So I think I've coded for at least the basics of my website. I'm under the impression that you just put the basics in Dreamweaver and then put together the fun stuff in CSS. So that's what I'm doing. Wish me luck.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Webmap
So I think I've coded for at least the basics of my website. I'm under the impression that you just put the basics in Dreamweaver and then put together the fun stuff in CSS. So that's what I'm doing. Wish me luck.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
What I Give Thanks For
On this lovely Thanksgiving day I'm giving thanks for no classes, for family fun and for eggnog. However, what I'm not thankful for is the inventor of the internet. This html stuff is not going to go smoothly. I'm going to spend some time looking at Dreamweaver, keep your fingers crossed.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Website Designs
Here are my designs for my website. I want it to be simple and easy to use. I don't like when websites are confusing and overdone. I prefer them to be functional and informative. That's how I plan to make my website. So here is the initial look.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Critique 3
Site: Brooklyn Children's Museum
Navigation
This website is again extremely straightforward. Each page links to new information and allows you to get back to the other information categories. It relies on color and typographic hierarchy to point out how the categories are organized. It uses the metaphors of imagery, like a letter referencing email, or hands to show that you can belong to their group. The pages link simply and don't have elaborate transitions.
Information Architecture
The information is structured and ordered. It is organized in a way where it seems the museum thinks some information is more important than other information. Visiting information is the first large link and the following categories are also important. The structure of information helps to display the content of their website (which is a lot) without making the site confusing for the viewer.
Usability
It is very easy to use. Information is given without confusion and the visual elements keep the pages from seeming stiff.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
The first page has somewhat of a narrative. There's a lot of activity and bright colors draw you to it. However there is no metaphoric structure throughout the website. Although if you wanted to say that there is a narrative it would be in the photographs of the children on each page. I would say this is a narrative because it shows all the fun that kids could have at each category of what the museum offers.
Reflection of the User
Despite nice colors and cute photos this website is primarily content driven so there isn't any real reflection of the user. This site is more natural than it is transparent. The viewer would pay more attention to the information than the overall design of the website. I think it makes sense because I don't think anyone would look to a museum for real interaction. They would want to know what shows were offered, when and for how long. There's a lot of information needed to be shown for a museum and complicated designs would only hinders someone from learning this information.
Navigation
This website is again extremely straightforward. Each page links to new information and allows you to get back to the other information categories. It relies on color and typographic hierarchy to point out how the categories are organized. It uses the metaphors of imagery, like a letter referencing email, or hands to show that you can belong to their group. The pages link simply and don't have elaborate transitions.
Information Architecture
The information is structured and ordered. It is organized in a way where it seems the museum thinks some information is more important than other information. Visiting information is the first large link and the following categories are also important. The structure of information helps to display the content of their website (which is a lot) without making the site confusing for the viewer.
Usability
It is very easy to use. Information is given without confusion and the visual elements keep the pages from seeming stiff.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
The first page has somewhat of a narrative. There's a lot of activity and bright colors draw you to it. However there is no metaphoric structure throughout the website. Although if you wanted to say that there is a narrative it would be in the photographs of the children on each page. I would say this is a narrative because it shows all the fun that kids could have at each category of what the museum offers.
Reflection of the User
Despite nice colors and cute photos this website is primarily content driven so there isn't any real reflection of the user. This site is more natural than it is transparent. The viewer would pay more attention to the information than the overall design of the website. I think it makes sense because I don't think anyone would look to a museum for real interaction. They would want to know what shows were offered, when and for how long. There's a lot of information needed to be shown for a museum and complicated designs would only hinders someone from learning this information.
critique 2
Site: Switch Mediaworks
Navigation
The navigation of this website is fairly easy. It’s pretty linear and allows the viewer to move from one desired page to the next without complicated transitions. The clues of arrows, squares that highlight a page scrolled over and the commonly known sign of an “x” for exiting that page are used to show the viewer how to move about. The moving elements also make the site more interesting and fun to interact with.
Information Architecture
The information is set up pretty orderly. On the left side are the categories the site holds and when you select one it gives you the subsequent information, also organized. Visual hierarchy is used with color, larger words than others and structure of major information to information that is not as important. There is also very small amounts of information. I think the website is driven by design and not so much on content. Which could be good and bad. If they want to show off their talents a well designed website is a good way of doing this, but with so little information they may not convince a client that they are the best choice for the job.
Usability
It is very easy to use and gives the information directly. The content and visual activity work together well. There isn’t a lot of movement to distract from the information but it’s just enough to make me read what comes up. I think the metaphors work fine for the site. It’s simple but structured and the various elements show that.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
There isn't a narrative to this website and it is linear. It follows a simple structure with some interesting movement but it doesn't move along a timeline. There also isn't a metaphor that somehow carries the site.
Reflection of the User
There is an interesting addition to this site, it has a live messenger. You can talk to others on the site and I think talk to the techs but I'm not really sure how it works. Otherwise there isn't a whole lot of viewer feedback on this site. It doesn't change depending on your choices and it doesn't take you somewhere that may interest you.
Navigation
The navigation of this website is fairly easy. It’s pretty linear and allows the viewer to move from one desired page to the next without complicated transitions. The clues of arrows, squares that highlight a page scrolled over and the commonly known sign of an “x” for exiting that page are used to show the viewer how to move about. The moving elements also make the site more interesting and fun to interact with.
