Oh The Irony.....
Carol Ott
because I didn't have a degree in web design?
Well, I sent my resume to another firm and I got a phone call today -- they
were very interested, and when I mentioned that I don't do web design, they
were actually GLAD and EXCITED. What put them over the top was the fact
that I have a PC and not a Mac. Apparently people like me are in short
supply (according to the woman on the phone) and they think they'll be able
to keep me busy for quite a while.
She also mentioned that they have been getting a lot of resumes from web
designers who haven't a clue about print design, and yet they think the
skill requirements are exactly the same.
I'm very excited!
--Carol
Tor de Vries
Congratulations, Carol! Keep us posted!
(even if you do use a PC)
SCG
scg
Carol Ott wrote in message ...
Gem
Excellent news!
Good luck.
--
Gem
Jonathan
--
Jonathan
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HSs_5.9944$h67.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
cpg
>designers who haven't a clue about print design, and yet they think the
>skill requirements are exactly the same.
What's so hard about print design? File>Print... right?
kidding, kidding. Don't yell at me. I feel all fragile.
cpg
P.S. I'm glad to hear you are getting some positive response. It was
just a matter of time.....
Tor de Vries
UberFreak
But seriously there isn't that much between web and print, although I have
not done much print work (I haven't done that much work full stop) I don't
find undertaking a print job daunting in any way. All you have to do is turn
out the work in a file format that the printer uses put it on disk and send
it to the printers, they send you a proof you check it and Bobs your your
transexual auntie.
Whats hard about that?
Regards
UberFreak
www.uberfreak.co.uk
"cpg" <c_p_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3a3a64ba...@news.bluestar.net...
Stan Wojda
> Congratulations Carol.
>
Welcome to the world of print design! There's nothing like the smell of
printers ink in the morning.
Stan Wojda
was.
Thanks, now I won't have to work so hard!
Carol Ott
All I can say is....good luck.
--Carol
UberFreak <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xau_5.25888$Bh.193451@NewsReader...
UberFreak
design studio for two weeks, this studio turns out work for Gucci, Dunhill,
Parkard Bell etc, so not a back room company. What I learnt over the two
weeks that I sat there is that web design takes a little more thought and
expertise than print design. The only worry that a print designer has is if
the colours come out right. Weigh that up against screen res, usability,
download times, navigation, innovation and the rest of the million an one
things that a web designer has to take in to account and then tell me that
print design is difficult. Yes its probably hard being a printer but
designing the stuff for print is the easiest part of the equation.
Regards
UberFreak
www.uberfreak.co.uk
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:g%v_5.6837$UN1.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Dimitri
UberFreak wrote:
>
The only worry that a print designer has is if
> the colours come out right.
Huh? Two weeks and that's your conclusion?
Dan
design studio for two weeks, this studio turns out building designs for
Gucci, Dunhill, Parkard Bell etc, so not a back room company. What I learnt
over the two weeks that I sat there is that web design takes a little more
skyscraper designer has is if the building comes out right. Weigh that up
against screen res, usability, download times, navigation, innovation and
the rest of the million an one things that a web designer has to take in to
probably hard being a general contractor but designing the building is the
easiest part of the equation.
OR: "I watched a doctor take out someone's appendix once and it didn't look
all that hard to me -- not compared to the million an one things that a web
designer has to take in to account."
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
--------------------------------------------
UberFreak wrote in message ...
Paolo
dazed and confused. ;)
Last time I checked web work didn't require crop marks, sizing, resolution
depending on paper stock, bleed, proofing, colour adjustments, print
deadlines, embossing, stamping, creeping, reprinting, print consistency and
not to mention the need to be utterly precise and consistent for work that
might have a print circulation of hundreds of thousands of copies!
I'm honestly at a loss for words... you've stunned me.
Paolo.
Stan Wojda
dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net wrote on 12/15/00 6:01 PM:
It must be great to be just starting out and know everything already. It
reminded me of a saying I heard once "When I was 20 I knew my father didn't
know anything. When I was 30 I was amazed at how much he had learned in ten
years."
Stan Wojda
in article 0By_5.2641$eU1.1...@weber.videotron.net, Paolo at
pa...@blackpencildesign.com wrote on 12/15/00 6:23 PM:
UberFreak
for you, your not the printer your the designer. I'm talking about the the
design aspect, I challenge you as a 'print design specialist' to turn out
print that a web designer couldn't. Yep that's right you couldn't do any
better than a web designer cause at the end of the day its not that hard to
turn out print. Stop kidding yourself that you have a manopoly on a specific
market, just because you try to make it more 'mysterious' than it actually
is...
Regards
UberFreak
www.uberfreak.co.uk
"Paolo" <pa...@blackpencildesign.com> wrote in message
news:0By_5.2641$eU1.1...@weber.videotron.net...
Carol Ott
--Carol
Paolo <pa...@blackpencildesign.com> wrote in message
news:0By_5.2641$eU1.1...@weber.videotron.net...
<snip>
Brian Mays
"UberFreak" <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote:
> What I learnt over the two
> weeks that I sat there is that web design takes a little more thought and
> expertise than print design. The only worry that a print designer has is if
> the colours come out right. Weigh that up against screen res, usability,
> download times, navigation, innovation and the rest of the million an one
> things that a web designer has to take in to account and then tell me that
> print design is difficult.
I guess you haven't yet learned about dot gain, lines per inch, dots per
inch, line screen, screen angles, moire patterns, duotones, tritones,
quadtones, font incompatiblities, four-color or spot-color, embossing,
thermography, lithography, foil stamping, heat transfer, bluelines, press
checks, coated or uncoated stock, full bleed, blind embossing, readability,
die-cuts, emulsion up or down, halftones, overrun, the power of a concept and
the permanence of print work. Screw a website up, fix it in five minutes.
Screw a print job up and it's screwed up FOREVER.
That's just a start. I'm sure others could add stuff to it that I haven't
experienced lately.
Brian Mays
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Brian Mays
"UberFreak" <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote:
> Come on, tell me one print house that doesn't take all that in to account
> for you
Usually it's the first one you don't ask to check that stuff for you. Their
job isn't to correct production mistakes the designer sends in. Their job is
simply to output the job.
> I'm talking about the the
> design aspect, I challenge you as a 'print design specialist' to turn out
> print that a web designer couldn't. Yep that's right you couldn't do any
> better than a web designer cause at the end of the day its not that hard to
> turn out print.
I know and work with a number of successful people who design for the web
without considering usability, screen res, etc also. My creative director
came to web design from print. That's not hard to do these days. Each one
has quirks you need to be attuned to.
All the things you mentioned such as usability are present in print design,
it's just got a less "sexy" name--usually it's called "readability,"
sometimes it's not called anything. Principals are the same and they're
taken into account in web and print.
Brian
a d d
with 1 font, or if he's outputing a mag with 25 fonts, multiple pages,
45 adverts with different fonts, spot colors, and so on.
It IS true that once you've learned the aspects of print, you won't have
to upgrade to the extent of a web designer, where the standards are
changing every 2 freakin' months. But it takes a lot to be a "good"
print designer, and many people forget that.
