Ok, I'm pretty decent with most computer software. Adobe Suite, various 3D modeling and rendering packages, surfing the web.
But every time I've sat down with some web design software, like Flash, Dreamweaver, or Go Live, I just can't get it. I guess I'm used to a single window that has my graphics—and I manipulate everything there. I'm also a little impatient, so I keep giving up.
What am I doing wrong? What's the easiest but slickest web-design packages out there? Any other tips on how to get started with webdesign?
I need to get a simple but multipage website up quickly. It can't look like it was done by neanderthals or five year olds. I've basically designed the whole thing in InDesign—seems like there should be a way to just convert those pages, add some rollovers and go to town.
as with lots of things... you really need to just slog through tutorials.
Either that, or come up with a problem you have to solve, then spend the time to solve it. Thats how i learned flash... it takes some time, and it will require sifting through lots of tutorials to get together the pieces that apply, but in the end its worth it... because flash is definitely a kind of program that once you understand it, the learning curve is pretty steep.
My friend and i went from possessing only a cursory knowledge of Flash, to programing a physical device that could take light intensity measured through sensors and translate it into corresponding sounds, in the matter of a week. (with lots of long nights... which you can skip if you like)
Do you think a simple website with just a few buttons (basically an online portfolio) is best created in flash? I won't be adding to it often, nor creating lots of text, etc. Just static images.
it really depends on how you want the website to function... flash sites dont have to be moving around, they just offer you a much greater degree of flexibility if you chose to enhance it later.
But it sounds like for your purposes, single frames, static images, something like dream weaver would be easier
a good reference is w3schools. Start at the top left and look through the HTML section. It will take you through the process of creating a page. Once you get the basics, start your project and look up whatever you are having difficulties with.
Remember, HTML is a linear language, no matter how you create it. For me it was easier to understand when I manually coded a page instead of generating it through Dreamweaver.
especially in the arch field...i get pissed off and leave the page if it takes more than 5 seconds to load up........ then trying to see some work and having little stupid icons and shit moving around and all that....
maybe if you are in the music scene then the shit flying around is cool...
yup, I don't bother giving clients html websites anymore (or very rarely).
Flash jsut as fast to download and you can control how content is displayed.
Stay away from tweening. The minute you think it looks cool to make something move across the screen you are only seconds from make spinning logos and annoying sounds.
the best way to get good looking results as a noivce is just to use a super minimalistic approach. white space, simple typography, simple navigation. plenty of professional portfolio websites take the same approach
Flash sites. Do not want. For the reasons cryzko and 765 said. And also because flash on osx is rubbish and the fans on my computer all come on every time some flash banner ad pops up. And also because I can't save pictures from a flash website. Almost anything you can do in flash you can do in dynamic html.
one of the beauties of flash is that it is compatible and controllable - dhtml requires a significant amount of patience and skill to be all-browser compatible.
As for the searchability, it should have more of that soon but most of the search compatibility is going to be how you structure your meta tags anyway.
As with any sophisticated tool, in the wrong hands it can be deadly.
I do agree with ulterior - if you are just beginning or can't resist the temptation to tween things all over the place, then just stick with very simple html (which can more easily be duplicated in Flash). I'd stay away from dhtml, I only know of a few sites that are very sophisticated and don't cause tons of problems.
You know another thing that you can't do with Flash? 'View Source'. And those are the two most important words in the world to any newbie web designer.
The comments are here are correct-don't use flash to make a website; however, you can add flash elements within an html. If you have Adobe CS3 software, it should come with flash and dreamweaver. I would use dreamweaver to setup your portfolio. dreamweaver is great in that you don't have to know code to make a nice site. my online portfolio and blog was built with dreamweaver with some flash documents in it...
mjh00c - some your links aren't working: 'Photography' 'City Garden Studio' maybe more, but I stopped clicking after the second one ...
... another common mistake to watch out for: everyone of your pages is called 'Untitled Document', and that's what shows up at the top of my browser window. If you give your pages titles, it'll help the search engines out, and look a little slicker too.
