Group items tagged

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.

Question: How do I choose an online portfolio layout? What do different layouts express about the designer? This website shows a number of Wordpress themes, and outlines the type of design work they are made for and the kind of feeling they present. Even if you didn't want to use Wordpress, I thought it would be useful to have examples of portfolios with different intentions. There are key words in the layout descriptions, like "elegant" or "artsy" that might tie in with the reading, which doesn't really say what these might look like. A few characteristics stood out to me. "Elegant" portfolio theme tended to have a simple, clean layout with understated backgrounds in neutral colors. The work showed well, but was often uninteresting because there was little wow factor. "Artsy" portfolio themes tended to be more colorful or include a decorative graphic elements, but the work was sometimes overwhelmed by the backgrounds. Work-focused themes tended to have dark backgrounds with a dimensionality to them, which makes the work almost "hung" in space. Text seemed a little awkward in these theme however, since they also "hung" above the background (perhaps if the image and text were in the same window above the background?). Photography had a layout reminding me of a magazine article, exciting and narrative, but more confusing if the information is complex. Some general comments while looking at sites: Some of the architectural portfolios tended toward neutral colors and crisp fonts, however, they often left little impression of who the designer IS, and what their approach is. Some of the graphic design portfolios were highly graphic and visually bold, but were a little "loud" and in the interest of being trendy or current, again left me wondering who the designer IS.

Pros: 1. Very clean, organized design 2. A combination of a portfolio and a marketing tool 3. Options for downloads of galleries, resume, and commission documents. Cons: 1. It's a small, awkward size. I would want my sites larger so there's not so much space hovering around 2. The slideshows of works are too fast 3. The language used (us, we) is that of an employer representing the artists, rather than the artist himself

His nav is too try-hard for my taste. The typography is tooooo big and distracting from the content. That and the language he uses isn't always clear what it is he's linking to in the nav. The nav in the footer is much better. Dude's a good poster designer though.

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

DISLIKES... - The Autoplay Music: with other running media, it became really distracting & i became more focused on looking for a way to turn it off. Could potentially make a person exit the website - More Descriptive Home: unlike other online portfolios, they usually state "portfolio" or "photography" or something, just to give an indicator as to what the website is. For his portfolio, there is no such description which would be nice to see - Details?: navigating through his site, his work is categorized, however there are not descriptions as to what the "advertising" was for. Even something as simple as "Canadian Hockey Nike Campaign" would have been nice. - About Him: It would have been nice to know a little bit about him (hometown or even the type of work he does) - No Back: Once you click somewhere, there's no real going back. LIKES... - Black & White: gave a sophistication to where I could see some sort of aesthetic in Chris' work. - The Rollover Effect: navigating through the work, there are thumbnails that you rollover and change opacity & starts to zoom out. I thought that was a really interesting effect that made me want to see more of the photo - Simplicity: his portfolio is really simple, which I find pleasing because it's easy to navigate & doesn't have clutter to distract from his photos - Music Choice: although I found the music distracting, his selection created a nice ambiance to his portfolio & created a "personality" to where I could start to get a feel as to who he was. - Use of Nav Buttons: I like how you can instantly flip through photos

Likes: -the layout that he puts menu on the left, and has a good quality of image on the right. -clean menu, such as you will see a bunch of his woks when you click "work," rather than putting those directly on menu. -fading out/ in images look sophisticated. Dislikes: -need to think about the contrast; blue on white is little hard for me to recognize those words. -he can definitely use the space on the left more efficiently. -those fonts are too small to get them.

Likes: -the strongest contrast: black and white background -nice fonts that is easy to catch those words up on the website -he puts pages, archives, categories, and meta, other than menu -the idea of putting a search engine in order to enable viewers to search their interesting thing. Dislikes: -the layout is little bit too simple, could be more dynamic. -it seems that he can use empty space more efficiently.

likes: -simple non confusing website -easy to use -less is more -you just have to scroll up and down - great visuals dislikes: -too baron -hard to find artist information -lack of title. -boring -no intro or animation

Likes: 1. Pages showing art use the artwork as their background, which is attractive 2. Description of art is clear and out in the open--not hard to find, and readable 3. There are two thumbnail options to click on: to view the full piece of art, and to view a zoomed-in photo (nice to be able to see detail) Dislikes: 1. Trajan font is overused, and the rest of the fonts don't work very well together... 2. The links in the "artists" section don't lead anywhere... 3. Navigation between artwork pages is confusing--doesn't give much direction.