Br.
Carol Ott wrote:
--
A Digital Dreamer
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com
br...@adigitaldreamer.com
"For designers that dare to dream digital..."
Dimitri
can it be?
: )
jivvy
Sorry, but you sound like the stereotypical "web designer" with no
print experience who thinks they know everything there is to know
about Graphic Design because they can make Web Buttons.
You may be better than that, but you're not demonstrating it here --
I'd really be interested to see what you'd have to say after spending
a year doing print only work, no web... you know, after you actually
*know* something about print.
In general, the people who say "how hard can it be" are the people who
have no idea.
Claire
Dimitri
jivvy wrote:
>
>
> In general, the people who say "how hard can it be" are the people who
> have no idea.
Nothings ever hard- it's either complex, involved, elaborate,
problematic, or challenging- and that's if you know what you're doing.
: )
Geophagus
When you get down to it, a lot of the same design principles apply to
both print and web. The designers just use different tools. I
certainly don't think just because someone's never seen a pica pole
means he's a bad print designer, and anyone who thinks that way *is*
pretentious. Likewise, people who think they're 1337 because they know
a few scripts and think print is going to be replaced by the web are
also pretty clueless.
It looked to me like the observation he was making was "there are a
lot of similarities in the two mediums" and therefore it wouldn't be
a huge leap to cross over. Well DUH the tools of the trade are
different, and the rules are slightly different, and of course it
would take some time to master these new skills. Actually, to MASTER
them takes a lot of time, and anyone who has made that kind of
committment gets a hell of a lot of respect from me.
I'm not giving you any major revelations here. But I notice some "old
school" print people get a little defensive around web artists, and
I'll hear "Do you have any idea what it takes to be a great print
designer?? Do you know how much WORK it is?? Do you think we just sit
around and draw pretty pictures all day?? It's WORK, I tell ya,
WORK!!!"
Chill! We know! It's not like we're your parents and you have to
explain to us that yes, a design degree *is* a real degree and no, you
didn't piss their money away, and yes, a graphic design job *is* a
real job, and no, it's none of their business why you haven't settled
down and gotten married yet. :)
Just a point of view from someone who sits on the fence. I'm perfectly
comfortable in either medium, and hope to someday be respected for my
work in both. But I still have a lot to learn on both fronts.
-Julie B.
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000 03:44:56 GMT, "Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
UberFreak
tasting mulled wine) I would not want to detract from the work that you
print only designers do. And at the same time I would like you to tell the
web only people out there that they shouldn't steer clear of getting
involved in print as experience, like anything, will help them understand
the medium better.
Print and Digital design need the same basic skills, its not hard to develop
these skills but the higher you develop these skills the harder and more
complex the work becomes. And the more skills you develop the more you get
paid. I just feel you shouldn't be afraid of using your creative skills in
any medium or media.
BTW Congratulations Carol on your new job.
Regards
UberFeak
www.uberfreak.co.uk
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HSs_5.9944$h67.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Remember when I posted about the firm that wouldn't give me the time of
day
> because I didn't have a degree in web design?
>
> Well, I sent my resume to another firm and I got a phone call today --
they
> were very interested, and when I mentioned that I don't do web design,
they
> were actually GLAD and EXCITED. What put them over the top was the fact
> that I have a PC and not a Mac. Apparently people like me are in short
> supply (according to the woman on the phone) and they think they'll be
able
> to keep me busy for quite a while.
>
> She also mentioned that they have been getting a lot of resumes from web
> designers who haven't a clue about print design, and yet they think the
> skill requirements are exactly the same.
>
Designer 3K
I think some people get it really wrong. I have been in print design for 6
years now and into Web Design for 4 years. I have come to realize one very
important difference. In Print Design you have to only worry about making
things look good. But Web Design is a different ball game all together. You
need to make thing to be usable, which is more important than looking good
(on the Web). Ofcourse both need lots of different skills if you are doing
work at a professional level.
Web Design is done in 72 dpi. And print at 300 to 600 dpi. So if you are
doing a large poster, a typical so to call professional Web designer without
print experience would just go bonkers waiting in front of his / her machine
because of extremely large files and amount of processing required. The kind
of color handling expertise you need for print design, comes only of age.
And no amount of institutional training can bring you this. Till everything
is in your hands things are perfectly fine. But the moment things go out to
service bureau, printers or process houses all your woes start if things are
not handled well. There is much more than Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, or
CorelDraw to it.
Its like, you know the real depth of water only after getting into it. Hence
please think 10 times before undermining anything.
Regards,
Manish.
"UberFreak" <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xau_5.25888$Bh.193451@NewsReader...
Brian Mays
"UberFreak" <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote:
> OK, I was playing devils advocate slightly (ill but that down to the foul
> tasting mulled wine)
I had a feeling that was the case :-)
> I would not want to detract from the work that you
> print only designers do. And at the same time I would like you to tell the
> web only people out there that they shouldn't steer clear of getting
> involved in print as experience, like anything, will help them understand
> the medium better.
Couldn't agree more. Having gone the print-to-web route two years ago I'd
have to say it's been the most fun two years I've had in my life!
Rachael Doherty
UberFreak wrote in message ...
>Come on, tell me one print house that doesn't take all that in to account
>for you, your not the printer your the designer.
Oh yes, many.
>I'm talking about the the
the the?
>design aspect, I challenge you as a 'print design specialist' to turn out
>print that a web designer couldn't.
mmmmm. Most of my inspiration for my web work comes from print. Primarily
because you have to sift though so much crap on the internet to get to the
good stuff.
>Yep that's right you couldn't do any
>better than a web designer cause at the end of the day its not that hard to
>turn out print.
The design bit is much the same when it comes to the web! That is where the
similarities end.
>Stop kidding yourself that you have a manopoly on a specific
>market, just because you try to make it more 'mysterious' than it actually
>is...
Monopoly. That error has just cost you $1500. Thanks for coming.
The fact that you don't appreciate the skills required to work in print
tells me that you don't know anything about it.
Have some respect, and maybe you might learn something.
jivvy
to both print and web.<
Since I disagree with this statement pretty vehemently, I'd like to
ask you to clarify what design principles you're talking about... that
way I don't make an ass of myself for disagreeing when what I really
did was misunderstand your meaning.
> It looked to me like the observation he was making was "there are a
lot of similarities in the two mediums" and therefore it wouldn't be
a huge leap to cross over. Well DUH<
That's not a "well duh" to me. As you say, it takes a lot of time to
MASTER either set of skills... and mastering one does not give you
mastery over the other... so if takes a lot of time (effort, and
brainpower) to master *each*, how can it be a small leap to master
both? The two fields may have a lot of crossover (e.g., both groups
use graphic software), but there's a much larger body of knowledge and
skill that doesn't cross over (e.g., gif vs. eps).
It sounds to me like the argument here is that it's not that tough to
become a "jack of all trades"... that I will grant. But not everybody
wants to be a jack.
Claire
Carol Ott
--Carol
UberFreak <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote in message
news:k4G_5.37804$_h.211905@NewsReader...
