with the task of making the index page for a website, there are a lot of user emotion and expectation factors we have to take into consideration (we have to play psychologist). We also have to romance the brand and create an aesthetically pleasant or exciting experience (we have to play artist). Much of this can be accomplished by properly using whitespace and fundamental artistry – in the context of the site’s aims, of course.

Logos and Branding

Or “So what are you trying to say, exactly?”

Whenever someone lands on a company’s website, there should be no question in their mind as to what the site’s message is (and therefore the company’s message). Any brand that is a good brand has a lifestyle, a point of view, a culture, an attitude – or all of these things – associated with it. One of the primary jobs of the web designer is to translate that “thing” into a communicative look and feel for the company’s site. Any visitor to the site should immediately perceive the core message that embodies the brand just by seeing the web page design and layout. Here again, the fundamentals of artistry are the relevant tools for doing this.

However, it should be understood that when a company has a brand that is not well conceived or is not associated with a lifestyle, a point of view, a culture or an attitude, the web designer’s job is difficult or impossible. When the company or the brand does not say anything of consequence, it should be obvious to everyone that it will be difficult to make their website say anything of consequence.

The site is an extension of the brand. Bad brand = bad website. There is really no way around this. Now, this is not to say that a website for a poor brand will necessarily look bad or be a waste of time. But in the context of the competitive market where good brands exist, such a website can be likened to a tiara on a mule. A great website starts with a great brand. Period.

In all seriousness, a company with a poorly conceived brand or poorly designed logo should enlist the services of a talented design agency to remedy the situation. Or perhaps perish in the marketplace.
Make the logo bigger!

One of the most common requests of web page designers from clients is to make the logo bigger. And that’s almost always a mistake. There are lots of reasons for this, and I’ll get to a couple of them in a minute, but first think about this example. When Cadillac, Jaguar, BMW or Mercedes Benz (or any car maker for that matter) puts their signature hood ornament on the cars they make, they don’t make this highly important feature 3′ wide and 2′ tall. Instead, they make it very small to elegantly fit the really important thing – the car.

Part of what must be taken into account in the context of this example is the fact that no matter how amazing the car maker’s signature hood ornament is, if the car looks like crap or doesn’t work well or live up to user expectations, no one will buy it.

Plainly put, the logo is not the important feature of the website and should not garner any undo emphasis. Rather, it is the content and the site’s purpose that should be emphasized. Consequently, the logo should not dominate the page, but instead work subtly to help to lend gravity, interest, and context to the content and the site’s purpose.

More on logos

The logo can communicate important things about a company and/or a website, but that is almost putting the cart before the horse. Ideally, the job of the logo is merely to brand the site and its content. Most of the communicative value of the logo should come from a dedicated marketing effort that lends the logo and company the desired value and values (that are then succinctly communicated later by branding company elements with a logo).

So, no, don’t make the logo bigger. Instead, make the branding/marketing effort bigger and let the logo do its simple job on the web page (and elsewhere) no matter its size. A result of leaving the logo at a manageable size on the page is that it can then be made to have greater impact by the use of available whitespace that surrounds it.
In Conclusion

Client aims and desires are always relevant to a site design project, but hopefully the preceding information helps to show that individual client preferences should often take a back seat to proven design principles and site user expectations. The client’s investment of trust in the designer can pay high dividends when it comes to design and branding issues.

So rather than merely being the production of online decoration, web design is an effort at direction and communication – just the same as art (and advertising). It is not something to be engaged in lightly and is best left to those artist-psychologist types who know how to use design to achieve specific aims within all sorts of constraints.

This article was written by Andy Rutledge

Andy Rutledge is an interactive designer, writer and composer in Dallas, Texas. He works as senior designer at NetSuccess.

