Status
Not open for further replies.

ziycon

New Member
Just wondering how many of you go about designing sites, do you use any methods like the KJ method and wire frames or do you go on what the client has seen on the net and wants replicated for their own site or do you just do it on the fly. Just curious as to what peoples opinions are on the methods used for design/development and pros/cons you've found for different methods?
 

jmcc

Active Member
Generally I start by defining what the site is to do. (I don't design for clients and my HTML has been known to make grown webdevs cry. ;) ) The choice of software is also set at this stage. (Static HTML or asp/jsp/php/database driven.) Then, once I understand what the site is about, I can work on the information architecture. I think that the smallest website I did was only a few pages but I didn't know as much about web development back then as the web was only being formed. The navigation is an important part of the process as is giving people exactly what they want. My designwork typically involves a lot of pen and paper design and then figuring out how to do it with CSS. All my sites are information driven so they are not going to win any awards for web design. This is where they would differ from the average brochureware site. I don't want the users to concentrate on the pretty design. I just want to provide them with the information for which they are searching. They shouldn't have to read a manual first and should be able to find that information on hitting the site or within one or two clicks at most.

With a brochureware site there is a completely different emphasis on design. It is meant to provide a showcase for the client. That would require a lot more graphic design and perhaps some mockups. There is also a massive difference between producing bish-bosh sites and high end sites. For quick turnaround websites, a website production tool like Dreamweaver is essential. Graphic design is important for such a site as images play a large part in brochureware sites. This requires some decent proficiency with Photoshop or Paintshop.

The most important thing is that if a design is not working then don't be afraid to change it.

Regards...jmcc
 

Byron

New Member
Generally I use the following method:

1. Find out what the client wants, ask them about sites they visit regularly and what they like the look of. Ask them who there biggest competitors are.

2. Design around the clients favourite elements, their industry preferences, making sure to better their competitors efforts.

3. Present a very rough spec, either scribbled on paper, or done up in 20 minutes, copying elements from other sites. We bounce ideas until we (both client, and myself) are happy with the concept we have being of quality / useful / industry sensitive, etc. If they do not take up the concept, I bill for an hours work, and an hours consulting, and we leave it at that.

4. If they agree, a deposit is taken, and a full concept is developed.

I refuse to do lenghty spec documents and concepts unless a job is really high profile or is worth a lot, even then I watermark concepts. It's important to me to have a set pattern of events, it cuts down on tyre kickers and you can tell quickly at this stage whether you should get payment upfront, or if a small deposit should suffice. Recently I let this practice slip over a small job, for a friends, and now I am having trouble - tar everyone with the same brush in future :p

Hope this helps.
 
ziycon,

It depends, if a client is strict about apperiance of a web site, I design what he sayz. But if I have a freedom to decide what is best for a customer or visitor or client, in that case I decide what is the best.
 

ziycon

New Member
From the replies so far I see people don't use any standard methods for design/development, not that this is a bad thing. I would have thought people would have been more confirtable using 'standard' methods that are used across the web world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top