Calling all designers...

[LazyJim]

Yes we need examples.
Yes the site could incorporate something that discusses qualities of a good site, it can serve as reference to the sort of results you expect from a well designed site I supose.

Really though, good sites are the result of good design processes.

Top Ten Web-Design Mistakes lists is a helpfull tool for designers, but the author of these lists ignores the most common and most damaging mistake - the design stage was not completed, and often not even contemplated.

[Suspicious]

Eheh, I like the comics XD.

I'll have to disagree with the horizontal scrolling though, I actually found some great sites that scroll entirely horizontally. I'll admit they're rare though.

9. URL > 75 Characters
"http://www.internet-marketing-research.net/"
43 characters, getting there, lol

Anyways, I'm curious to see what you come up with (it would be a valuable resource for me, a noob designer).

[LazyJim]

Yeah the comics are a great addition over the old lists, oh by the way, did you read his old lists too? The are still valid points.

[LazyJim]

Originally Posted by CHRIS MacGREGOR

DIDJA HEAR ABOUT that 16 year-old kid who designs web pages and makes over $6000 per month!?!

The hardest part of being a professional web designer is telling people what I do for a living. The range of comments I get runs from dismissal of the web as a fad, to the ever popular, "My fifth-grade son has his own website." The main reason that job titles like Web GUI Designer or Web Creative get bandied about in the media and professional circles is that the term web designer carries about as much respect as paper boy in today's society.

That is the introduction of an aticle on A List Apart, It's about a very similar topic to this thread, almost exactly the same, it's another facet of my project.

The whole article: http://www.alistapart.com/stories/proud/

[Suspicious]

Well, you can't completely disregard stuff teenagers put out. Some of it's actually pretty good.

[gecko]

and most of it isnt

so a few kids can do graphics, lately ive seen alot of graphics from kids that make me want to reach through my ISP and smack the mouse from their hands

[LazyJim]

Granted, sometimes quailty comes out of no-where. But usually it's less than skin deep.

[gecko]

hmm? are you saying that training is the only diff betrween good graphics and bad?

cause as an artist AND a web designer, ive seen that being taught the fundamentals can make for decent graphics, but the artistic eye is needed and you have it or you dont

[LazyJim]

Yes I agree, "the eye" can be having a sixth sense and knowing what looks good. I don't deny that there is science and art to it.
That just means that you have to be knowledgeable in the science part, and be an artist too.

artistic eye is needed and you have it or you don't

I think that any artistic eye will be clouded by their personal taste.
There are obviously a lot of tastes that are popular, if these match the artist's taste then great! But ultimately the best eye is the viewers, you can't see things from a viewers exact point of view, but you can observer them, and get feed-back.

So, in summary I think "good graphics" as you say is very much affected by the artistic eye and the artists skills with the tools he uses.
But Graphic Design is still a form of design where centuries of practice have provided a set of principles and guides. What these boil down to is that you should have a good understanding of the subject and medium in which you are working, then think damned hard about what you're trying to accomplish and how best to go about it.

You could look at Design as common sense written up logically, with added guides built up from centuries of practice, and purposefully leaving space for creativity.
So why can't anyone do it? Because they put creativity first, ignore common sense principles, and don't think they can learn from the past or what their users think.

[LazyJim]

Anyway, we are digressing, (or I am anyway).
The main problem is people calling themselves things that they are not. I think the best route is to attack the source, - educate these people.
At the same time I hope to educate the public so they can spot the difference, - which will also provide motivation for the 'fakes' out there to be honest.
The result I am after, I think, is that hopefully then the 'fakes' will define themselves better, whether they do it by calling them selves something more accurate, or change themselves to truly become what they've been calling themselves, is up to them.

[ATLien]

Originally Posted by Suspicious

Somebody find a way to post this rant on the Goodyear blimp, the world shall be enlightened!

that thing was out side my window the other day it was kind of kewl. As for the thread, I counsider myself a web designer and web developer, but I have years behind me and proof of experience. I don't consider my self a specialist in any field, I just consider myself a good overall website creator. I don't care if I get skullded for saying that but I have what most people that call them selfs web designers don't have, and that is a portfolio of client based web sites.

[LazyJim]

I think maybe I expanded and mixed up two problems.
1) the kids that get a computer, find they can shove web sites on the net, and call them selves web designers.
2) the much less important problem of "web designers" with experience and proof of thier work, that inaccuratley (in my view) imply that they are what I would call a real designer.

[gecko]

i agree jim, but they are interrelated because most patrons fo both of those examples doesnt know there is a difference

[LazyJim]

the second problem is more sensative because it's very hard to tell whether they are a real designer or not.

I would rather assume the are till I find they're not.
But it always seems they are not, so I've taken that as the most common, and therefore most likely when meeting new people.
So I may inadvertantly accuse real designers, - I just hope they'll understand.

[gecko]

frag em all

[AcRoNym]

get certified and frag em