Nice article below…
KYLIE GUSSET gusset.net

Ultimately, who cares? Avid appreciation brings up images of hordes of teenagers hanging out in the mere hope that they’ll see you, let alone get your autograph, picture, or some other thrilling memento to remind them of their brush with fame. I’m not so sure that avid appreciation is something worthwhile to aim for…I’m much more keener on the idea that people who build the web will be able to make a living building sites where cash isn’t the only driving force behind its existence.

The niche community that designers have will expand to incorporate mainstream culture – we’re already seeing this happen in the form of design portals. There’s a huge community out there, and at a guess there’s a large quantity of people who are simply into design and not working as or aiming to work as a commercial artist.

We can very safely leave my mother out of the equation when it comes to knowing about webdesigners. The olds rarely have access to the web and daily papers, which are the main sources of general interest stories about designers which are aimed at a more mainstream market. Two thirds of the worlds population will die not having touched a computer. Count yourself lucky.

Younger people tend to be more likely to know their stuff when it comes to the web and designers. 15 year olds email Scott (http://www.pixelshifter.net) wanting to know how to become a famous designer just like him now that he’s scored a Macromedia site of the day. Frances Cobain told her mom that she was keen on being a webdesigner. Kids are going to have a greater knowledge about the web and web design in general, because they grew up with it, and it’s a part of their life.

I don’t think that we’re going to see designers being targeted to the mainstream in the same way that Britney is – thank goodness. However, might someone in the design world do a deal with Apple to produce ads about themselves aimed at designers which become popular, and are then delivered to a more mainstream market? It’s going to be interesting to see what happens in the future with media making becoming more accessible to designers.

What is happening, and what I hope to see more of is one niche being picked up by another. Going to my flatmates end of architecture course showing, the amount of final works that looked like printouts of Mike Young’s stuff was insane. Did they know about him? If the web and what designers are doing was part of the curriculum, architectural students might have further developed and extended their work, and had a greater understanding and appreciation of designers. It’s great to see sites like archinect (http://www.archinect.com/) crossing boundaries of disiplines such as web design and architecture.

Traditional artists would probably get a kick out of seeing what James Patterson, Vicki Wong and Lee Meisenheimer have done with drawing online, and stretching the methods and mediums of how their own work is created and displayed. It’s often frustrating trying to find new content to post at artkrush – galleries and artists have yet to see the benefits of coming online, so that awesome local show that you wanted to write about? No go. I’d love to see more collaborations and traditional based art brought online, and what happens when new/old media artists work together.

So, that avid mainstream appreciation? It ain’t gonna happen for people whose main work is web based, because the web is still very much a niche, albeit a rapidly expanding one. Hopefully sooner than later, it will be possible for people involved with the web to create a living by having greater recognition of the independent work that they do. At least, here’s hoping, because it would sure beat the hell out of looking, acting, and sounding like plastic for the enjoyment of the masses.

ORION TATE freshjuicy.com heavy.com

No, my mom will never know what James Patterson or Jemma Gura look like in the same way that she knows what Britney Spears or Kurt Cobain look like, unless either of them sell a million records or secure a lucrative Pepsi endorsement. Though this really is just a question of degrees: *avid* appreciation of graphic designers has always been and I suspect will continue to be limited to a relatively niche audience. That being said, there does seem to be an increased consumer appreciation for that which is designed and, as a result, increased media attention on designers. The may issue of Paper Magazine, for example, features a discussion on the design principles of Target (”Yay, Tar-Jay!”) and an interview with Apple design guru, Jonathan Ive, both articles loosely themed around the topic “ordinary design and corporate branding through aesthetics.”

In the introduction to the section “Extra Ordinary Design,” editor Kim Hastreiter, appropriately invoking the memory of Andy Warhol, touches on two topics relevant to this discussion: our aesthetic zeitgeist and the Designer-Rockstar:

“I think he [Andy Warhol] really would have appreciated this whole “Target moment” we are experiencing. His heart would be racing as fast as mine does as I mentally prepare for the day this June when I’ll get to purchase my Stephen Sprouse designed boogie board, skateboard, flip-flops and beach towel…I can’t wait to see what Target has done not only with Stephen Sprouse, but also with designers Todd Oldham, Marc Ecko and Philippe Starck.”

