Group items tagged

DISLIKES... - Quick Icons; The icons used to navigate through his work, move really quickly & pop up really fast. - Small font: in combination with some of the light colors & mix with white, the titles were hard to read cause the fonts were so small - Hidden Categories: each time i refreshed the page, the menu icons were just randomly "dropped" onto the page to where sometimes some menu icons were hidden. - Small Viewbox: It is nice to have a formatted size to view his work, however, for some I felt it was too small. There were so much content for some of his work, that shrinking it down to that formatted size didn't do justice to what his work look liked LIKES... - Simplicity: his home page looks clean to where the main focus is the menu icons that really encourages you to interact with his website - Menu Icons: they are really unique & interactive - No Need Back: through the integration of his menu icons, there is never really a need to press the back button. - Interaction: At the very least, every person that comes to his portfolio page would be interested because of the interaction that is required to navigate through his page. It is very playful yet simple

In this article, I'll be analyzing the navigation elements of a particular category of websites, i.e. portfolios. Why portfolios, you ask? Because they represent an interesting blend of creativity and development techniques. As they offer an intriguing user interface and interaction, this often borderlines with what is ultimately defined as an enjoyable user experience. Should aesthetics, originality and creativity come at the expense of usability? Can they reside on the same website in harmony?

+ project navigation on the left and project images on the right is simple and intuitive and project images are a great size. + Variation of media such as video with images creates an interactive feel + Project text on left is a good size and about the optimal amount (verging on the lengthy side however) - Navigation buttons to switch between different images in a project are not as intuitive and harder to find - Direct posting of project boards instead of individual images make site less engrossing - The web design is light on unique details, and therefore it is hard to get a sense of the personality of the artist from exploring the webpage (the about section is also very short)

+ Interactive animation are fun and create immediate interest + Bright colors against grey background create visual interest + Logo and name as part of the title create an impression of professionalism - First page is simple and intuitive, however, after this it become cluttered and complicated to navigate - Images are too small due to the confined area - Loading time, although short, is unwelcome - Music playing is low quality and repetitive and can be an annoyance, especially if the person is listening to music on their computer at the moment.

Likes: 1. Uses mouse tracking to navigate horizontally, which is fun and interactive 2. Clean look--fonts work well together (only 2 or 3, which keeps it simple) 3. Client info is clear, and makes it clear what the author of the website does. Dislikes: 1. I don't understand the significance of the numbers at the top of the page (why they're out of order, and why there's only this selection being shown...) 2. The author of the website could use a copy editor.....there are some grammatical and sentence errors. 3. Flash scroller is a bit jumpy after page loads various items....

I have been very impressed with youtube architecture portfolios from students. I like the way their work is presented as a small 2 minute film. Its fast, its visual and its a great way of introducing your work, designs and projects to this type of profession. What I like about this portfolio: 1. I love the first image you see: "How I do architecture" its a great "pow" and intro to what comes next (your work) 2. I like it when he shows a project in almost a scrapbook kind of way. You see one large picture of the overall project, then you see smaller pictures of different views of the same project. This is how I thought I might show my architecture projects with a plan, perspectives and a small collection of materials. 3. The ending of his portfolio is very surprising, I like it! It is a final quote from F. Wright about architecture and its connection to the heart. 4. I like his second page set up: a sketch of a seating area he designed. It looks very professional. 5. It is great how he shows sketches/black and white pictures and then it turns into a colored rendering of the sketch. What a great way to show design and drawing skills then to bring that sketch to life with color or turning it into a 3D model. Its fascinating to watch the development of the project. What could be changed with this portfolio: 1. I think this is a great way to introduce yourself and get viewers excited about what you can do, but this video is lacking a Homepage, contact and resume (at the least). I would be using this as an interactive tool (a small slide show) to introduce the viewers to my portfolio. (it will serve as an invitation of who I am to the profession) 2. Its too long. 3. Its not consistent and smooth. Its a bit choppy and shows too many different ways and styles, it feels like a little too much distraction of movements, when it should all be about the work. 4. It feels like an archive, a collection of all he has done. There is no direction or reasoning behind his selection

