[Orlyplox]

[FONT="Century Gothic"][/FONT]
Hi I'm both new to this site and to world of design, so forgive me if what I say has been said before.
I've just had a cursory scan of Dr Jakobs Nielsons views on "web design userbility". He advocates a minimalist approach to design, primarily by being as direct and concise with the text content as possible. cutting out all the tecno/sales babble, with a strong beleif that all pages within a website are easily read and navigitable. Whilst I am a convert to his thinking, I'm totally against his views on the use of graphics. which he beleives are largly unnecessary and can be distracting, in fairness to him he admits from the outset he finds the visual graphic difficult to design.
However, I firmly believe the opposite, in that the good use of grahics can get your message over far more quickly and affectively than by laboriously reading through pages of largely unnecessary text.
I find if I'm browsing to find a service, I tend to go with my instincts, if the page is cluttered or over texted, or any animations, anything that appears remotely diificult to read I move on. I think a good page should grab your attention, and be enticed into entering. maybe my own site perhaps, is not up to standard yet but I am determined to continue with perfecting the use of still graphics as a means of messaging. Your views Phil Carvey

[Orlyplox]

an example

[Orlyplox]

Originally Posted by Phil Carvey

[FONT="Century Gothic"][/FONT]
Hi I'm both new to this site and to world of design, so forgive me if what I say has been said before.
I've just had a cursory scan of Dr Jakobs Nielsons views on "web design userbility". He advocates a minimalist approach to design, primarily by being as direct and concise with the text content as possible. cutting out all the tecno/sales babble, with a strong beleif that all pages within a website are easily read and navigitable. Whilst I am a convert to his thinking, I'm totally against his views on the use of graphics. which he beleives are largly unnecessary and can be distracting, in fairness to him he admits from the outset he finds the visual graphic difficult to design.
However, I firmly believe the opposite, in that the good use of grahics can get your message over far more quickly and affectively than by laboriously reading through pages of largely unnecessary text.
I find if I'm browsing to find a service, I tend to go with my instincts, if the page is cluttered or over texted, or any animations, anything that appears remotely diificult to read I move on. I think a good page should grab your attention, and be enticed into entering. maybe my own site www.designsthatspeak.co.uk perhaps, is not up to standard yet but I am determined to continue with perfecting the use of still graphics as a means of messaging. Your views Phil Carvey

example

[yugyug]

That website sells lower abdomens does it?

The userbility views you expressed are an extreme perspective to 'form follows function' and rarely followed closely (on the web at least) - but its important for any designer to understand its worth so that they don't go overboard with graphics and end up with visual effluent. Witness the terrible fad for Flash intro screens a few years ago. But in reality the best solution is one not so extreme and the smart and subtle use of graphics will almost always improve a page - at least a 'dry' page of nothing but text will lose out to a well designed page with a border or trim color; graphics don't have to be photos or illustrations and can be very useful in breaking up chunks of text for easy 'digestion'.

[Orlyplox]

Hi Yugy yug......That website sells lower abdomens does it?

Thank you for you your comments, of course your right. As I said I'm new to this business and much to learn. but will enjoy the discovery.
Bye the way I wish were selling lower abdomens of such form and beauty.I would buy at least 6. Thanks Phil

[andi*pandi]

designs that speak need to talk to text that anti-aliases.

and JN doesn't speak to design as much as functionality, both of which should intertwine gracefully--design should never impede functionality, and functionality should never impede design.

[Thorzdad]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

...design should never impede functionality, and functionality should never impede design.

I would expand on that a bit and add that design should enhance functionality. Just as, in the print world, design should enhance (illuminate? focus?) the message.

[Dark Helmet]

Is this image supposed to be full of cliché's?

http://www.designsthatspeak.co.uk/images/pic_ind.gif

I mean bevels, no AA and drop shadows on text?

It looks like it was made in Word.

[iREZ]

thats hawt...

[Orlyplox]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

Is this image supposed to be full of cliché's?

http://www.designsthatspeak.co.uk/images/pic_ind.gif

I mean bevels, no AA and drop shadows on text?

It looks like it was made in Word.

Hi
I agree with your observations, but you are a designer. Rarely do the prospective clients have the stomach for fresh ideas, unless your one of the Guinesses of the marketing world.
Who can afford not to have the comfort of the cliche, from the customers perspective! thanks for the comment though, thats what I love about these forums ,gets the argumentitive juices flowing, so thanks Phil

PS the bevels, I agree are a bit naff, need to change it, my idea was simply to create a large button. but it seems I got that wrong.