Good and Bad Web Design

There are many different elements, both technical and creative, that need to be considered when creating a website. As a multifaceted artist and creative thinker, I am initially focused on the aesthetic quality of a website. I focus on the colors, patterns, fonts, alignments, and of course; on the level of ingenuity and originality. If an image is not pleasing to the eye, then the viewer immediately develops a negative relationship with what that image represents. Most of the time, when we stumble upon a site that looks awful, we will close it out and never return to it again.

Many restaurants, fashion companies, musicians, writers, photographers, film makers, etc. rely on websites to sell their products and generate interest in what they have to offer. If their websites are visually appalling, viewers won’t be able to focus on the product but rather, on the unfortunate nature of the site, and will most probably not take these businesses seriously.

Along with aesthetics, functionality is extremely important. If a website is difficult to read, navigate, or understand, that means it has been poorly designed. The web has become a primary (if not the primary) source of research and information.

• We use the internet to find answers to questions, to discover new things, to shop, to plan our schedules, to figure out what we want to eat for dinner and where we would like to go on vacation.
• We use the internet to interact with people all over the world, to make new contacts and stay in touch with old friends.
• We use the internet to fuel our creative sources and entertain ourselves in ways we wouldn’t be able to in “actual" life.

If the sources we look to are difficult to comprehend, then the purpose of the internet is null.

Let’s begin with examples of bad web design because it’s just so much more fun. One of the worst websites I’ve ever encountered is NYC Goth

To start, the layout and color scheme are a disaster. The background is black with purple skeletons, the header is burgundy, and the font and icons are pink. All of the colors clash and nothing blends.

The site also looks very amateur. There are thick white border lines separating different sections of the site and they are just eye sores.

Another problem is that many of the links are broken and the information provided is outdated. This site is supposed to be for people interested in the Goth subculture and is supposed to be a guide to various events within that culture. If the information is outdated, the site is basically useless.

Some websites aren’t only bad because of the design but the content doesn’t help, either. http://thelightofgodministry.org/ is a religious website made by a man who claims to be a prophet.

The site is like an explosion of color and not in a good way. The layout consists of dozens of boxes, each containing black text with large font. When the site loads, it’s impossible to figure out where to look first. There is no order or organization to the information on the page. This site consists of one page; there are no links and no external sources.

Another awful website in the same vain as the prophet’s site is http://www.happehtheory.com/. This site appears to be underdeveloped and doesn’t have any kind of direction. The page consists of a large table containing ridiculous images. It is difficult to take the message of the site seriously when the execution is so bad.

I am a huge fan of the band and the website does provide a lot of information A big problem with web design is the balance of professionalism and allure. A lot of people want to promote their services and themselves but put too much focus on elements that aren’t important to the browser.

http://www.neckandbackpainchiropractic.com/ is such a website; the best way to describe this is to use the colloquial term “cheesy." First of all, the colors used on this site are extremely unprofessional. They are too vibrant for the subject matter. Secondly, the portrait is not very tasteful or authoritative which brings up questions of legitimacy. The guy looks like he’s floating in a green wavy sky; this imagery does not bring “chiropractor" to mind. There is also too much going on in terms of shape; you have wavy lines, boxes, rounded boxes, and borders. It is far too busy.

Moving on to websites that aren’t blatantly bad, the first one that comes to mind is a site I frequent quite often. http://www.dreamtheater.net/ is the site of band Dream Theater. On first glance the site looks well organized and efficient. As soon as it loads, one of Dream Theater’s songs begins to play and that adds a nice touch.

The problem I have with this site, again, is the color scheme and style. This is a progressive metal/rock band and their website is dull and inexpressive of their music. If I did not know the band, I probably wouldn’t guess what to expect from viewing their website.

I do think the logo across the top is interesting and I like how it’s incorporated into the background as well. The logo and background change every time you refresh the site and I think that’s a pretty creative choice and eliminates the possibility of having a boring site.

Most television networks and shows have websites that are supposed to complement their programming style and subject matter. Of course MTV has a website, http://www.mtv.com/, and I find it extremely annoying. It’s understandable that MTV has many shows and a lot of information to convey to fans but the website is too cluttered. There is bright red text all over the index page and it immediately gives me a headache. There is also a ridiculous amount of material confined to one page. I feel that the site would function better if things were separated.

Italian Vogue, http://www.vogue.it/en/, has the same problem as MTV; the website is too busy and doesn’t represent the beauty and glamour of the magazine. Of course viewing a website is free and therefore Italian Vogue is not going to display its best images in full size because then no one would buy the magazine. However, they could eliminate a lot of the smaller images and just give us several powerful examples of what can be found in the magazine. The scrollbar at the bottom is also great!

Most of the sites I visit are those of bands, photographers, and writers because those are my areas of interest. Photography and portfolio websites are supposed to be simple because it’s all about the work but simple doesn’t mean boring and ugly. My favorite photographer site is http://www.studiorusselljames.com/main.html#/home/. The color palette is sophisticated and subdued so that the images aren’t overpowered. The site loads quickly and doesn’t have any fancy extra flash effects. All of the information is well organized and easily accessible and the site offers external links for information that is not contained within its pages. I also appreciate the soundtrack that goes along with the images because it adds extra mysticism to the quality of his work.

Todd Hido and James Salzano also have nice portfolio websites. Todd Hido’s (http://www.toddhido.com/) color palette fits in well with his work. Like Russell James’s site, it is easy to navigate and there are no complex features that make the work difficult to view. Salzano’s and James’s sites have images that alternate on their own and I like that extra touch. Jim Salzano’s page, http://www.salzanophoto.com/, is extremely basic but it works. The site is sending the message that the work can stand on its own without needing any help.

These sites are elegant, simplistic and look polished.

I’ve always been impressed with sites that create a lot of interesting effects. Many band and movie sites have been doing this in the past ten years, generating more interest. The website for the film Requiem for a Dream, http://www.requiemforadream.com/, is unbelievable and mirrors the movie perfectly. It’s a very trippy site and obviously took a lot of effort. I appreciate and admire the designer’s diligence and originality. Other sites that impress me on a similar level are http://www.rescueme.com , http://www.digitalmash.com, and http://www.wolfmother.com.

There are several websites that I use daily but never give a second thought to. http://www.weather.com, http://www.tdbank.com, and http://www.facebook.com are sites that I frequent once a day, if not more. I do all of my banking online and rely on the internet for the weather forecast.

I always thought that the web design on these sites was primitive and dull but I realized that I was wrong. The sites stay true to their style; the colors they use are consistent with those we see on commercials and in the actual world. They are extremely easy to navigate and are organized in list-like ways that allow for information to be received readily. If these websites were poorly designed, I would definitely have to find other means of checking the weather and checking on my bank account.

There are most likely fundamentals that I haven’t addressed and perhaps I have been too vague. As someone who doesn’t really understand the inner workings of web design yet, a part of me feels that every site is good to an extent because someone spent time creating it. I also had a hard time deciding which websites to make examples out of because there are so many to choose from.