<snip>
Carol Ott
is why I haven't really done much with web design. I have a pretty
specialised set of skills at this point, and I would like to develop them
even further. Adding a whole new set would slow me down, I think.
Not that I'm against trying my hand at web design.....I downloaded a trial
version of Dreamweaver last night, and I'm having a lot of fun putting
together an online portfolio and personal web page. Not so much to
highlight my web ability, but to be able to share my portfolio without
having to send out so many CDs.
--Carol
jivvy <webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote in message
news:EwM_5.274$CO1....@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
<snip>
a d d
were advertsing many moons ago? You used to advertise daily on here like Kitty,
and we waited, and waited, with this great anticipation........ : ) And then I
think i left for a while, and yeah. That's it.....
Br.
Brian Mays wrote:
> Couldn't agree more. Having gone the print-to-web route two years ago I'd
> have to say it's been the most fun two years I've had in my life!
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
--
Brian Mays
things in it but I can't remember what all they are at the moment--Flash
experiments and I think a client's website.
It's not dead, just progressing slowly.
(I don't remember advertising EVERYDAY though...)
Brian
br...@adigitaldreamer.com wrote:
> Hey, just as a side note, what ever happened to that personal webpage that you
> were advertsing many moons ago?
jivvy
description survey (not the proper document title) states that the
lowest level of web designers is someone who (and i'm paraphrasing
here): uses WYSIWYG web editors like Dreamweaver and can edit some
HTML but with -uncertain results-. I liked that last part.<
Yeah, I read that in Aquent, too. My question is "Is anybody really
hiring people with this 'skill' level?"
Nobody that I know... except maybe some people who aren't willing to
pay more than $19.95 for their ENTIRE web site ;).
Claire
jivvy
portfolio without having to send out so many CDs.<<
My first reason for learning anything about print was so I could
design my own business cards. ;)
And while I once had a job where I designed all the collateral, cds,
direct mail campaigns, and the web site (it was a
small-and-running-out-of-money company), I never ever want to do that
again. ;) The web site was great and everything else was mediocre...
There may be people who are Masters of both, but they are rare indeed.
Claire
Debbie Hurley
juggle the job and the little tyke? Can you work from home?
Debbie
Carol Ott wrote:
>
> Remember when I posted about the firm that wouldn't give me the time of day
> because I didn't have a degree in web design?
>
> Well, I sent my resume to another firm and I got a phone call today -- they
> were very interested, and when I mentioned that I don't do web design, they
> were actually GLAD and EXCITED. What put them over the top was the fact
> that I have a PC and not a Mac. Apparently people like me are in short
> supply (according to the woman on the phone) and they think they'll be able
> to keep me busy for quite a while.
>
> She also mentioned that they have been getting a lot of resumes from web
> designers who haven't a clue about print design, and yet they think the
> skill requirements are exactly the same.
>
a d d
I need more sleep me thinks.....
Br.
Brian Mays wrote:
--
Carol Ott
with me. His attention span is very short, so I end up doing a lot of my
work after he's down for a nap or in bed for the night.
--Carol
Debbie Hurley <dhu...@ieaccess.net> wrote in message
news:3A3BAB27...@ieaccess.net...
Brian Mays
br...@adigitaldreamer.com wrote:
> Ummmm, yeah, that's it. : ) Kind of makes sense with www.brianmays.com I guess, huh?
> I need more sleep me thinks.....
I'm working on the site...first I have to get the 80 hour days in the 12 day
weeks approved.....
Brian
Paolo
> Come on, tell me one print house that doesn't take all that in to account
> for you, your not the printer your the designer. I'm talking about the the
> design aspect, I challenge you as a 'print design specialist' to turn out
> print that a web designer couldn't. Yep that's right you couldn't do any
> better than a web designer cause at the end of the day its not that hard
to
> turn out print. Stop kidding yourself that you have a manopoly on a
specific
> market, just because you try to make it more 'mysterious' than it actually
> is...
>
> Regards
> UberFreak
> www.uberfreak.co.uk
By all that is good and Holy! What devilish creature set you upon me? Your
strange reasoning is so devoid of logic that I feel it sucking at my brain
like light to a black hole.
Get thee back!
Paolo.
Michael Gastin
I was feelin' for you when you got the brush-off because it just did not
make sense. Well, it always comes around full circle.
Enjoy.
Mike Gastin
"Carol Ott" <cs...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HSs_5.9944$h67.6...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Terry L. Griffin
grif
Michael Gastin
not sure what specifically is so difficult. Since you are a very experienced
designer, maybe you could give the guy/girl an answer that would help
him/her understand the specifics.
Just a thought.
Mike Gastin
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:Hhy_5.229$JH3....@bgtnsc07-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Although I have not built any skyscrapers I have sat in a building-only
> design studio for two weeks, this studio turns out building designs for
> Gucci, Dunhill, Parkard Bell etc, .... (Snip)
Michael Gastin
Mike Gastin
"Dimitri" <pla...@the-spa.com> wrote in message
news:3A3B03EE...@the-spa.com...
Terry L. Griffin
I respect web design as something that I presently don't have the skill
or expertise to do as a fulltime job...not competently, anyhow. See, no
need to get offensive. Just agree with me that, logically, you'd
probably be a lot better and more knowlegeable at print design if you
were doing it fulltime, as you do web design. Therefore you're not
really in a position to say how much easier/harder one is than the
other...just as neither am I.
All assumptions aside...because you know what they say about ass-umptions.
grif
UberFreak wrote:
>
> Come on, tell me one print house that doesn't take all that in to account
Carol Ott
--Carol
Michael Gastin <mi...@flywheeldesign.comeatspam> wrote in message
news:TbW_5.25360$7g.30...@typhoon.nyroc.rr.com...
SCG
years. You forgot color trapping Brian.
scg
Brian Mays wrote in message <91eqrp$6oq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <Dgw_5.25920$Bh.193967@NewsReader>,
> "UberFreak" <ne...@uberfreak.co.uk> wrote:
>> What I learnt over the two
>> weeks that I sat there is that web design takes a little more thought and
>> expertise than print design. The only worry that a print designer has is
if
>> the colours come out right. Weigh that up against screen res, usability,
>> download times, navigation, innovation and the rest of the million an one
>> things that a web designer has to take in to account and then tell me
that
>> print design is difficult.
>
>I guess you haven't yet learned about dot gain, lines per inch, dots per
>inch, line screen, screen angles, moire patterns, duotones, tritones,
>quadtones, font incompatiblities, four-color or spot-color, embossing,
>thermography, lithography, foil stamping, heat transfer, bluelines, press
>checks, coated or uncoated stock, full bleed, blind embossing, readability,
>die-cuts, emulsion up or down, halftones, overrun, the power of a concept
and
>the permanence of print work. Screw a website up, fix it in five minutes.
>Screw a print job up and it's screwed up FOREVER.
>
>That's just a start. I'm sure others could add stuff to it that I haven't
>experienced lately.
>
>Brian Mays
SCG
scg
Dimitri wrote in message <3A3B03EE...@the-spa.com>...
>Hey, a 10 year old child can build a small web site these days. How hard
>can it be?