Hastreiter, goes on to explain that Target “shrouds the creative folks of their corporate culture in mystery, preferring to keep the world’s eye on the merchandise, not the hype or the names.” This suggests, that while the author, a self-described design freak, wants to know who designs the packaging and products, the general public need not be concerned. This is a successful strategy for Target and suggests an interesting trend: as design proliferates, which it will continue to do in this age of hyper-information, it becomes increasingly integrated into our lives to a point where good design is implicitly appreciated, but perhaps not explicitly celebrated.

Mainstream fame in aesthetic disciplines has been reserved, for the most part, for artists, architects, fashion designers, filmmakers. While this is another discussion entirely, it does beg the question: what is the difference between art and design, between graphic design and fashion design or architecture? I think it is a question of intention or motivation. As Jonathan Ive puts it “Design is less about expression than fine art, though I think you trade in a language that is similar, in some sense, and you trade in the emotive…I think the core motivations are different.” While I agree with this statement, I wonder how long this distinction will be made…

As commerce becomes a pervasive and inextricable part of our lives, the lines between art and design have started to blur, creating a new type of artist-designer who works in many disciplines with varying motivations. It is both common and acceptable for artists to be engaged in or associated with commercial ventures. Witness Actor/artist Dennis Hopper, former counter-culture bohemian: even in the consumer-driven 80s, he had to go to Japan (where the proverbial lines were blurred long ago) to do commercials for bath bubbles. Now he’s on the small screen in the most recent installment of celebrity Gap commercials; William Burroughs does Nike Ads, Picasso sells computers. In recent years, the Guggenheim has featured exhibits on the art of the motorcycle and a fashion retrospective. Mike Mills, whose career and work I greatly admire, is an example of someone who comfortably exists within the two worlds of art and commerce; he designs album covers, shows his work in galleries, and directs commercials along with music videos, independent shorts and feature-length films and is able to garner accolades in both commercial and artistic ventures, furthering awareness and appreciation of the commercial arts.

Simply put: it does seem that as the world becomes more commercial, commercial artists will be more celebrated. Will the web enhance this? Right now, web spaces authored by “The Design Community” are chock-full with portfolio sites and client work, which I suspect limits their audience. As commercial and fine arts continue to merge and mingle I imagine “Designer” web spaces will reflect this change. And as this happens, I do hope that the web (in whatever form it will manifest) will continue to proliferate as a space for artistic expression and the creators of these spaces will be celebrated. But Britney Spears? Well kids, get out of your Aeron, expose that midriff, and get to work.

RYAN SHELTON bd4d.com

Personally, I don’t think graphic designers will ever be household names like Britney or Kurt Cobain. I think design drives a lot of the pop culture but doubt whether the designers behind the work will ever get as much recognition as the artist(s) they are designing the CD, website or video for. Yes people into music videos will know who directed the latest Madonna video but will my mom? I don’t think so. It‚s not something that she cares about or is interested in. she may not even know who is actually singing the song she’s humming in the kitchen. She just likes the tune and that’s all that matters to her. In the same way, I think design is digested but not taken much notice of by the general public. Take apple’s new iPod or the iMac. Every Mac faithful knows who Jonathan Ives is and that he is the force behind Apple‚s product design team but to the rest of the world the iPod is just a very cool MP3 Player. The latest Levis ad campaign or new insurance building that’s being built in the middle of town, we don‚t necessarily care who designed or came up with the ideas but it affects us in some way. We either think the ad campaign is brilliant, funny or stupid. The same with the building, it either looks nice and is going to get more people employed or we see it as capitalism taking over the world. I personally would be interested to know who designed the new building or produced the Levis campaign but again would my mom?

