There's not much to say. I pretty much agree with what Curtis wrote. A site shouldn't need all the bells and whistles that many have. To be creative and beautiful does not mean it has to be complex on the user's side (though sometimes it may be on the developer side).
The problem comes down to audience...kind of. We can make assumptions about the types of computers and connections certain demographics would have. But just as it is true that we have to keep up with technology as designers...we also need to realize that others are keeping up with technology too.
How do we determine the abilities of the user's station so we know what we can design for? Should we design for x-amount of years back in computers? Should we even bother with people still using 56k connections or lower? OR again should we be doing a "slow connection" version...which also means, more work.
Filtering for this type of stuff is great. It makes us not go overboard. But how far is too far?? Maybe the people living 10 years in the past need to catch up.
http://www.plusgood.co.uk/
Very unique site an online friend posted on Facebook a few days ago (though I just realized it's on FWA now >.<). I'd say it's pretty much perfect for this assignment. Not only do they have a Flash version...but they also have a functioning accessible version that does the same thing, which is great since not everyone has flash, but they may want to have fun with the site as well! It's a bit hard to navigate, but once you get used to it it's fun to play around with 9they also have the main links you may want in the bottom left corner). It almost reminds me of those old books where you get to choose how they story continues by flipping to different pages. The site even has a Pong game on it if you choose the right combination.
http://www.getoutthere.qld.gov.au/
A fun little site that is general information for young people starting to go out own their own. Impressive for a government site. I think this site has a few issues, but because it has a quick nav as well when you move your mouse it makes it easier to use for those that want "less" experience. It reminds me of Sim City :P The site runs a bit slow on my computers...so that is a down side.
http://www.neave.com
Lots of interesting activities to do here, even stuff that interacts with your microphone and webcam if you have one. The navigation of the website is pretty normal, but I thought the content was what put this in to the experience side of things.
http://www.bio-bak.nl
Well...the site is...interesting...but I can't figure it out! Plus you have to wait for the images to load as you scroll around and zoom in/out. I like it...but it was just difficult. This is the only reason I put it under bad.
I'm torn. As a designer, of course we would love to see more interaction and experience in websites, even if that is their only purpose. Unfortunately, how many people are on the web for just that? People are on the web usually for a specific reason. That reason doesn't have to be "to get information"...and sure your reason could just be "I'm bored and want to browse". But usually people don't want to stumble upon things that htey have no idea what to do. Take a flash website for instance (maybe, a portfolio?). Unless I have to be there to find something out...if there are no obvious buttons I'd probably just leave. I should be able to figure out what the buttons do without actually having to click them to see. But they don't have to be labeled.
So again, as a design I like to see all the bells and whistles. But as your average internet user...not so much.
What Buckley suggest seems like something more than a web site. There's nothing wrong with web-based online entertainment...but is there a demand for it? When I want interaction, I go play games.
As I sit here late at night, frantically trying to finish my film festival project...one thing keeps running through my head.
"Blah."
I am not feeling this design...at all. Which is making me hate this project. I'm pretty sure once I get the chance I will want to redo this...with a new theme and everything. I totally ruined this chance to do something different for myself. I've always wanted to do a dirty-grungy-texturey design that comes out feeling oh-so organic. What better than a film festival for the Pacific Northwest? But instead, I came out with something that fails. Can't I just bring myself to use brown and green in a design? Maybe just this once?
If not organic, the least I could have done is make something nice clean and professional.
Blah again. I just feel like something held me back this time around. I hope I can get hyped up for the next assignment.
I want a new design. I want a do over :( Too late now!
Let's not mention that I need to clean up the formatting on my code. I hate messy code! Somewhere along the way all my pretty tabbing got messed up. Booooo.
Steve Krug brought up many interesting and great points about usability. I would agree that most web users scan instead of read through like a novel they want to read. Heck, I do that myself. But then he brings up things like "Employment Opportunities" vs. "Jobs". Isn't Employment opportunities self explanatory? Who, that is looking for a job, doesn't know what employment is? Or an opportunity?
I somewhat agree on the search function though. Guys, I just want to search. If I have to choose how I'm searching, beyond Google, it's just annoying. Sometimes I have to perform multiple searches if there's things like Title, Author, Keyword, because I don't choose the right option. It's not a multiple choice test guys...just let me search, please. On the other hand, if I'm on Amazon searching for a DVD, and I choose to search books, I'm an idiot. Fair enough. I do like those types of distinctions.
His example of buttons though...just because a button is flat doesn't mean it's not a button. Why should things have to "pop out" of the screen for you to know they're a button or a link? There are certain things that are common enough on the internet to make you know something is a link. If it's your first time on the internet, perhaps it's time you learn a thing or two. For instance, generally text-links are a different color or style on a site to make them stand out. If you see that color/style, you can usually say "oh it's a link". Now, if people are using that color or style on other things that aren't links as well, then there's a possible issue. Say you have a site that is 3 colors (black, blue, white). Black background, white text, and then blue or styled white text needs to be used for hierarchy. Will bold white links stand out enough? Or do they need to be blue? But then if you use blue, can you use blue in the larger headings and expect people to not try to click on them? It's enough to give a designer a headache. But we are here to solve those problems.