In this portfolio it is mostly visual with very few words. This style of portfolio allows his work to do all of the talking. To me it was very powerful and bold. What I liked best about this portfolio: 1.It is quick and easy to navigate 2. The photos are captivating and large so you know what you are looking at 3. The landing page is clean, precise and different then others I've seen (it looks professional). 4. When you glide over the elongated photos of the works he has been involved in, large white titles show up to tell you right away what file you are about to open. Example: photo of the production Cinderella, hover your curser over the image and click! Now you have several more photos to look at, all on the production of Cinderella 5. The main menu is large and bold, always visible. 6. There is a small text that shows up "move your mouse over me" encouraging the host to explore and help navigate the site. 7. I like that there are current projects he is working on, he includes awards he has won and he has both a contact page and a resume (that you can download) My suggestions of changes this portfolio could have are: 1. It could use more text, all I see is the work, but where are his ideas and contributions (his experiences in this field?) 2. Does he draw his designs or make models, how does he work? 3. I did not see an about page-what is he like? 4. There is nothing too personal about him. For example: no picture. 5. Resume is all one size and same color of text, nothing jumps out at you. 6. His name and title could be larger (on each page). Because as you scroll down you loose his name and then you ask your self who's work am I looking at again, because this is good and I want him to work for me! (although all you have to do is scroll up or click on the back button to return to menu... there his name is prominently displayed again) Overall: It was very hard to find anything that this portfolio needs to change because I really like what James has done with

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

Likes- Zach's layout is really easy to understand. Simple Main Menu on top of the page lets you look at his Architectural work, blog, and contact info. Select one Menu item and a menu bar on the side allows you to pick which project you want to see. He uses navigation devices in 3 different spots on this page, but does it in a way that is really easy to understand. I would say intuitive. Dislikes- The only problem with the page is that I have to scroll down to see all the information. I didn't realize this at first and later found there were written descriptions at the bottom of the page. I also had to scroll down a bit to see all of the image that was being displayed. That gets old after a while, and I think I can take no more of this website. Sorry Josh. You came really close, but I'm giving you a B+. With a little work this site could be much easier to read.

At first glance this portfolio seems to be impressive. I think Josh is good at first impressions, but maybe tends to lose people after they start talking with him. He has a layout that is simple to read, but after you hit an icon it takes you through a labyrinth of pages and outside links. I scrolled down one page for about 2 minutes reading about his project, just to realize I was stuck scrolling all the way back to the top. One project was just an NYT article about a project he worked on at a firm, but not sure do to lack of information. Likes- This portfolio clearly shows the vast amount of experience Josh has. It includes his architecture school work, professional practice work, graphic design work, and a link to his blog. It seems that Josh is all over the place, and wants everyone to know, but maybe he could do better if he concentrated more on a few things instead of drowning us in his all star achievements. I'm going to give Josh a B-, with plenty of room for improvement.

Likes - Love the simplicity of the homepage, and the slideshow of pictures - I like how he organizes his wedding galleries by using the couples names, instead of just mashing all his wedding photography together under one gallery. - I love the navigation through the gallery pictures themselves, and how you can have them in a contact sheet, or a slide show, or a mini slideshow. Dislikes - I hate when websites have unnecessary sounds, and I think the clicky sound that occurs when the mouse goes over each link is irritating. - I think the way he labels his links and the organization is confusing and unclear. He gives appropriate titles to his gallery sections, but then when you get to the sublinks, you sometimes don't get a clear understanding of what the gallery you are clicking on is going to be of. - I think the link titled "hello and good day" is pointless and I don't really understand why it is there.

Likes: - I like how the landing page is uniform in the colors and link pictures. It was also nice and simple. - I like how she organizes her galleries by color. I think it's an interesting way to do it and sets her apart from other websites I've seen. - I love how she uses very basic colors and fonts, because her work has such vibrant colors that it allows them to really pop and stand out. Dislikes: - It took FOREVER to load. Even though it had a progress bar, I was getting impatient. - I don't like how the photographs that represent the sections of the gallery cut up into the navigation links. I think its distracting and looks messy. - On her contact page, her contact form cuts off on the very bottom. I think maybe the whole site was having an issue with sizing.