Not many people understand why designers are so passionate about what they do. We‚ll work all-night and still smile on the way to work the next day. Are we all mad? Hell no! We just love what we do. One of the things we have seen with BD4D is that designers love getting together to show off their work and be amongst people who think the way they do. I think this is because not many people really appreciate what we do I know most of my non-design friends don’t understand why I work ’til stupid hours of the morning. Getting together with like-minded people is a way for us to get that recognition we don’t get from the rest of the world. At the same time, within our little design world we have the same kind of opinions we all have when it comes to music. For example I might like one band and dislike another just like I might love one piece of design and dislike another. You may disagree and hate the piece that I love? Design is art and is therefore very subjective. Wanna fight?

The other side of the coin is. Who would have thought that a geek software programmer would become the richest man in the world. I‚m sure all of our mom’s have heard of Bill Gates – spit, spit! How many other programmers can we name? Who was/were the programmers behind PhotoShop or the web browser. I know Jim Clark started up Netscape but my mom doesn’t. Shigeru Miyamoto is a living legend, having created Donkey Kong and Super Mario he is the Spielberg of computer games. He is treated like a rock star at gaming conventions. It‚s the same with the design community, we have our own Œrock stars‚ but they are only rock stars to other designers who appreciate what they have achieved. Whether the rest of the world will ever fully embrace design and elevate a designer onto a ‘household-name pedestal’ is not for me to say but I doubt it will happen.

I see appreciation of graphic designers coming mainly from with in the design community for a while yet. From people who understand the blood, sweat and tears you have put into your works of beauty. I could be completely wrong but lets face it. I could be completely wrong but lets face it – Britney is fit, and she’s more marketable than your average graphic designer is.

Now, where has my Mos Def CD gone…

Nice article below…

CURT CLONINGER

I submitted this theory topic, so I’ve been thinking about it for a while now. Designing for the web doesn’t have to be much different than print or film if you don’t want it to be. Most Saksi-influenced surstation-esque stuff is great printwork, and that new wddg quicktime movie is great filmwork. I guess I’m just interested in the things the web can do that neither print nor film can do.

The web can do at least three things that neither print nor film can do:

1. the web can be like software, which means interactivity, non-linearity, and all the other media characteristics that arise when you let your visitors play a major part in the outcome of your site. I can flip pages in a magazine, and I can change channels on a TV, but I’m just changing from one static/frozen presentation to another static/frozen presentation. On the web, as a surfer, I can actually dynamically change the nature of the content itself (if the designer will let me).

2. the web can synthesize and combine tons of media. Film combines photography and audio. But the web can get at all your senses. The web can even tweak your haptic senses (like touch, how heavy something is, how much resistance something gives when you push on it). Praystation’s flash sliders and yugop’s flash gravity simulation menus are examples of haptic communication.

3. the web, because it is a real-time worldwide network, allows a level of collaboration and improvisation between two or more people that just isn’t possible in most other media.

No one of these three things is particularly unique to the web in and of itself. The web can be like software, but so can a CD-ROM or an arcade game. The web can combine media, but so can a multi-media performance arts piece. the web can allow real-time, long distance collaboration, but so can the telephone. It’s the fact that you can have all three of these things working together at the same time that makes the web really unique.

Not a lot of designers are interested in exploring all these areas. I think this is because most designers come to the web with a print design paradigm, rather than a furniture design paradigm or an architectural design paradigm. Once designers embrace the fact that design is about function as well as appearance, I think more designers will take the leap and learn how to program. Already, lots of web designers are at least exposing themselves to Flash action scripting and DHTML, which is a probably a good thing.

KAREN INGRAM

I see the web as sort of a middleground between print & film–not quite able to handle the size of a film, yet it offers the option of movement. It is, however, quite different from both of these mediums, and very young in its evolution.