>
>: )
>
>
>
>
Carol Ott
--Carol
SCG <none> wrote in message news:t3ogr5s...@corp.supernews.com...
Dan
>>>Nice sarcasm, Dan. I do think his post was sincere - he is saying that he
is not sure what specifically is so difficult.<<<
An over-reaction on your part, Michael. I simply wrapped my point in
*exactly* the language our young friend uses to express himself. Have you
heard of mirroring? I know you have. Have you heard of NLP? I know you have.
>>>Since you are a very experienced designer, maybe you could give the
guy/girl an answer that would help him/her understand the specifics.<<<
Young Uber does not yet speak *designer,* and he is not interested in the
specifics. He is still deciding how he will make use of ADG. Pushing buttons
and watching the fur fly holds a certain appeal for him, and it doesn't tax
him too much. Forming intelligent posts to garner the best information takes
a lot more work; he may not be up to it. We shall see.
It is unwise to make a complete presentation to a prospect without first
qualifying that prospect. But you know that.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
---------------------------------------------
Michael Gastin wrote in message ...
Brian Mays
"SCG" <none> wrote:
> You're not a designer until you've been a print designer for at least 5
> years. You forgot color trapping Brian.
OK...I'll admit to falling back on my service bureau for that quite often.
Unless it's something I can do very simply :-)
Brian who has been in print from 1996-1999, but still dabbles in it
now....does that make 5 years?
SCG
call on process jobs. You can also count your formal training into those 5
years...anyway, it's almost 2001.
scg
Brian Mays wrote in message <91ibe9$kbj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
TheDon
think. Most of them are technical differences, of course...
resolutions, file formats, and such, but there are also
differences in how you can and/or should present information
and images.
You can do many things in print that simply don't work (at
least not very well) on the Web, and vice-versa.
TheDon
Mental Soup
http://mentalsoup.com/
> But seriously there isn't that much between web and print,
although I have
> not done much print work (I haven't done that much work
full stop) I don't
> find undertaking a print job daunting in any way. All you
have to do is turn
> out the work in a file format that the printer uses put it
on disk and send
> it to the printers, they send you a proof you check it and
Bobs your your
> transexual auntie.
>
> Whats hard about that?
Michael Gastin
My bad - I made a comment too early. I will admit you seem to be heavy
handed at times, but that was not why I posted as I did.
On first reading of Uber I thought he was asking for some proof. I then took
a shot at you ... Well, then I read a few more of his posts and realized
that you were right and I was wrong. Unfortunately, Usenet does not come
with a 'recall post' button or I would have employed it.
Hope this does not have to become an 'issue' and that you will accept my
apology.
Mike Gastin
PS - NLP???
"Dan" <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:m00%5.2367$GQ1.1...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Mike C.
Michael Gastin wrote:
> Unfortunately, Usenet does not come
> with a 'recall post' button or I would have employed it.
You can "cancel" your own message.
":^) ®
--
Mike C.
* Logo Design
* DHTML & GIF Animation
* Custom Graphics for YOUR Site!
Stop by and see if my skills and talents are up to your standards.
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
NEW SITE at: http://www.mikeslogoland.com/
mailto:mi...@artistmike.com?Subject=Logo.Project
Poptart7O4
>Come on, tell me one print house that doesn't take all that in to account
>design aspect, I challenge you as a 'print design specialist' to turn out
>print that a web designer couldn't. Yep that's right you couldn't do any
>better than a web designer cause at the end of the day its not that hard to
>turn out print. Stop kidding yourself that you have a manopoly on a specific
>market, just because you try to make it more 'mysterious' than it actually
>is...
>
>Regards
>UberFreak
>www.uberfreak.co.uk
Uber...I'm curious. Do you do hardcore programming in your web development as
well or strictly stick to the design and basic coding? Your statements about
print design show a complete lack of understanding of the industry and I'm
curious if this same lack of understanding and respect is evident in other jobs
that are closely related to yours that you perhaps don't quite grasp.
Michelle
Carol Ott
--Carol
Dan <dant...@worldnet.att.ooo.net> wrote in message
news:m00%5.2367$GQ1.1...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
<snip>
Michael Gastin
Mike Gastin
"Mike C." <mi...@artistmike.com> wrote in message
news:3A3D4C0E...@artistmike.com...
Mike C.
Michael Gastin wrote:
>
> How do I do that after I post it, Mike?
In Netscape's Communicator you highlight the message you want to
cancel (must be your own message) then in the menu under "Edit"
there is a command to cancel the message.
Michael Gastin
Well, I use MS Exploiter and do not think I will change, but I wonder if
there is a similar feature?
Thanks for the info!
Mike Gastin
"Mike C." <mi...@artistmike.com> wrote in message
news:3A3D6764...@artistmike.com...
Geophagus
<webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote:
>> When you get down to it, a lot of the same design principles apply
>to both print and web.<
>
>Since I disagree with this statement pretty vehemently, I'd like to
>ask you to clarify what design principles you're talking about... that
>way I don't make an ass of myself for disagreeing when what I really
>did was misunderstand your meaning.
Aw maaaan!! You're going to make me pull out my books, aren't you??
How dare you make me back up my glib generalizations with hard
evidence?? Grrr.... :)
Ummm....ok, since most of my books are at work, I'm going to have to
wing it. One example of a design principle that applies to both areas
would be color. We can talk web-safe palettes vs. spot color till
we're Pantone 660CVC in the face, but that doesn't change the fact
that it hurts your eyes to read red type on a blue background whether
it's on a soup label or on a web site about soup labels. How about
effective use of white space? How about not mixing 7 different fonts
on the same page? That's the kind of design principles that I'm
talking about.
What part are you disagreeing with? I understand there's a whole
different set of rules for making stuff look good onscreen vs. making
stuff look good on paper. Different constraints, different
resolutions, different audiences, etc. But I still think the basics
are the same.
>
>> It looked to me like the observation he was making was "there are a
>lot of similarities in the two mediums" and therefore it wouldn't be
>a huge leap to cross over. Well DUH<
>
>That's not a "well duh" to me. As you say, it takes a lot of time to
>MASTER either set of skills... and mastering one does not give you
>mastery over the other... so if takes a lot of time (effort, and
>brainpower) to master *each*, how can it be a small leap to master
>both? The two fields may have a lot of crossover (e.g., both groups
>use graphic software), but there's a much larger body of knowledge and
>skill that doesn't cross over (e.g., gif vs. eps).
*nod* No arguement here.
>
>It sounds to me like the argument here is that it's not that tough to
>become a "jack of all trades"... that I will grant. But not everybody
>wants to be a jack.
