Here is the link to my final website. I don't know if anyone else had this problem, but I had all my images in a separate folder on my onid. But when they were in that folder, I got a 403 Forbidden message that said I needed to change the permissions. So I just took them out of that folder and they work just fine now - weird...
Anywho, here it is:
http://www.oregonstate.edu/~cespedes
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Monday, December 1, 2008
Website Code
Here is my site so far:
CLICK ME TO SEE!
I haven't added anything pretty yet (obviously), and my content will be added later.
CLICK ME TO SEE!
I haven't added anything pretty yet (obviously), and my content will be added later.
Website Crit #3
http://www.vectorize.de/index_old.html
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It’s easy.
How are you led through the site?
Through a very tiny set of drop down menus and submenus.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors, make sounds, and change form when you mouse-over them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes.
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
There is an “enter” button from the splash page. There are also “next” buttons throughout.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
This layout is very basic and the information flow makes sense.
Can you access the content you want easily?
No! The type is too small to read and the extra windows that pop up clutter the space.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
It’s organized by pertinence and importance in the site. But the splash page really doesn’t have much organization. It’s very hard to find anything unless you read the whole thing.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size and color is a big indicator.
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
It’s pretty intuitive what you should click on next, but it’s too small to be sure of what you’re clicking on.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The formal layout based on putting the most pertinent information first really creates an easy flow. But the text size and the pink on shades of gray don’t create very visible content. Also the way that extra windows pop up instead of just navigating through one window is incredibly annoying and cumbersome.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
There really aren’t any metaphors other than an “enter” button, which makes sense.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
No - I get frustrated with the tiny type and small structure.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
There’s really just a file-flow like system such as the one in your computer. One menu leads to a submenu, which leads to content. There really isn’t a detailed overall meaning.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there are “enter” and “next” buttons.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just information.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
A little bit.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
Yes. The icons that you’ve visited stay highlighted so you can see where you’ve been.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The text colors change when you mouse over them. There are also sounds when you mouse over text. Images move, buttons create masks on images, etc.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Yes, but again, the small text size makes me skim over all the text and the extra windows make me less apt to try to navigate myself back through the channels.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
The design is clearly the main attraction. The only content they have is so small that I can barely see any of it. And what little tastes I do get aren’t enough to get me to open the larger views.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
No.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
Yes.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
No it’s doesn’t seem to make sense. If it’s telling what this company does, it should show more of the products. Its main focus seems to be on the transitions. They have very cool effects, but the small samples and small text create very disinterested viewers.
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It’s easy.
How are you led through the site?
Through a very tiny set of drop down menus and submenus.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors, make sounds, and change form when you mouse-over them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes.
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
There is an “enter” button from the splash page. There are also “next” buttons throughout.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
This layout is very basic and the information flow makes sense.
Can you access the content you want easily?
No! The type is too small to read and the extra windows that pop up clutter the space.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
It’s organized by pertinence and importance in the site. But the splash page really doesn’t have much organization. It’s very hard to find anything unless you read the whole thing.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size and color is a big indicator.
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
It’s pretty intuitive what you should click on next, but it’s too small to be sure of what you’re clicking on.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The formal layout based on putting the most pertinent information first really creates an easy flow. But the text size and the pink on shades of gray don’t create very visible content. Also the way that extra windows pop up instead of just navigating through one window is incredibly annoying and cumbersome.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
There really aren’t any metaphors other than an “enter” button, which makes sense.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
No - I get frustrated with the tiny type and small structure.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
There’s really just a file-flow like system such as the one in your computer. One menu leads to a submenu, which leads to content. There really isn’t a detailed overall meaning.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there are “enter” and “next” buttons.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just information.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
A little bit.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
Yes. The icons that you’ve visited stay highlighted so you can see where you’ve been.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The text colors change when you mouse over them. There are also sounds when you mouse over text. Images move, buttons create masks on images, etc.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Yes, but again, the small text size makes me skim over all the text and the extra windows make me less apt to try to navigate myself back through the channels.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
The design is clearly the main attraction. The only content they have is so small that I can barely see any of it. And what little tastes I do get aren’t enough to get me to open the larger views.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
No.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
Yes.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
No it’s doesn’t seem to make sense. If it’s telling what this company does, it should show more of the products. Its main focus seems to be on the transitions. They have very cool effects, but the small samples and small text create very disinterested viewers.
Website Crit #2
http://struckcreative.com/
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It is easy.
How are you led through the site?
