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.