http://www.sourceforlearning.org is a website for a not-for-profit company that offers teachers, students, and parents many different learning resources. Upon first glance, from a non-designer perspective, it's not horrible. Honestly, it could be a lot worse, but it could be a lot better too. The gray is a turnoff, based on the vibrancy of the logo. The bold white type is abrasive to the eyes. The layout of the links on the side and the resources at the bottom with the main area nestled in the middle just below the header is a good, solid layout. The search, share, and contribute boxes look a little awkward thrust up in the top right corner. Because of the harsh devising line between the lined gray and dark black, the logo going off the main page area looks awkward as well, though it is nicely lined up with the points sitting right on the edge. I don't know why the browser background is black, I would at least make it the same dark blue from the logo. That's another point: not all the blues on the page are the same. I don't know how many people would pick up on that, but I would think it could be distracting. The main section of the page looks very flat with the image slapped on. The resources at the bottom overflow their containers, which gives a very unfinished view of the site. Let's hope these people can provide better material than they can hire a web designer. The links on the left side are okay…until you hover over one with a "drop down" menu. It literally drops everything else on the page down and expands the page so everything fits with the new links. Compare the first screen capture with the second for a better idea of the awkward expansion. With the page expanded, there's empty blue space at the bottom under the white resources bar. I'm not sure it would even help if that bar were anchored and blue space was added in the main page area. I just think the way these links work is distracting and unprofessional. Also, not even every link has a drop down, which doesn't follow the standard parallelism of if A has two sub-points, B and C also need to have two sub-points. I'm not saying each link has to have the same number of sub-links, but they do need to have some parallels. The sign up link for the email is acceptable, but I feel like it could be customized for the organization. A small detail that wasn't paid attention to is in the section at the bottom with the chunks, the titles are blue then red, unlike the logo, which is red then blue. It's nice they tried to tie that in though. I do like the logo for the site.
http://www.visitmyrtlebeach.com is a tourist website for visitors to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. I really like this website. I open the link and feel like I'm already at the beach because of the color scheme and general atmosphere of the site. As a non-designer, I think this site is fantastic. As a designer, I think this website is pretty darn good. The logo could be better, but at the same time, it suits given the competition. I would venture to call myself an expert at things Myrtle Beach and I've used this site before. The changing picture bar at the top is great, and really paints a great picture of the area. The transitions are subtle waves and adds another dimension to the site. There's a current conditions area at the top of the page next to the search bar and for any tourist, this is a great, must-have feature. The links across the top are fine enough. I don't happen to like the ampersand in that particular typeface, but it fits with the style of the site and the other type that's used. I love the links in the picture bar. They're beautiful and take after web 2.0 icons with the glass shimmer reflection and their shape and size. The links are colorful and color-coded, which is nice. Links within the text are a nice soft blue that is included in the theme colors of the site, so it fits in, but it's recognizable as a text link. The links along the right side are colorful too, though they do not necessarily coordinate with the links up top, which is disappointing. The page might be a little long, but it doesn't have an overwhelming amount of information on it either, so I think it's fine. Because of the importance of applications and being connected to them these days, I would say the twitter, facebook, and youtube icons should not just be slapped at the bottom of the text in the main area of the page. I'd also say that the email updates and plan your trip bars as well as the Myrtle Beach Events section shouldn't be at the very bottom of the big link bar down the right column. It's not often you find links listed along the right side of the website, but I think it's fine in this situation because of the links in the upper left. Overall, I think this is a pretty good website.
http://www.juggle.org is a site for the International Jugglers' Association, which is a resource for jugglers. From a non-designer point of view, I think the site works, but it's a little messy. From a designer point of view, I think the website could use a lot of help. The site is very white - the boring and plain kind of white, not the effective, minimalistic kind of white. The logo needs a lot of help seeing as there's word art in it. The links along the side are stuck in bars with random underlines within the words and it just looks bad. The site is organized well in terms of the placement of information within links / categories. The photo gallery at the top is weird because of the pictures themselves, but also because they repeat within the bar. The flyer / image on the welcome page is too big because it doesn't all fit above the fold (at least on my laptop). Surprisingly, the site features a donate button, a login, and a translate-the-site option. The structure of the site is rather typical with a header area, a link area on the left and a main page area. The text, links, and color theme could use a lot of improvement and once those areas were taken care of, I think the site would be a lot better.
http://www.subwayart.com is a site for Rochelle Weber, a Subway Station painter. Her logo is interesting and it is recreated with her landing page, though the page is a little flat like grid paper instead of being interesting like the logo. The only links are on the main page in the box. There is nothing to demonstrate the link being active. Once you click on a link, it puts a small amount of information on that gridded background and at the bottom, there is a "return to main menu" link. I think even a non-designer would find navigation of this site rather cumbersome. All of the text on the sub-pages is very plain and is contained in a white box. It's so boring and flat instead of having an artist feel to it like it should. This site probably doesn't show the artist's true personality. The virtual gallery isn't as bad as I expected given the rest of the site, but it is still a pain to use. You have to click on so many different things, just to get where you want to end up and there's not even that much content to the site! I think the gallery especially could be a lot better. After all, she's using it to promote her work. The structure of the website isn't like anything I've seen before, probably because it's so oddly constructed.
http://www.butlerfarmshow.com is a website for the Butler Farm Show in Butler, PA. It is atrocious and just as bad as the juggling website. The logo is horrible and there's even a cow in it. The creator tried to make the pictures fun and put them in overlapping bubbles. The home page is labeled "Home Page" and has a list of links. The photo at the bottom advertising the farm show did not display on Safari. There are a ton of links and they are literally organized in a table. Someone with a basic web design class or access to the software must've done this website because the websites I did in high school were on par with this from a graphic standpoint. The page is pretty much just ugly. This is a classic example of a website layout as well, with a header area a the top and links underneath it, followed by a main content area. I found the major arena events page particularly amusing because of a construction logo (see screen capture). The links could be better organized to make it easier to find things. There's not a whole lot to say about this site because this site really is nothing. I think this is a case of a website having no redeeming qualities and needing to be completely redone.
No comments:
Post a Comment