There is a more traditional layout style, but the effects on the text and images is what makes this site interesting.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors, make sounds, and change form when you mouse-over them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
There are forward and back buttons.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
This layout is very clear and everything has a flow that makes sense and makes the information make sense.
Can you access the content you want easily?
Yes, and it’s easy to find your back and forth through the menus. The constant upper menu bar is very helpful and makes me feel grounded in the site.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
It’s organized in a kind of “getting to know us” way. What I mean is there’s the main page, “about us,” then “our work,” then other details, and finally “contact us.” I would say that it’s organized by importance of information as well.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size and color is a big indicator.
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
Yes, it is very easy.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The formal layout based on putting the most pertinent information first really creates an easy flow. Once key element in creating that ease within the viewer is the upper menu bar that stays constant. This gives you a kind of bread crumb trail to know where you are and where you can go.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
Yes, what little metaphors there are make sense and don’t clutter.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
Yes it does. There is enough variety yet predictability to make me engaged and not feel overwhelmed.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
There’s really just a file-flow like system such as the one in your computer. One menu leads to a submenu, which leads to content. There really isn’t a detailed overall meaning.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there are forward and back buttons.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just information.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
No.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
No.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The text colors change when you mouse over them, and the text rotates around to reveal that other color. There are also sounds when you mouse over text. Images revolve, drop down menus pop up, etc.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Yes.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
The clear design definitely makes the content take the spotlight. Though the design is engaging, it’s not over the top so much that I ignore the content. There’s a nice balance.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
Yes.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
No.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
Yes, it seems very professional and it lets the impressive content speak for itself.
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It is easy.
How are you led through the site?
There is a more traditional layout style, but the effects on the text and images is what makes this site interesting.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors, make sounds, and change form when you mouse-over them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
There are forward and back buttons.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
This layout is very clear and everything has a flow that makes sense and makes the information make sense.
Can you access the content you want easily?
Yes, and it’s easy to find your back and forth through the menus. The constant upper menu bar is very helpful and makes me feel grounded in the site.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
It’s organized in a kind of “getting to know us” way. What I mean is there’s the main page, “about us,” then “our work,” then other details, and finally “contact us.” I would say that it’s organized by importance of information as well.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size and color is a big indicator.
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
Yes, it is very easy.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The formal layout based on putting the most pertinent information first really creates an easy flow. Once key element in creating that ease within the viewer is the upper menu bar that stays constant. This gives you a kind of bread crumb trail to know where you are and where you can go.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
Yes, what little metaphors there are make sense and don’t clutter.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
Yes it does. There is enough variety yet predictability to make me engaged and not feel overwhelmed.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
There’s really just a file-flow like system such as the one in your computer. One menu leads to a submenu, which leads to content. There really isn’t a detailed overall meaning.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there are forward and back buttons.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just information.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
No.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
No.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The text colors change when you mouse over them, and the text rotates around to reveal that other color. There are also sounds when you mouse over text. Images revolve, drop down menus pop up, etc.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Yes.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
The clear design definitely makes the content take the spotlight. Though the design is engaging, it’s not over the top so much that I ignore the content. There’s a nice balance.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
Yes.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
No.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
Yes, it seems very professional and it lets the impressive content speak for itself.
Oops! Website Crit #1
Apparently I've forgotten to post these! Sorry!
http://www.appetiteengineers.com/
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It’s easy to get to things, but it’s hard to find your way back through the menus. The “back” icons aren’t put in predictable places.
How are you led through the site?
With links and drop-down-type menus and other menus that fan out/grow out of graphic elements.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors when you mouse-over them which makes you think you should click on them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
They have a kind of file system/flow. It also has virtual books of their work.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
The first page makes sense, but after that the information seems a little jumbled. Maybe this is just because the structure is unpredictable. I don’t know what’s going to come up, where it’s going to appear, or how to get back to where I came from.
Can you access the content you want easily?