This is what I'd like my website to look like. Simple, clean. Seems somewhat easy to put together in flash, and doesn't give users palpitations (unlike the Morphosis site, for instance.)
Yup, it's the designer that is to blame for bad design, not the program, software, project or whatever. Bad design is bad design - there are no absolutes. This kinda goes along with thinking that it is a rendering program that makes a great image.
farwest - it's the subtleties that can separate a great site from a mediocre one. Note things like not being able to click on a button while it is active, etc.
You can make a simple site in Flash relatively easily. The beauty of flash is the control - from the design to the details.
So I downloaded a test copy of Flash this morning, and I already have a passable website! It was much easier than I'd expected—but I'd like some fade transitions and things, too, so I'll keep working on it.
well, it's not actually up on the web yet. i guess it's not quite ready for the world (give me a few weeks), but i was excited by what i was able to do pretty quickly in flash.
i also like steven holl's new website, which went up a few days ago. it seems pretty simple, and gets away from all the flash hoohaa.
photoshop and convert to image ready - very easy to make slices and rollovers as needed. then you drop into dreamweaver. or.... hire a student to make your page for you. this can be efficient and not as costly as a design firm or well-seasoned pro having a go at it.
also, you can use existing databases and personalize, like:
stick with HTML for now, you can always upgrade to flash later. If nothing else, it's a good skill to learn.
I highly, highly recommend the Visual Quickstart Guide series of books for learning technical stuff like this. That's how I learned InDesign, and I've got their HTML, XHTML & CSS book just waiting for me to get a little time to go through it.
but I guess I got focused on the programming... just understand that had assumed you have an actual design in mind and just need help with execution. If that's not the case, then browse websites, all websites within your reach, and examine carefully the following things:
hierarchy: are there pages within pages, is it all on one, is there a single-tier structure, or consecutive pages?
ease/clarity of navigation: did you really, really wish there was a 'back' button at some point?
position of navigation in relation to content: above? left? right? below? what did that feel like to you? did it dominate the content, or let the content shine, and is that the effect you want for your page?
amount of information per page: was there too much, making it feel cluttered? or too little, making some pages seem uneccesary? Where precisely are the boundaries of "too much" and "too little" to you?
type: what fonts and sizes did you feel were the most successful? You want something that does not pixelate in a bad way, set in a way that will be readable by most people with half decent eyesight, but you don't want it so big that it looks childish. Do you want several different sizes or weights of text to assist with the hierarchy (full circle, woo!)? Or even two different fonts for different types of information (i.e. navigation vs. text, headings vs. text, or project descriptions vs. technical information like dates and places)?
trace, I don't think expert but thanks any way. I do like sites that are clear to navigate. And of course hit on many of the points rationalist brings up.
West Wind is a non-profit film company. They create films that focus on human rights struggles around the world. Their first film, The Judge and The General, tells the story of bringing Augusto Pinochet, the former dictator of Chile, to justice. Our client was Elizbeth Farnsworth. She is a senior correspondent at TheNewsHour with Jim Lehrer.
Nov 2, 07 10:56 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Web Design for Idiots
Ok, I'm pretty decent with most computer software. Adobe Suite, various 3D modeling and rendering packages, surfing the web.
But every time I've sat down with some web design software, like Flash, Dreamweaver, or Go Live, I just can't get it. I guess I'm used to a single window that has my graphics—and I manipulate everything there. I'm also a little impatient, so I keep giving up.
What am I doing wrong? What's the easiest but slickest web-design packages out there? Any other tips on how to get started with webdesign?
I need to get a simple but multipage website up quickly. It can't look like it was done by neanderthals or five year olds. I've basically designed the whole thing in InDesign—seems like there should be a way to just convert those pages, add some rollovers and go to town.
has some great tutorials for flash
also FlashKit
as with lots of things... you really need to just slog through tutorials.