I know.....I've cursed myself with the very "jack" disease you're
talking about. I like a lot of different stuff, and I like to try new
things...but I've sort of reached a crossroads where I have to pick a
few things to focus on, and I know I have to do it if I want to
develop any *real* skills and be taken seriously as a professional,
but it's hard to abandon all the other stuff I enjoy doing. :(
BUT that really wasn't where I was going with my arguement. I just get
fed up with the whole "print vs. web" thing sometimes. I don't think
one set of skills is less valid than another. We're all designers, and
just because one person has chosen print doesn't give him/ her the
right to dis web designers. I guess when you see a lot of
badly-designed websites it's easy to generalize and say all web
designers are dumb teenagers who don't have a clue about what it is to
be a REAL designer. (And I'm not talking about anyone specific here,
I'm just making another generalization....but I'm sure it's not much
of a stretch to think of someone who fits that description.) And in
Carol's case, just because she's not a Java guru doesn't mean she's
not a damn good designer, and it's a shame there are people who see
things that narrowly. I dunno....I just want everyone to hold hands
and sing kumbaya. :)
Claire, I really don't like conflict that much, but I can appreciate a
good arguement and you seem to be the kind of person I enjoy sparring
with. :) So if you still disagree....BRING IT ON!!!!! :) But
seriously, I'd be curious to know why, and I promise not to let it
degenerate to name-calling or anything childish. I've always enjoyed
your posts and seeing your work, and I have too much respect for you
to turn any disagreements we may have into a flamewar.
Cheers,
-Julie B.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dimitri
madman
Madman
" jivvy" <webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote in message
news:bzN_5.311$CO1.1...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
> > Good alternative, Carol. BTW, the recent Aquent salary and job
> description survey (not the proper document title) states that the
> lowest level of web designers is someone who (and i'm paraphrasing
> here): uses WYSIWYG web editors like Dreamweaver and can edit some
> HTML but with -uncertain results-. I liked that last part.<
>
> Yeah, I read that in Aquent, too. My question is "Is anybody really
> hiring people with this 'skill' level?"
>
> Nobody that I know... except maybe some people who aren't willing to
> pay more than $19.95 for their ENTIRE web site ;).
>
> Claire
>
Dan
>>>I made a comment too early.<<<
I know -- I occasionally do the same thing. This newsgroup is brutal!
>>>PS - NLP???<<<
Neuro-Linguistic Programming. The web is full of NLP sites and info, Dimitri
supplied a link. All of the best sales and communication training of the
last 25 years is rooted in NLP techniques. For our purposes, a real
truncated definition is "a way of learning how other people understand their
own experiences, so we can find out how they think."
If you have been involved in any type of advanced sales training, you have
been exposed to NLP -- although it is often re-packaged under more
marketing-friendly names.
>>>I will admit you seem to be heavy handed at times..."
There is a major difference, at least to me, in speaking "at" someone as
opposed to speaking "with" someone. If I am to be understood, "with" is
always better. This sometimes rankles bystanders, but it is a small price to
pay for direct communication. The resulting discussions crackle with
information and ideas. In my nearly three years here, I have only driven
three people over the edge -- but they were ready to crack anyway.
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
---------------------------------------------
Michael Gastin wrote in message ...
Tor de Vries
> reminded me of a saying I heard once "When I was 20 I knew my father didn't
> know anything. When I was 30 I was amazed at how much he had learned in ten
> years."
I had a t-shirt once that said: "TEENAGERS! Quick, move out of the house
and get a job while you still know everything!"
Tor de Vries
grow on trees, and they are similar in several other ways. But they ain't
the same.
Print design requires a library of knowledge that is irrelevant in web
design. Web design requires a library of knowledge that is irrelevant in
print design. Thank God I don't have to worry about inks, LPI/DPI,
PostScript, etc., on a web site. And, thank God, I don't have to worry
about browser compatibility, JavaScript coding, plug-ins, download time,
etc., on a print job. (Mixing these has given me some odd nightmares. In
one dream, I had to pick a lighter-weight paper and print a 2-color job
because the heavier paper, 4-color job I wanted took too long for the reader
to download to their magazine. Bizarre.)
There is significant overlap in foundational concepts of layout, color,
shape, typography, and overall message. That is why they are both "design."
They diverge when it comes to technical skills. But technique affects form,
which creates a difference between print and web design. Knowing web design
gets your foot in the door with print, and vice versa, but you will have a
lot of technical learning that only time and experience will teach.
Somebody said here that in print design, you only have to make it look good,
but in web design, you have to worry about usability. Whoever said that has
clearly never designed a book or magazine (or instructional poster series,
or large-scale corporate identity, or...). Much print design has serious
usability issues, as much or more than in most web design. Just look at the
first few issues of WIRED if you want to see print design that looked good
but was (at times) utterly unusable.
tdv
Stan Wojda
even though it is a print medium. Virtualy every piece I do has an element of
personalization, either thru scitex imaging or thru the choice of list. I must
design for a specific audience, (age, educational level, sex, and economic
level) and move them through the package to achive the desired outcome. The
design of a direct mail piece must take into account not only the normal print
production problems but all of the physical problems involved in computer
imaging, die cutting, folding and insertion problems. On top of that is the
problem of keeping the weight and size of the piece within postal requirements.
So usability altough quite diffrent from web design is of primary importance.
Since the resulting sales are easy to track both by dollar amount and
percentage of return my success as a designer is based soly on the
effectiveness of the design rather than esthetics of the piece. That doesn't
mean that I don't care about the creative aspect, but I must use the creative
within a fairly complicated series of physical constraints.
David A. Burgess
~DAB
Dan
Dan
--
To reply, remove ooo from address
David A. Burgess wrote in message <3A3E5ECA...@cliotools.com>...
Carol Ott
SOMEONE'S been watching too many X-Files episodes.
--Carol
(who is feeling very cranky today.....sore throat.....gasp gasp...)
Dimitri <pla...@the-spa.com> wrote in message
news:3A3D8451...@the-spa.com...
David A. Burgess
email. *grin*
~DAB
Dimitri
Carol Ott wrote:
>
> Sounds like a bunch of hoo-doo-voo-doo to me. Neurolinguistic programming?
> SOMEONE'S been watching too many X-Files episodes.
>
> --Carol
> (who is feeling very cranky today.....sore throat.....gasp gasp...)
>
Oh, sorry to hear that. Warm socks, chicken soup, off to bed now.
Tor de Vries
>> (who is feeling very cranky today.....sore throat.....gasp gasp...)
>
> Oh, sorry to hear that. Warm socks, chicken soup, off to bed now.
I just realized something horrible. My wife recently bought a PowerBook...
I'm getting her the AirPort wireless setup (base + card) for Christmas...
this means that I may someday be tempted to WORK WHILE I AM SICK IN BED!!!
The horror. *cringing*
tdv
a d d
cord connected to the computer trips the mrs when she brings me chicken soup.
Man, I hate noodles in the bedsheets..... ; )
What I'm really waiting for is a future that allows me to work in Maui on a
deserted beach with wireless internet, an anti glare/sun screen, batteries that
last 2 weeks a charge, and an anti sand/salt water keyboard. Yeeeeeeeeeeha!
Br.
Tor de Vries wrote:
> I just realized something horrible. My wife recently bought a PowerBook...
> I'm getting her the AirPort wireless setup (base + card) for Christmas...
> this means that I may someday be tempted to WORK WHILE I AM SICK IN BED!!!
>
> The horror. *cringing*
>
> tdv
--
A Digital Dreamer
http://www.adigitaldreamer.com
br...@adigitaldreamer.com
"For designers that dare to dream digital..."