It’s a little confusing because you don’t have the usual vocabulary. I expect it to say: about us, portfolio, mission statement, contact us etc. But since those keywords aren’t there, it makes it a little harder to find.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
On the front page the content was organized by importance, but everything after that doesn’t have organization. It’s not even organized chronologically.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size goes from large (with fewer options) to smaller (with more options) to images (which are thumbnails of each piece)
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
It’s easy to get to things, but harder to get back unless you really look and investigate.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The navigation is very unique. It’s not just your basic series of drop-down menus. Again, I think that the difficulty to find the “back” buttons make the site easily usable in one way, but not usable after you get through the site map in one channel.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
Well the paint splatters and virtual books make sense, but the cats all over the site, that serve as some of the transitions don’t make sense. I suppose cats are in their theme, in which case I guess they make sense.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
For a while it does. The colors and images are bright and the layout is unique. However, the type gets so small that I don’t want to work that hard to read everything, and when I couldn’t find the “back” button right away I lost interest.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
It’s sort of a collaged non-sensical collection of images. It just makes it fun and funky.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there’s a “close” button, when really you’re just navigating to the previous page.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just random images or graphic elements.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative other than one of the cats pulling down the information like a window shade for a transition.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
No.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
No.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The colors of different elements change when you mouse over them. Some images even toggle back and forth when you have your mouse over them versus when you don’t.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Not especially.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
Definitely to the design; the bright colors, odd images, unique transitions, etc. draw my eye away from the content.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
No.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
There is more attention on the design itself. The content is cool, but it’s lost in the design.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
No it doesn’t make sense and really competes with the content.
http://www.appetiteengineers.com/
NAVIGATION:
Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
It’s easy to get to things, but it’s hard to find your way back through the menus. The “back” icons aren’t put in predictable places.
How are you led through the site?
With links and drop-down-type menus and other menus that fan out/grow out of graphic elements.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?
Things change colors when you mouse-over them which makes you think you should click on them.
Does the designer use a metaphors to get you to move through the website?
Yes
What Kind of metaphors are used? Organizational Metaphors = (organized by type, kind etc…); Functional Metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can figuratively “cut” and “paste”) or Visual Metaphors (common graphic elements familiar to
most – the traditional “play”, “fast-forward”, “rewind” buttons found on CD players)
They have a kind of file system/flow. It also has virtual books of their work.
INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:
Does the information in the site make sense?
The first page makes sense, but after that the information seems a little jumbled. Maybe this is just because the structure is unpredictable. I don’t know what’s going to come up, where it’s going to appear, or how to get back to where I came from.
Can you access the content you want easily?
It’s a little confusing because you don’t have the usual vocabulary. I expect it to say: about us, portfolio, mission statement, contact us etc. But since those keywords aren’t there, it makes it a little harder to find.
How is the content organized? (By location, alphabet, timeline, category, etc? )
On the front page the content was organized by importance, but everything after that doesn’t have organization. It’s not even organized chronologically.
Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
The text size goes from large (with fewer options) to smaller (with more options) to images (which are thumbnails of each piece)
USABILITY
Is this site easy to use?
It’s easy to get to things, but harder to get back unless you really look and investigate.
How do the above two concepts, navigation and information architecture, work in terms of making the site usable or not?
The navigation is very unique. It’s not just your basic series of drop-down menus. Again, I think that the difficulty to find the “back” buttons make the site easily usable in one way, but not usable after you get through the site map in one channel.
Do the metaphors make sense with the content?
Well the paint splatters and virtual books make sense, but the cats all over the site, that serve as some of the transitions don’t make sense. I suppose cats are in their theme, in which case I guess they make sense.
Overall- does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
For a while it does. The colors and images are bright and the layout is unique. However, the type gets so small that I don’t want to work that hard to read everything, and when I couldn’t find the “back” button right away I lost interest.
MEANING-MAKING: (Narrative and Metaphoric Structures)
In what way is the designer creating meaning in this site?
It’s sort of a collaged non-sensical collection of images. It just makes it fun and funky.
Are they using metaphor? (Remember, metaphor is very common in our experience with computers, sometimes so common we don’t even realize we are using it, i.e. the desktop, cutting and pasting, file systems, buttons, etc.).
There’s the file flow, then there’s a “close” button, when really you’re just navigating to the previous page.
Is there a narrative, story or event that unfolds over time?
No, most things are just random images or graphic elements.
Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I don’t think there is a narrative other than one of the cats pulling down the information like a window shade for a transition.
REFLECTION OF THE USER:
Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site?
No.
Does it change according to your specific visit?
No.
Do you receive mouse feedback? text feedback?
There is a great deal of mouse feedback. The colors of different elements change when you mouse over them. Some images even toggle back and forth when you have your mouse over them versus when you don’t.
Does the site store any choices you have made?
No.
Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore.
Not especially.
TRANSPERANCY OF DESIGN:
Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself?
Definitely to the design; the bright colors, odd images, unique transitions, etc. draw my eye away from the content.
Does the design feel transparent or “natural”, leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely?
No.
Or – Is attention called more to the design itself?
There is more attention on the design itself. The content is cool, but it’s lost in the design.
Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
No it doesn’t make sense and really competes with the content.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