Glen's portfolio is fun and personal. What a fantastic way to meet future clients and letting them meet you. What I liked best about this portfolio: 1. I immediately love the homepage image and how you interact with it, what a refreshingly new idea that I haven't seen before. 2. When you click on the image you go inside the book bag or you zoom in onto the notebook paper to read the resume. Its fun and inviting. 3. I love that you get a feeling for who this guy is and what he is like. Its personal and friendly. The guy is waving at you, saying hello. 4. I like how everything is black and white until you hover your curser over an area on the drawing like the tie. It all of a sudden gives you a punch of color and a clear definition of what file you might be opening. 5. When you have opened one of the files like his book bag-the photo icons are clean cut and clear, plus the return to homepage is prominent and easy to spot in the upper right hand corner. Easy navigational tools. What could be improved in this portfolio: 1. He could have used some text on his homepage. Like his name and the profession he wants to get into. 2. He could have included a footer. More navigation choices. 3. He could have added different ways the pages morph into one another 4. His Return to Home button is a little too well designed, it is kinda masked, to look like a skeleton to match his portfolio design. It could be even more clearer. 5. In the about me page-he could have given us his name. Overall: This portfolio is flat out Amazing! Making a homepage can be a fun and can be used in an artistic way of introducing your self to your profession. Again it was hard to come up with things Glen could change about his portfolio, because its really good: great use of color to highlight his work and having fun with portfolio.

Likes: 1. Simple, clean layout that focuses on vivid images. 2. The "News" option serves as a kind of mini-blog that allows viewers/clients stay up to date on what's new with Deep. 3. The muted background pictures for the different types of work they do - creates visual interest that doesnt detract from the project pictures. 4. Has a downloadable feature in "About Us" of recent works - gives visitors something that can be referenced when offline. 5. The main interactive piece is the scrolling marquee of pictures - the main page look stays the same throughout. Dislikes: 1. The marquee of pictures constantly scroll down unless stopped manually - has a dizzying effect. 2. No hierarchy (visually) between the three main columns ("Portfolio" etc, "Selected Works", and project descriptions corresponding to related pictures. The font and size and colors are the same, making the user have to search a little bit to understand the hierarchy. 3. The use of hot pink throughout the site. 4. The links via pictures don't give us more information about the project/client, just a larger picture and access to Deep's contact info. 5. The use of the same/similar images for different subheadings/types of projects - redundancy is noticeable after awhile.

Likes: 1. Majority of the page is pictures/videos of current works 2. Hover on the left side of page - hides/reveals which section you're in, but always has the "home page" button as an option. A creative way of navigating through the site, while maximizing space for visuals. 3. Has an easy "Pause/Play" option for all videos. 4. Simple, clean graphics and colors are still made interesting by their level of interaction and composition. 5. The optional view option on the right (has thumbnail pictures for each sub page) - is something different. 6. Hovering to the Left hides/reveals (don't need to click and wait for loads) Dislikes: 1. In the portfolios section, the reel starts playing automatically, with music. 2. The left and right view options can be a little confusing - some people might not know that each side contains the same info/pages. 3. Every visual aid is pretty much a reel with music - gives viewer little control of what they see and when they see it.

Pros: 1. Gives you a good impression of the designer. 2. Clear navigation. 3. Blog format works well for the interaction he seems to be looking for. Cons: 1.The colors are too aggressive, the monotone with red highlights works, but the other strong colors distract from that. 2.The flickr links are poorly placed. 3. Home page is a little busy, it takes a couple of seconds to understand.

Pros: 1- Appealing use of words and font size (see also con). 2- images fill entire screen. 3- Incredibly dynamic with video clips of space in use- especially the performing spaces. Cons: 1- Words are sometimes obscured with the image behind. 2- It can be a little too active with the rapid image shifts when scrolling across and the video clips jumping in. 3- Interaction with the site sometimes takes precedence over connection with the work.