Tor de Vries
> cord connected to the computer trips the mrs when she brings me chicken soup.
> Man, I hate noodles in the bedsheets..... ; )
Ditto on all points.
> What I'm really waiting for is a future that allows me to work in Maui on a
> deserted beach with wireless internet, an anti glare/sun screen, batteries
> that last 2 weeks a charge, and an anti sand/salt water keyboard.
> Yeeeeeeeeeeha!
What I'm really waiting for is a future where I don't have to work unless I
want to. And then it's not "work" anymore.... *sigh*
tdv
jivvy
Oh, I'm not really sure. I blame the "disagree vehemently" on the
fever I was running at the time. ;)
But I guess it boils down to a couple of things: 1) we don't know
enough about web design to know if the same "principles" apply --
e.g., I'm pretty sure that when it all shakes out and there is enough
data to study, principles of "white space" in print will be somewhat
different from "white space" on the web; and 2) I believe <donning
flame retardant suit> that 95% of web sites don't require any truly
sophisticated level of "graphic design" to be successful.
While I understand your frustration with "print vs web" and while we
may all be designers, we are not all "Graphic Designers."
Look, I'm a mediocre graphic designer... even though it is a job title
I have held and I consider myself better than many ;). While I have a
really good eye and a certain knack, I don't have 1/10th the Graphic
Design talent of many of the people in this newsgroup. I could not
make a [good] living creating ads, collateral, and logos.
OTOH, if the goal is a profitable web site, I'll stack my credentials,
know-how, and skill against anyone in this newsgroup or any other. ;)
Web Design is *not* the same as Graphic Design and my general take is
that the people who think they are either don't understand Graphic
Design or don't make profitable web sites.
They're both good fields, but they are by no means the same. I don't
think one is any easier or harder than the other, better or worse --
they're just two different fields... and I *do* think the crossover
between the two is infinitely more difficult than is being bandied
about here.
Feel free to flame. ;)
Claire
Geophagus
<webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote:
>> What part are you disagreeing with?
>
>Oh, I'm not really sure. I blame the "disagree vehemently" on the
>fever I was running at the time. ;)
Ha...ok :)
>
>But I guess it boils down to a couple of things: 1) we don't know
>enough about web design to know if the same "principles" apply --
>e.g., I'm pretty sure that when it all shakes out and there is enough
>data to study, principles of "white space" in print will be somewhat
>different from "white space" on the web;
And I totally agree with that statement. But they are both principles
of white space, so the methods may be different but the underlying
principle is still the same.
and 2) I believe <donning
>flame retardant suit> that 95% of web sites don't require any truly
>sophisticated level of "graphic design" to be successful.
Neither does print. :) But it certainly doesn't hurt.
But I think I see what you're saying. "Graphic design" principles were
written for and originally applied to print, because at the time
that's all there was. When they were writing the books no one worried
about cross-browser compatibility back then. Now we have another
medium that uses another set of rules that are constantly being
re-defined. But I am taking an extremely broad view of design in
general, and therefore I still think the basics can apply to both
fields.
>While I understand your frustration with "print vs web" and while we
>may all be designers, we are not all "Graphic Designers."
Maybe I'm not understanding the difference. IS there a difference?
Oh, that does it....now you made me get up and look for my dictionary.
*ignoring her boyfriend who points out I could have looked it up on
mw.com without getting up*
Graphics: 1) the art of drawing, painting, and printmaking. 2)
pictorial computer output produced, through the use of software, on a
display screen or printer.
Design (skipping over a few of these): The organization of elements in
a work of art or other object.
So are you saying "graphic designers" is another term for "print
designers"? Or does the term apply to those who have been classically
trained in the art of drawing, painting, and printmaking?
>Look, I'm a mediocre graphic designer... even though it is a job title
>I have held and I consider myself better than many ;). While I have a
>really good eye and a certain knack, I don't have 1/10th the Graphic
>Design talent of many of the people in this newsgroup. I could not
>make a [good] living creating ads, collateral, and logos.
Ummm...ok....I took a grand total of 2 design classes in college. Up
until a few months ago I never had anything "graphic" in my title. But
people call me the "graphics person" because I'm the only one who
knows anything about taking photographs, manipulating them, laying
them out onscreen, drawing stuff in Illustrator, preparing stuff for
the printer, blah blah blah etc. Everyone at work thinks I'm great
because no one else knows any better. *I* know better and that's why I
come here. I don't consider myself an expert by any means and y'all
can tell me my opinion blows and I won't bat an eyelash because it
probably does. :)
>
>OTOH, if the goal is a profitable web site, I'll stack my credentials,
>know-how, and skill against anyone in this newsgroup or any other. ;)
Where does "profitable" come in?? I'm just concerned with whether
something looks like crap or not. And I say crap is the same whether
you see it on the screen or on a piece of paper. Profitable is just a
side effect....if it looks like crap, people are less likely to be
interested in your product. But what if there isn't a product to sell?
I know the profitability thread has been hashed and rehashed here
recently, so I'm not going to go there right now....
>Web Design is *not* the same as Graphic Design and my general take is
>that the people who think they are either don't understand Graphic
>Design or don't make profitable web sites.
OK, by "Graphic" do you mean "Print?" Then I agree, it's not the same.
But I think nowadays the word "graphic" has morphed into this
all-emcompassing term that covers print as well as the processes that
go into making the print, and since computers are heavily involved in
the process the term grew to include any application that uses
computers to make pictures for print or for screen.
Actually, I sort of lost myself there. My point still is that when we
critique web sites here, people use the principles they learned in
beginning design class to explain why a site looks good or looks like
crap. I just deleted a bunch of threads that would have proven that,
but you've read them and you know what I'm talking about (don't you?).
Therefore, to me, the BASICS of graphic design seem to apply to both
print and web. I'll have to find my books so I can list specifically
what I'm talking about, but I'm starting to think we're beating a dead
horse and it's 12:30 and I just wanna go to bed WAAAAAHHHH.
Nighty night, :)
-Julie B.
>
>They're both good fields, but they are by no means the same. I don't
>think one is any easier or harder than the other, better or worse --
>they're just two different fields... and I *do* think the crossover
>between the two is infinitely more difficult than is being bandied
>about here.
>
>Feel free to flame. ;)
>
>Claire
>
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
jivvy
principles of white space, so the methods may be different but the
underlying principle is still the same. <
Okay, I think we're then arguing semantics here, so I'll drop this one
(because in other places we're really *arguing* ;).
> So are you saying "graphic designers" is another term for "print
designers"? Or does the term apply to those who have been classically
trained in the art of drawing, painting, and printmaking?<
No, I'm saying graphic design embodies tasks and skills not needed to
make a decent web site. Architecture is design, but it is not graphic
design. Landscaping is design, but it is not graphic design. I'm
saying the "graphic" part is a very small element of what it takes to
make a successful web site and it's a *huge* part of what it takes to
make it in the print world.