Either that, or come up with a problem you have to solve, then spend the time to solve it. Thats how i learned flash... it takes some time, and it will require sifting through lots of tutorials to get together the pieces that apply, but in the end its worth it... because flash is definitely a kind of program that once you understand it, the learning curve is pretty steep.
My friend and i went from possessing only a cursory knowledge of Flash, to programing a physical device that could take light intensity measured through sensors and translate it into corresponding sounds, in the matter of a week. (with lots of long nights... which you can skip if you like)
Thanks letdownl.
Do you think a simple website with just a few buttons (basically an online portfolio) is best created in flash? I won't be adding to it often, nor creating lots of text, etc. Just static images.
it really depends on how you want the website to function... flash sites dont have to be moving around, they just offer you a much greater degree of flexibility if you chose to enhance it later.
But it sounds like for your purposes, single frames, static images, something like dream weaver would be easier
farwest,
a good reference is w3schools. Start at the top left and look through the HTML section. It will take you through the process of creating a page. Once you get the basics, start your project and look up whatever you are having difficulties with.
Remember, HTML is a linear language, no matter how you create it. For me it was easier to understand when I manually coded a page instead of generating it through Dreamweaver.
screw flash.......
especially in the arch field...i get pissed off and leave the page if it takes more than 5 seconds to load up........ then trying to see some work and having little stupid icons and shit moving around and all that....
maybe if you are in the music scene then the shit flying around is cool...
b
see everyone thinks flash sites have to be crazy with flying icons and weird shit and long download times...
its just not so
thats ok though, one day postal and i will get unlazy and finish our site... prove all the haters wrong
flash forever
yup, I don't bother giving clients html websites anymore (or very rarely).
Flash jsut as fast to download and you can control how content is displayed.
Stay away from tweening. The minute you think it looks cool to make something move across the screen you are only seconds from make spinning logos and annoying sounds.
Keep it simple and clean, html or flash.
simple and clean...... no sounds effects either.....
if your a novice i would avoid flash.
the best way to get good looking results as a noivce is just to use a super minimalistic approach. white space, simple typography, simple navigation. plenty of professional portfolio websites take the same approach
Screw Flash, it ain't searchable and it ain't linkable, what's the web for if not searchin' and linkin'?
what are some good examples of elegant flash sites....?
The morphosis site is a example of flash in the wrong hands
Flash sites. Do not want. For the reasons cryzko and 765 said. And also because flash on osx is rubbish and the fans on my computer all come on every time some flash banner ad pops up. And also because I can't save pictures from a flash website. Almost anything you can do in flash you can do in dynamic html.
See gmail, for example - lots of functionality, no flash.
one of the beauties of flash is that it is compatible and controllable - dhtml requires a significant amount of patience and skill to be all-browser compatible.
As for the searchability, it should have more of that soon but most of the search compatibility is going to be how you structure your meta tags anyway.
As with any sophisticated tool, in the wrong hands it can be deadly.
I do agree with ulterior - if you are just beginning or can't resist the temptation to tween things all over the place, then just stick with very simple html (which can more easily be duplicated in Flash). I'd stay away from dhtml, I only know of a few sites that are very sophisticated and don't cause tons of problems.
Go look over sites like http://www.favoritewebsiteawards.com/, www.newstoday.com, www.moluv.com, www.fcukstar.com and a few others.
Like most creative things, including architecture, about 90%+ suck.
You know another thing that you can't do with Flash? 'View Source'. And those are the two most important words in the world to any newbie web designer.
Right-Click > View Source
... and CSS is your friend, too, it'll help you position those images precisely and get your page looking exactly like it does on InDesign.
Check out the source code on this page, I've got images and text placed exactly where I need them with CSS:
link
The comments are here are correct-don't use flash to make a website; however, you can add flash elements within an html. If you have Adobe CS3 software, it should come with flash and dreamweaver. I would use dreamweaver to setup your portfolio. dreamweaver is great in that you don't have to know code to make a nice site. my online portfolio and blog was built with dreamweaver with some flash documents in it...
click
this is a great one ..
link
it includes awesome video tuturials
for flash that is
mjh00c - some your links aren't working: 'Photography' 'City Garden Studio' maybe more, but I stopped clicking after the second one ...