It is hard for me to believe so many people are internet (or even computer) illiterate. Of course, I do believe it...but at an age where I grew up with the internet and computers, it makes me impatient when I have to explain to people how to use something pretty basic. Maybe it's because I had a bit of access to a computer and the internet before most people my own age did, and it fascinated me. I think I was around age 10 when I got a computer in my own room. Good times.
All in all, I do believe the internet should be user friendly. Perhaps this is why I'm not a fan of full-flash websites (the back button is one of my best friends...and Flash hates it :< style="font-weight: bold;">much thought" rather than "no thought at all".
After all...the use of the brain keeps it young. If we didn't have to think, even just a bit, we'd become more drone-like than our society already is.
Honestly, I am horrible at doing a process for a lot of things. When doing just a logo, I find it easy. Make a word list...sketch out the ideas (no matter how horrible I am at sketching)...and take it to the computer. With animation (the little bit that I've done), I will sit there and sketch out some key frames, characters, etc. But with websites...that's a whole other story.
Sketches? Wireframes? Oh no! I'm one of those people that likes to get an idea in their head, sit down, and fiddle with the idea straight on the computer. Often times, things get scrapped. But then I have a backbone for a possible future project, or at least something to show people. I never delete my scrapped work for that reason.
I'm not saying process is bad. Oh, quite the contrary. I am sure if I could get used to it I'd have a grand old time sketching out my ideas. But as someone who has done almost ALL her artwork digitally, it's almost intimidating. I know the sketches are just for ideation...but there's something about me that when i sit down with a pencil and paper, I better have an eraser handy. There's also just something about working in full color instead of just sketches...
As for audience, it's difficult to think of your audience when you are creating the whole concept and everything. I know who my main audience is on my personal sites...If I were to have a client they'd generally have an audience in mind as well. But when you have to decide for yourself, that's where it gets tricky.
With the film festival website it's especially difficult. If your film festival is general, then your site should be for the general public too. Then you get the dilemma I'm having. Having a general audience opens up a full can of design possibilities. But then there's also the fact that you can't please everyone. I can't see a design being liked by everyone of all ages...so instead I had to think further in to it.
If this is a family friendly festival, who is most likely going to be looking at the site? Parents perhaps, who want to SEE that it's a kid-friendly event. So it should be friendly as well. Maybe there is a teen who wants their parents to take them to the festival because they are in to that type of thing...so the site should be enticing for that age group. Trendy perhaps. Maybe college students who take interest in film or even just the arts in general.
I think when it comes to older people (50-60+), they might not be going for the festival itself, but to see a specific movie. So maybe the website won't matter so much to them (not to mention many people this age still aren't using computers as their source of information...they may appreciate a pamphlet instead).
It's sometimes difficult to design for all ages and still make it fun to look at for everyone. You don't want to make something completely boring (as I've seen many actual festival sites are...low budget doesn't mean it has to be bland!).
Again, I have this issue that I just NEED to make things at least have a little something for higher resolutions, so I usually do that in the form of a background image that continues on. There's not many people that use 800x600 anymore, so I do not want to limit a website to only looking good on that!
Design 1
A fun, floaty version that has plenty of space for information, clear navigation, and a clean feel. The boat stays above the page you are on. It's a marker! A friend actually helped me a little with the concept on this, especially the suggestion of using a boat in some fashion on the header (while I came up with the use of it as a marker, and she loved it). I am hoping this design isn't too girly. I was also very hesitant to use blue...but with the big emphasis on showing films across the water, I feel it can't be helped. At least this isn't SUPERMAN BLUE like my GoTV site.
Design 2
I didn't want to do a dark layout this time, but I LOOOOVE charcoal grey. So to compromise I just made the background dark and kept the content light with bold colors. I wanted to do something a bit grungy so this is the attempt. I couldn't get away from using those film strips. It gave so much more character than plain black stripes. I also for some reason (on both of these) had a great urge to use the Georgia font in places to contrast with my always using Verdana. The other font used in the logo and other buttons (again on both) is Berlin Sans.
Design 3
Blaaahhhh! This one was a bit bland for my taste once I got the content in. Oh well. Sometimes we make things we hate. Not really made for a large screen this time. Maybe that's why I don't like it!
Design 4 a/b
I think this was my favorite...and it was just an experiment! Okay, so again, I'm not diggin the blue...so I'm walking to class and I think "Oh, why not a skyline of Seattle?" I had a hard time finding an image that would be usable. After all...Seattle is so gray...all the time. So I had to fabricate the image a bit. I used a stock photo (ONOEZ) for Seattle in the day time, and a sunset photo and attempted to make a somewhat believable sunset. So I am probably going to do the sunset version of this one for my final :) It should be fun.