> Where does "profitable" come in?? I'm just concerned with whether
something looks like crap or not. And I say crap is the same whether
you see it on the screen or on a piece of paper. Profitable is just a
side effect....<
Complete and total bullshit. First of all, if you're only concerned
with whether or not it looks like crap, don't plan on getting too far
in *either* field -- the people who hire you will want results from
what you do, not just something that looks good. Second, "profitable"
may be a "side effect" for a lucky few, but in the rest of the world,
profitable is a goal, is measurable, and can be obtained repeatedly
(with various "products") by the people who know what they are doing.
> But what if there isn't a product to sell?
Just means different metrics for success. Pure info site? Measure
traffic, non-recip links to site, penetration into site, repeat
visits, etc. Sites always have a goal(s). It's the designer's
responsibility to find out what those goals are and meet them. And I
have yet to meet anyone who wanted to sacrifice the goals of the site
in order to look good... oh they'll say "we want it to be written all
in flash," but when asked how much profit they're willing to sacrifice
to meet that goal, they back down real quick.
> OK, by "Graphic" do you mean "Print?"
No, I mean "graphic". ;)
>My point still is that when we critique web sites here, people use
the principles they learned in beginning design class to explain why a
site looks good or looks like crap. <
It's a graphic design newsgroup, how else would you expect the people
to critique? Trust me, post the same sites to a "usability" newsgroup
and you'll get much different critiques and they'll have very *little*
to do with the "basic of graphic design".
>but I'm starting to think we're beating a dead horse<
Oh, I don't think we're beating a dead horse -- I think we disagree
pretty strongly on lots of avenues we haven't even come close to going
down, but that's okay, we're not required to go down all of them. ;)
Claire
Carol Ott
presentation drawings and illustrations for manuals and such. I'll post
some of mine on my website when it's up.
--Carol
jivvy <webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote in message
news:8mI%5.238$1J1....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
<snip>
jivvy
Yeah, but isn't that why they hired you? ;)
I know -- lots of fields use many of the elements of graphic design...
I just don't think that makes the people in those fields graphic
designers.
Claire
Geophagus
and a jousting match. :)
>> So are you saying "graphic designers" is another term for "print
>designers"? Or does the term apply to those who have been classically
>trained in the art of drawing, painting, and printmaking?<
>
>No, I'm saying graphic design embodies tasks and skills not needed to
>make a decent web site. Architecture is design, but it is not graphic
>design. Landscaping is design, but it is not graphic design. I'm
>saying the "graphic" part is a very small element of what it takes to
>make a successful web site and it's a *huge* part of what it takes to
>make it in the print world.
OK, even though I *totally* do not agree, let's say for the sake of
arguement that the "graphic" part of a web site is...what, shall we
say 10 percent? What would you consider the other 90% of a successful
website to be comprised of?
I can guess. Proper HTML 4.0 coding that doesn't crash people's
browsers, marketing strategies to maximize page views and ad
clickthroughs, ensuring your server doesn't crash when more than 50
people try to access your site at once (actually happened at
work....server crashed with fewer than 20 people on it, how
embarrassing). Geeky computer shit and marketing shit that has nothing
to do with the color you choose for your background or the font you
choose for your body copy.
I guess I just am not "getting" it. I am first and foremost an editor,
so for me a website is a lot like a publication. You have to keep it
fresh and up-to-date, you have to answer your email and address your
audience's' concerns, but above all if it doesn't look good, the
navigation is confusing, the purple text on black background hurts
their eyes, etc., your audience will be turned off and it's a lot
harder to keep them. Like I had a friend who used to put out this
funny crustpunk/grindcore zine called POINT BLANK (capitalization done
for KITTY's benefit....it was Doug from HELLNATION's zine), and it was
your typical punk zine, really crappy black and white copies of
different stuff all stapled together. The only reason I'd ever look at
it is because my friend was (and still is) the funniest writer I know
and it was worth sifting through pages of half-baked interviews with
totally drunk punk bands to find the editorial page. My point here is
not everyone has that kind of dedication. I'm not saying a web site
is destined to fail if someone doesn't know graphic design principles,
but it is my personal beliefs that a web page that utilizes these
principles has increased their chances of success by a significant
amount. Of course there is still a ton of work to do in other areas,
just like at a magazine publication. Maybe that's the problem I'm
having....you're focusing on what makes an apple red, and not only am
I looking at the entire apple and seeing something else, I'm analyzing
the whole damn tree and going way off on this tangent. Steer me back
if I've gone too far...unless of course we wander into more
interesting territory. :)
>
>> Where does "profitable" come in?? I'm just concerned with whether
>something looks like crap or not. And I say crap is the same whether
>you see it on the screen or on a piece of paper. Profitable is just a
>side effect....<
>
>Complete and total bullshit. First of all, if you're only concerned
>with whether or not it looks like crap, don't plan on getting too far
>in *either* field -- the people who hire you will want results from
>what you do, not just something that looks good. Second, "profitable"
>may be a "side effect" for a lucky few, but in the rest of the world,
>profitable is a goal, is measurable, and can be obtained repeatedly
>(with various "products") by the people who know what they are doing.
OK, then let me modify that, since I do occasionally come back to the
real world, and you are correct and profit should be taken into
account.. Can something that looks like crap possibly be profitable?
Don't most profitable sites become that in part due to appearance?
Y'all can argue content and service levels and usability, but it's
kind of like dating - at least before we started meeting people
online. What initially attracts us to another person or to a web page
or to a movie poster is because something in the way they look appeals
to us.....then we stay with them because we like the content.
>
>>My point still is that when we critique web sites here, people use
>the principles they learned in beginning design class to explain why a
>site looks good or looks like crap. <
>
>It's a graphic design newsgroup, how else would you expect the people
>to critique? Trust me, post the same sites to a "usability" newsgroup
>and you'll get much different critiques and they'll have very *little*
>to do with the "basic of graphic design".
Hmm. I suppose we all do look at things a little differently,
depending on what our backgrounds are in. But in their cases I suppose
there's a "basics of usability" that could apply to both print and web
graphics. *snicker* Now I'm just being a smartass. :)
>>but I'm starting to think we're beating a dead horse<
>
>Oh, I don't think we're beating a dead horse -- I think we disagree
>pretty strongly on lots of avenues we haven't even come close to going
>down, but that's okay, we're not required to go down all of them. ;)
Heh....I'll go down as many avenues as you're willing to go. :)
Have a great evening!
-Julie B.
jivvy
(purple text on black, 85 fonts on one page), I call Common Sense.
Sure "graphic design" is an element, but the items you're listing
(text colors, fonts, etc.) are Graphic Design 101 (and only a couple
of chapters, at that). Knowing these things does not make one a
graphic designer -- this is stuff that can be picked up in just about
any Build Your Own Web Site in 10 Minutes or Less book/article.
Don't get me wrong -- I know there are scads of people building sites
with no knowledge of the above. But an abundance of
ignoramus-designus doesn't make the people who know the basics Graphic
Designers.
>>What would you consider the other 90% of a successful website to be
comprised of?
Depends on the goals of the site.
>>I can guess. Proper HTML 4.0 <snip><<
Pretty bad guesses -- though, I do insist on standardized coding. But
I don't manage a site that takes ads, so ad clickthrouh is meaningless
to me (I do care about page views, but only because that is one
element of tracking how involved visitors get with the site). I don't
own the server or the server's performance (though I raise holy heck
if there is a problem). I'm not sure what all is included in "geeky
computer shit" or "marketing shit", so I can't really respond to
those. ;)
>>Can something that looks like crap possibly be profitable?