... another common mistake to watch out for: everyone of your pages is called 'Untitled Document', and that's what shows up at the top of my browser window. If you give your pages titles, it'll help the search engines out, and look a little slicker too.
This is what I'd like my website to look like. Simple, clean. Seems somewhat easy to put together in flash, and doesn't give users palpitations (unlike the Morphosis site, for instance.)
sevensixfive:you are right, I haven't updated things yet...been to busy with school
Yup, it's the designer that is to blame for bad design, not the program, software, project or whatever. Bad design is bad design - there are no absolutes. This kinda goes along with thinking that it is a rendering program that makes a great image.
farwest - it's the subtleties that can separate a great site from a mediocre one. Note things like not being able to click on a button while it is active, etc.
You can make a simple site in Flash relatively easily. The beauty of flash is the control - from the design to the details.
So I downloaded a test copy of Flash this morning, and I already have a passable website! It was much easier than I'd expected—but I'd like some fade transitions and things, too, so I'll keep working on it.
Thanks for all your advice.
whats the URL so we can see it?
well, it's not actually up on the web yet. i guess it's not quite ready for the world (give me a few weeks), but i was excited by what i was able to do pretty quickly in flash.
i also like steven holl's new website, which went up a few days ago. it seems pretty simple, and gets away from all the flash hoohaa.
I've got no problems with flash when done thoughtfullly and with restraint. I don't want to see the same silly animation time after time.
Our site is in flash and I hope I'm not the bad designer that trace speaks of.
e - always good to hear an expert's opinion. If memory serves me, you have some great web designs
photoshop and convert to image ready - very easy to make slices and rollovers as needed. then you drop into dreamweaver. or.... hire a student to make your page for you. this can be efficient and not as costly as a design firm or well-seasoned pro having a go at it.
also, you can use existing databases and personalize, like:
http://www.artcat.com/
good luck.
stick with HTML for now, you can always upgrade to flash later. If nothing else, it's a good skill to learn.
I highly, highly recommend the Visual Quickstart Guide series of books for learning technical stuff like this. That's how I learned InDesign, and I've got their HTML, XHTML & CSS book just waiting for me to get a little time to go through it.
but I guess I got focused on the programming... just understand that had assumed you have an actual design in mind and just need help with execution. If that's not the case, then browse websites, all websites within your reach, and examine carefully the following things:
hierarchy: are there pages within pages, is it all on one, is there a single-tier structure, or consecutive pages?
ease/clarity of navigation: did you really, really wish there was a 'back' button at some point?
position of navigation in relation to content: above? left? right? below? what did that feel like to you? did it dominate the content, or let the content shine, and is that the effect you want for your page?
amount of information per page: was there too much, making it feel cluttered? or too little, making some pages seem uneccesary? Where precisely are the boundaries of "too much" and "too little" to you?
type: what fonts and sizes did you feel were the most successful? You want something that does not pixelate in a bad way, set in a way that will be readable by most people with half decent eyesight, but you don't want it so big that it looks childish. Do you want several different sizes or weights of text to assist with the hierarchy (full circle, woo!)? Or even two different fonts for different types of information (i.e. navigation vs. text, headings vs. text, or project descriptions vs. technical information like dates and places)?
trace, I don't think expert but thanks any way. I do like sites that are clear to navigate. And of course hit on many of the points rationalist brings up.
Here is a small site that we just completed: West Wind Productions
West Wind is a non-profit film company. They create films that focus on human rights struggles around the world. Their first film, The Judge and The General, tells the story of bringing Augusto Pinochet, the former dictator of Chile, to justice. Our client was Elizbeth Farnsworth. She is a senior correspondent at TheNewsHour with Jim Lehrer.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.