Personally, I tend to want to juice up stuff w/ lots of colors & illustrations, which can be a bit heavy when it comes to the web. Scale is a big factor with me as far as subjects go–in a print,I’d be working larger. My subject matter has deviated from what I typically choose for painting or print–I find myself being more attracted to smaller objects in my work, to make my work more efficient as animated objects. In print or painting I did a lot of work with the human form, but on the web, I simply feel as though I cannot get the physicalspace to play around with human form, except in bits & pieces.

A frequently expressed artistic gripe about the web is cross platform compatibility & instability in general, especially in relation to viewer experience. Unfortunately, if you want for a piece to look consistent across the board, you’ve got to make some major sacrifices. Display “space” is a factor that is difficult to control on the web. We are limited to viewing a piece in a browser window, on a monitor, so any image we create is confined to that space, as opposed to an exhibition space environment. Monitor color calibration and screen resolution are factors which are not controllable from viewer to viewer, as well as dial up speed. You may have the loveliest image, but if someone is on a 56k dial up, they may not be willing to wait for the visuals to download.

The printed piece is a stable form, overlooking the average wear that paper will undergo, fading colors, etc. Surface texture is an element of print that it’s tough to take advantage of on the web–by this I mean paper stock,print techniques such as thermography, metallic inks, embossing, etc.- -the tactile nature of print is something that I miss on the web…

All areas of creative expression need a strong vision & intent in order to be successful & memorable. Currently, a lot of the work on the web is either experimental or portfolio oriented, which to me, signals proof of its youth. In time, I think, people will expand these ideas outward into more original, complete “idea-driven” pieces. In print or film, because of maturity, theme & content are considered more.

The amazing thing about the web, though, given all of its shortcomings, it is easy to access, & you can’t get much better than worldwide distribution in your own “space”! This is what attracted me to the web in the first place–self publication that’s affordable. Print & film simply do not offer that kind of affordability, combined with distribution. The ability to pull from various artistic disciplines is something that makes the web very different from other mediums–painting, sound, video, typography, programming, etc etc can all be lumped together into one luscious piece to delight out eyes & sizzle our brains–plus that added element of interactivity…Ohhh, goody! It would be excellent to see the web viewer’s experience level out a bit, much like the home video viewing experience– where the “work on display” would appear similarly from household to household.

Web centric sites that I find appealing tend to combine artistic skill with movement and excellent visual themes. For example presstube–James Paterson employs a hand drawn feel to his work, & manages to make lines & shapes loop around to create forms that have a lot of raw energy. I greatly admire Lee Misenheimer’s (destroyrockcity.com) work, because he uses very subtle, simple movements on top of crazy rich drawings of characters. This is the sort of stuff that I find myself going back to again & again, because I really appreciate Lee’s expertise in drawing, image collage and technical skill. Natzke.com is an absolute beauty–inspiration from orderly chaotic forms in nature, and wondrous attention to detail make Erik’s work strong in every dimension. I enjoy Wonderfulheadhurt because of interesting imagery combined with strange, actionscript driven movements. Rustboy(as well as all other work involving Brian Taylor) is a site that meshes technology & artistic vision in a very impressive manner. All of these sites manage to live on the web in a very comfortable way–these folks have managed to work around, or by-pass the web’s limitations, and the outcome is absolutely stunning. Other sites that are equally successful in establishing the web as an excellent forum for artisticdisplay are Volumeone, Going on Six, Prate, Turux.org, Pitaru, Megatight…I could go on and on…These folks (and many more that I’m sure I will smack myself for forgetting) invoke something that is very refreshing in the mass of e-commerce & corporate sites that live on the web.

Karen Ingram

http://www.designiskinky.net
http://www.krening.com

STEVE CADDY

Print is beautiful and classical. Its what I curl up around and peel through under lamplight. Sliding fingers over and around the powdery sleeves. Its the crumpled and abused Bike rag that has followed me through dirt, tent-condensation, hours beneath sweaty clothes and months on the bottom shelves. It’s the mighty tome of architecture that lives atop the draws that house the things that are closest to me. Print is somehow real in a way that film has never been for me, and that the web can only fleetingly be late at night.