Ever been to http://www.useit.com?
>>What initially attracts us to another person or to a web page or to
a movie poster is because something in the way they look appeals to
us...<<
When it comes to the web, you're gonna have to back that one up.
People don't just stumble on web sites they way they do other people
or movie posters. People *intend* to arrive at a web site and
generally (if not always) with a purpose in mind. Rarely (unless
they're a designer) is that purpose to see what a site looks like.
Again, I know think we are arguing semantics -- we don't agree on what
makes someone a Graphic Designer. ;)
Claire
jivvy
that would properly be "Again, I now think"
and sometimes I don't. ;)
Geophagus
<webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote:
>Now we're getting more to semantics -- what you call "graphic design"
>(purple text on black, 85 fonts on one page), I call Common Sense.
You say tomato...... :)
>Sure "graphic design" is an element, but the items you're listing
>(text colors, fonts, etc.) are Graphic Design 101 (and only a couple
>of chapters, at that). Knowing these things does not make one a
>graphic designer -- this is stuff that can be picked up in just about
>any Build Your Own Web Site in 10 Minutes or Less book/article.
Well if the extent of my graphics knowledge is a only a couple of
chapters, I guess I look pretty stupid having this conversation.
>
>>>I can guess. Proper HTML 4.0 <snip><<
>
>Pretty bad guesses -- though, I do insist on standardized coding. But
>I don't manage a site that takes ads, so ad clickthrouh is meaningless
>to me (I do care about page views, but only because that is one
>element of tracking how involved visitors get with the site). I don't
>own the server or the server's performance (though I raise holy heck
>if there is a problem). I'm not sure what all is included in "geeky
>computer shit" or "marketing shit", so I can't really respond to
>those. ;)
I was attempting to demonstrate that I understand there is more
involved in designing a web page than dropping a few pictures in
FrontPage. I guess I can content myself with knowing that I may still
be stuck in the rubbish heap, but god damn it I'm on *TOP* of that
rubbish heap!! :)
>>>What initially attracts us to another person or to a web page or to
>a movie poster is because something in the way they look appeals to
>us...<<
>
>When it comes to the web, you're gonna have to back that one up.
>People don't just stumble on web sites they way they do other people
>or movie posters. People *intend* to arrive at a web site and
>generally (if not always) with a purpose in mind. Rarely (unless
>they're a designer) is that purpose to see what a site looks like.
OK, but they're still arriving with certain expectations of what the
site should or shouldn't look like, and if that site doesn't meet or
exceed those expectations, that's a strike against it. Maybe I
shouldn't have used the word "initially," and maybe I should stop
assuming the rest of the world looks at web pages the same way I do.
Darlin, I'm going to have to give you this one... I'm having a bit of
a career crisis (print or web?) and right now I'm not feeling good
enough at either to defend myself the way I could if we were arguing
about....oh I dunno......South American vs. African cichlids. Thanks
for humoring me and playing along, though.
How good are you at Scrabble? :)
jivvy
site should or shouldn't look like, and if that site doesn't meet or
exceed those expectations<<
This is our major point of disagreement -- I say they're arriving at
the site with certain expectations of tasks they'll be able to
accomplish... and 99% of any "looks" issues will be forgiven if they
can accomplish those tasks.
> I guess I can content myself with knowing that I may still be stuck
in the rubbish heap, but god damn it I'm on *TOP* of that rubbish
heap!! :)<<
Okay, I'm not sure where this one came from... but I hope nothing that
I said suggested this was where you are -- if so, please accept my
apologies, it was not my intent to suggest anything of the sort.
> I'm having a bit of a career crisis (print or web?) and right now
I'm not feeling good enough at either to defend myself the way<<
I can't speak to the print aspect at all, but in our conversation, it
is my opinion that you have demonstrated greater knowledge of what it
takes to make a successful web site than many (if not most) of the
people out there making web sites. Trust me, anyone who thinks about
the site from the customer's perspective is a rarity and a gem.
Claire
Carol Ott
FIRST and pretty-pretty SECOND. If I get my information quickly, then I
don't care what it looks like. I have to use a lot of government websites
and most of them look like crap.....but what I need is there, and that's the
whole point.
--Carol
jivvy <webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote in message
news:AW116.31$NA3....@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
Geophagus
<webm...@freegraphics.com> wrote:
>> OK, but they're still arriving with certain expectations of what the
>site should or shouldn't look like, and if that site doesn't meet or
>exceed those expectations<<
>
>This is our major point of disagreement -- I say they're arriving at
>the site with certain expectations of tasks they'll be able to
>accomplish... and 99% of any "looks" issues will be forgiven if they
>can accomplish those tasks.
OK, I don't think I disagree with that entirely...Carol was right in
that most people look for information FIRST and pretty SECOND. I guess
what I was getting at is if it's too hard to dig through ads and
banners and silly animated gifs and a bunch of other useless crap to
FIND the information, the site is useless. It doesn't have to be
"pretty," but it can't be "ugly," and since I used to be a layout
editor I guess my definition of "ugly" differs slightly. I think
Yahoo-style sites are horrible. I think 37-Signals-style sites are
wonderful. I LOVE Google, you can't get more simple than that. :)
>
>> I guess I can content myself with knowing that I may still be stuck
>in the rubbish heap, but god damn it I'm on *TOP* of that rubbish
>heap!! :)<<
>
>Okay, I'm not sure where this one came from... but I hope nothing that
>I said suggested this was where you are -- if so, please accept my
>apologies, it was not my intent to suggest anything of the sort.
Sorry, I guess I should have mentioned I'm vaguely manic-depressive,
and occasionally I take Usenet a little more seriously than I should.
No offense taken. Just pass me those happy pills and I'll be fine. :)
>
>> I'm having a bit of a career crisis (print or web?) and right now
>I'm not feeling good enough at either to defend myself the way<<
>
>I can't speak to the print aspect at all, but in our conversation, it
>is my opinion that you have demonstrated greater knowledge of what it
>takes to make a successful web site than many (if not most) of the
>people out there making web sites. Trust me, anyone who thinks about
>the site from the customer's perspective is a rarity and a gem.
Thank you, that was very kind. Unfortunately I'm not using my web
skills at my company, since the decision was recently made by
Corporate to outsource. I'm not very happy about being reduced to
making PowerPoint presentations (on Office 97 no less), but I just got
a new boss and I still want to give him a chance before I cop an
attitude.
Thanks, and I hope your holidays were as wonderful as mine. :)
napalm...@my-deja.com
> Like I had a friend who used to put out this
> funny crustpunk/grindcore zine called POINT BLANK (capitalization done
> for KITTY's benefit....it was Doug from HELLNATION's zine), and it was
> your typical punk zine, really crappy black and white copies of
> different stuff all stapled together. The only reason I'd ever look at
> it is because my friend was (and still is) the funniest writer I know
That Doug guy is a real doofus.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/