Information Architecture
The information is set up pretty orderly. On the left side are the categories the site holds and when you select one it gives you the subsequent information, also organized. Visual hierarchy is used with color, larger words than others and structure of major information to information that is not as important. There is also very small amounts of information. I think the website is driven by design and not so much on content. Which could be good and bad. If they want to show off their talents a well designed website is a good way of doing this, but with so little information they may not convince a client that they are the best choice for the job.
Usability
It is very easy to use and gives the information directly. The content and visual activity work together well. There isn’t a lot of movement to distract from the information but it’s just enough to make me read what comes up. I think the metaphors work fine for the site. It’s simple but structured and the various elements show that.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
There isn't a narrative to this website and it is linear. It follows a simple structure with some interesting movement but it doesn't move along a timeline. There also isn't a metaphor that somehow carries the site.
Reflection of the User
There is an interesting addition to this site, it has a live messenger. You can talk to others on the site and I think talk to the techs but I'm not really sure how it works. Otherwise there isn't a whole lot of viewer feedback on this site. It doesn't change depending on your choices and it doesn't take you somewhere that may interest you.
oh man only one project to go....(critique 1)
Site: Stereotype Design
Navigation
The website is very easily navigated. It consists of simple pages and a menu that disappears when you run the mouse over the lower images. It basically leads you from the menu page to subsequent pages. There isn’t any trickery and you don’t have to click on multiple things to see what you want. It visually lets you know where to move next by either making the menu disappear when you scroll your mouse downward or highlighting the words in the menu. The only real use of a metaphor is the visual metaphors of the arrows, which suggest that you can move to the next page. It is a simple website that scrolls photos across like a slideshow and allows the viewer to pick specific things without having to search for them.
Information Architecture
Like I said before this is a very basic site. It functions by having a menu that appears. One can choose all the categories of information from that menu. From there the imagery comes up. There is no visual hierarchy among imagery but after clicking on the main menu the secondary menu’s words are in pink. This gives the viewer the idea that these are the categories that should be found off the main menu.
Usability
Overall the site is very easy to use. It is straightforward and there aren’t any distracting elements that make it overwhelming. However I find it a little boring. Even though the works are interesting the site itself doesn’t maintain my interest. It might be that I don’t really enjoy “surfing” the web so if there really isn’t any interaction between me and the site then I don’t care to keep looking. It is also visually boring. It’s just the works being shown. I like when pages connect with some sort of visual metaphor and this site doesn’t have that.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
The narrative of this site is definitely linear. There aren’t any links back to other pages, there isn’t a connection between different categories and there aren’t any real interactive pieces. The only real metaphor is the “home page”. It isn’t a real home but it’s the beginning of the site. That is a metaphor that we’ve really gotten used to without noticing it.
Reflection of the User
There isn’t a reflection of the viewer in this site. This question is similar to the one asking if the website was linear or not. It is an organized website and doesn’t venture outside of that. The website forces you to pay attention to the content and not the design. There really isn’t a design to it and therefore all you really have to look at is the content.
Navigation
The website is very easily navigated. It consists of simple pages and a menu that disappears when you run the mouse over the lower images. It basically leads you from the menu page to subsequent pages. There isn’t any trickery and you don’t have to click on multiple things to see what you want. It visually lets you know where to move next by either making the menu disappear when you scroll your mouse downward or highlighting the words in the menu. The only real use of a metaphor is the visual metaphors of the arrows, which suggest that you can move to the next page. It is a simple website that scrolls photos across like a slideshow and allows the viewer to pick specific things without having to search for them.
Information Architecture
Like I said before this is a very basic site. It functions by having a menu that appears. One can choose all the categories of information from that menu. From there the imagery comes up. There is no visual hierarchy among imagery but after clicking on the main menu the secondary menu’s words are in pink. This gives the viewer the idea that these are the categories that should be found off the main menu.
Usability
Overall the site is very easy to use. It is straightforward and there aren’t any distracting elements that make it overwhelming. However I find it a little boring. Even though the works are interesting the site itself doesn’t maintain my interest. It might be that I don’t really enjoy “surfing” the web so if there really isn’t any interaction between me and the site then I don’t care to keep looking. It is also visually boring. It’s just the works being shown. I like when pages connect with some sort of visual metaphor and this site doesn’t have that.
Meaning-Making (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
The narrative of this site is definitely linear. There aren’t any links back to other pages, there isn’t a connection between different categories and there aren’t any real interactive pieces. The only real metaphor is the “home page”. It isn’t a real home but it’s the beginning of the site. That is a metaphor that we’ve really gotten used to without noticing it.
Reflection of the User
There isn’t a reflection of the viewer in this site. This question is similar to the one asking if the website was linear or not. It is an organized website and doesn’t venture outside of that. The website forces you to pay attention to the content and not the design. There really isn’t a design to it and therefore all you really have to look at is the content.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Final Sequence
Here I give to you my final title sequence for Breakfast at Tiffany's. It isn't quite what I wanted from the start but I think I'm pleased with the way I was able to handle the obstacles. Enjoy :)
Monday, November 10, 2008
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Ugh....
So this project is proving to be much more difficult than I thought it would be. I was hoping that there would be a way to create the visual organically and along with the music, however the problem is that After Effects can't really make it look organic. I was going to try to solve this problem by doing the video in a stop-motion manner, but this way won't allow the visual to be timed with the music. I think I'm going to have to compromise and just do the stop-motion and not try to time it with the music. I'm really disappointed in how this is going to turn out but I don't really have much of a choice. I have a lot of work ahead of me :(
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