It is in the spacious and velvety confines of well spec’d caverns that film-makers reach out. Call it the luxury of a controlled audience environment. All you have to do is step in, sit down and get comfy, open your mind and dive in. The big, dark room, the 40 foot screen, the precision sound equipment: its all there to deliver it just the way it was intended.

And the web. It is perhaps its own worst enemy. Design for the web — most design on the web — exists in the context of . . . web design? I wonder who read my heart’s outpouring in their lunch hour, coffee break or while ‘checking the links’ off K. There’s nothing more I can really do than hope that maybe someone will see it the way it was created: Late at night in some melancholy void, as ready to be inspired as to close their eyes and drift away – that’s where I hope we reach someone. In the same way that volume|one, staticlife, the first submethod, and the old FameWhore blew me away with what they said, and how they said it.

There are gaping differences across all aspects of these three disciplines, some are closing – to the glee and dismay of whichever parties – as we feed off each other and push harder and harder. Web is historically the least defined of the three – in many ways similar in terms of possibilities, but consumed and rehashed and spat before anyone has time to even take it in. For a space that was never meant to be designed all that graphically, the web has been pushed a long way. But look outside design circles and take note of how things really are on a larger scene. Film may primarily be the domain of film-makers, and print that of authors and publishers, but as designers on the web, we’re a minority.

Among oceans of others, the defining differences between print, film and the web — boil down to:
1. the price of admission,
2. the method of delivery, and,
3. the audience, their environment and what they’re preparation to bring something to a piece.

Now its starting to get very late, so I shalln’t delve any further into those three lest things start making even less sense than they are now, so I’ll swing around to five of my favourite examples of the web being used as only the web can…

volumeone
Matt just keeps drawing me in again and again. One summer night I stumbled over volume one and spent the next hour exploring the way it moved and responded, and thinking about what it might mean. But that was before I was aware of a web design community, at that time I’m not sure there really was one… well, there was, but not like now. Think mid 1999.

submethod
- the original one The original Submethod kept bringing me back for the same reasons volume one did. It was at times intensely personal, other times social commentary, but the thing it really embodied about the web – something that really is part of the huge power of the web – is the way it responded to me, and to the things that were (are) happening in the world. No vacuum.

google They don’t come much more web-centric than search engines. Designed with one part big dob of common sense (the interface) and two parts hardcore (the searching and indexing algorithms). Google came along about two months after I’d completely stopped using search engines. It still pains me that they had to pay *ahem* someone to build that interface – its 200% common sense (what more does a search engine need than a search box and a go button?)

staticlife Sun An is one of … let’s say less than ten people who have genuinely wrapped emotion up and let it wander around in a place on the web. There’s no hint of ego, nor the kind of teenage blogger mope that’s so pervasive. I really don’t want to say much more or to even pimp it too hard. It just is what it is, and lately I’ve been missing people just being themselves.

dreamless Because its a hint at what could be achieved. I’m still hopeful for the rebirth of the information superhighway – the concept of sharing and communicating freely. Don’t go getting cynical before your time.

So… could you print these sites out and read through them? Put `em in a book? On a wall? Sure, most of them, yes. Would they still be alive? No. Could Submethod’s message be delivered on film? Maybe. Would it be the same? I don’t really think so.

The power of the web as a medium is unique, if not the all encompassing juggernaut of The Future, as so many companies have tried to have you believe. We’ve just got to remember why we’re here and how we’re different from other media. Both are important if the web is going to keep progressing towards something that isn’t something we already have.

Thanks for your time reading this. Sorry if it makes no sense, its late.

Steve Caddy
vanillacircus
eek@vanillacircus.ne

Suppose you want to announce or sell something, amuse or persuade someone, explain a complicated system or demonstrate a process. In other words, you have a message you want to communicate. How do you “send” it? You could tell people one by one or broadcast by radio or loudspeaker. That’s verbal communication. But if you use any visual medium at all—if you make a poster; type a letter; create a business logo, a magazine ad, or an album cover; even make a computer printout—you are using a form of visual communication called graphic design.

Graphic designers work with drawn, painted, photographed, or computer-generated images (pictures), but they also design the letterforms that make up various typefaces found in movie credits and TV ads; in books, magazines, and menus; and even on computer screens. Designers create, choose, and organize these elements—typography, images, and the so-called “white space” around them—to communicate a message. Graphic design is a part of your daily life. From humble things like gum wrappers to huge things like billboards to the T-shirt you’re wearing, graphic design informs, persuades, organizes, stimulates, locates, identifies, attracts attention and provides pleasure.

Graphic design is a creative process that combines art and technology to communicate ideas. The designer works with a variety of communication tools in order to convey a message from a client to a particular audience. The main tools are image and typography.

Image-based design
Designers develop images to represent the ideas their clients want to communicate. Images can be incredibly powerful and compelling tools of communication, conveying not only information but also moods and emotions. People respond to images instinctively based on their personalities, associations, and previous experience. For example, you know that a chili pepper is hot, and this knowledge in combination with the image creates a visual pun.

In the case of image-based design, the images must carry the entire message; there are few if any words to help. These images may be photographic, painted, drawn, or graphically rendered in many different ways. Image-based design is employed when the designer determines that, in a particular case, a picture is indeed worth a thousand words.

Type-based design
In some cases, designers rely on words to convey a message, but they use words differently from the ways writers do. To designers, what the words look like is as important as their meaning. The visual forms, whether typography (communication designed by means of the printed word) or handmade lettering, perform many communication functions. They can arrest your attention on a poster, identify the product name on a package or a truck, and present running text as the typography in a book does. Designers are experts at presenting information in a visual form in print or on film, packaging, or signs.

When you look at an “ordinary” printed page of running text, what is involved in designing such a seemingly simple page? Think about what you would do if you were asked to redesign the page. Would you change the typeface or type size? Would you divide the text into two narrower columns? What about the margins and the spacing between the paragraphs and lines? Would you indent the paragraphs or begin them with decorative lettering? What other kinds of treatment might you give the page number? Would you change the boldface terms, perhaps using italic or underlining? What other changes might you consider, and how would they affect the way the reader reacts to the content? Designers evaluate the message and the audience for type-based design in order to make these kinds of decisions.

Image and type
Designers often combine images and typography to communicate a client’s message to an audience. They explore the creative possibilities presented by words (typography) and images (photography, illustration, and fine art). It is up to the designer not only to find or create appropriate letterforms and images but also to establish the best balance between them.

Designers are the link between the client and the audience. On the one hand, a client is often too close to the message to understand various ways in which it can be presented. The audience, on the other hand, is often too broad to have any direct impact on how a communication is presented. What’s more, it is usually difficult to make the audience a part of the creative process. Unlike client and audience, graphic designers learn how to construct a message and how to present it successfully. They work with the client to understand the content and the purpose of the message. They often collaborate with market researchers and other specialists to understand the nature of the audience. Once a design concept is chosen, the designers work with illustrators and photographers as well as with typesetters and printers or other production specialists to create the final design product.

Symbols, logos and logotypes
Symbols and logos are special, highly condensed information forms or identifiers. Symbols are abstract representation of a particular idea or identity. The CBS “eye” and the active “television” are symbolic forms, which we learn to recognize as representing a particular concept or company. Logotypes are corporate identifications based on a special typographical word treatment. Some identifiers are hybrid, or combinations of symbol and logotype. In order to create these identifiers, the designer must have a clear vision of the corporation or idea to be represented and of the audience to which the message is directed.