Back with a Redesign
Well, after 5 long weeks without my ever-so-precious internet connection I am finally back on the air. As you may have noticed I've kept myself busy during that dull month; not on decorating my new house (as I should have been - and as the Mrs would have liked me to have done) but redesigning this site.
Going without the internet has brought me upon two realisations; the first is that I am hopelessly reliant on the internet, and ashamed to say it. The second more important (and interesting) realisation is in the importance of good design time.
The Theory
A website will receive from its creator design time relative to it's worth. Let's imagine I were to have two clients wanting websites, the first offering me a cheque for just £1000, the second prepared to pay me a whopping £8000 in unmarked, used £10 notes in a charismatic black suitcase. I would spend a much greater portion of my time working for client #2.
Likewise if I were designing a website for a large, well-known organisation I would place greater preference and therefore more design time on their website than I would, say, the local Chinese takeaway with the flashing neon kebab light in the window. But there is one website that all web designers value above any other - their own.
Leaning from a Mistake
When I built the last version of my website I had the internet; I was a happy young man. I also didn't have a mortgage, but that's beside the point. However, so eager was I to get started on building my site that I failed to place enough of my time ratio on the design; relative to the importance the site held to me. The result was a site that took too long to build, in part due to the constant mid-development tweeking, and which I continually felt could be improved.
Not having an internet connection this time around meant that I had no choice but to design my site in flat graphics only. No coding, no Dreamweaver, no browser; just me, my watch and Macromedia Fireworks 8. However designing so meticulously for such a long stretch of time helped me to realise the importance of those few weeks when I did get my connection back. During that time I forgot about the coding. I forgot about what yet needed to be done. It didn't matter because it couldn't matter; there was nothing I could do about it anyway.
So how did I bide my time on the new version of SteveTucker.co.uk?
- Graphic design: 4-5 weeks (approx. 1 hour/day weekdays, 3 hours/day weekends)
- Building the site: 1½ days (recycling bits of original site).
Roundup
This may seem like a major waste of time, but in reality I would probably have ended up spending almost that much time, tweaking the design as I built, which is not the correct way to achieve a good graphical interface, as I'm sure you'll agree. All I am saying is this; don't follow your gut urge to get building. Keep designing until you are absolutely, totally satisfied, then use it as a cast-iron blue print. It'll be every bit worth the effort in the end.
PS: I'll get back to all those who've emailed me over the past month+. And dont forget to leave some feedback on your thoughts and feeling for the new design. The old site can be viewed again here. Cheers, y'all
Article Envelope
- Dated: 30 September 2006
- Comments: 18
- Spam Blocked: 39
About the Author
Steve Tucker is a 23 year old web developer living and working in Huddersfield, England
Read more...
02/04/2007 
8 Comment(s)
On 30/09/2006 Spencer said:
Wow you took along time with the design!! this is a cool new design steve (or is it a variation of the original?) :-)
I love the new picture and the transparent,glassy border. Cool you kept the dd menu too. Nice work man!
On 30/09/2006 Elessar said:
Nice redesign...i REALLLLLLLLLYYYYYYYY wish you would make the background static, and have the content scroll. I like the background, but then i scroll and its done...
WHY MUST THE GOOD DIE YOUNG!....
Anyway, looks great :) Have you entertained the idea of making the content a bit wider???
On 30/09/2006 Steve Tucker said:
I have been batting the idea of a static backdrop, and I would do were it not for the technical boundaries involved with transparent sections of the content area. Essentially, If I were to set the backdrop as static then I'd loose my page footer. It's a difficult compromise.
I was considering a content area that expanded smoothly (like the menu) with javascript to a greater width, but I ran into the same problem as with static backdrops. I could get rid of the transparency (and the drop shadow, which is a form of transparency) but it wouldnt look nearly as cool in my personal taste.
On 01/10/2006 Elessar said:
Perhaps you could try the static backdrop and such, and then work on it from there?
On 01/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
Problem is I know before hand what is achieveable, and if I used a static it would mean I would loose either:
1) My page foot and increase the background in filesize, or
2) The semi-transparent border and drop shadow
In addition, if I went for #2 the site *could* look poor if the resolution was high enough on the client screen. What you think?
On 01/10/2006 kitsimons said:
Nice. The edge around your main content area is much better now - stronger, more solid and with more purpose to it.
A small glitch I've come across in Firefox 1.5/Mac: your main menu slides underneath the article title and "Date" part of the date, rather than over them. I presume it's meant to go over them anyway ;-)
On 01/10/2006 J Phill said:
Very nice. It looks also cleaner! I will agree that I would like to see that background fixed. Could you maybe add the footer inside of your content div so it's not lost?
I also totally agree that your own site becomes the most important. The redesigns that I did with my site over the past year were time consuming, and I didn't take on any clients while working on my own site.
On 01/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
@Kit: thanks mate! Yes, urm, of course I meant that glitch to happen... ;). Does it occur wit the old version of the site?
@John: There really is no way around it. If I go fixed I either sacrifice the cool transparency effects on the container, or my page foot (additionally increasing the background image filesize and reducing compatibility with much higher screen resolution computers). I too would like to see it fixed, but I just cannot find a solution with the current resources available :/
On 02/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
Here's a static backdrop attempt. Unfortunately styling the <html> tag has partially broken IE, and there appears to be a minor (yet aesthetically unpleasing) Opera glitch. However FF runs beautifully. I'll keep plodding!
On 02/10/2006 Elessar said:
Haha, FF looks great, and the static bg looks great too. Now...thi smay sound greedy, but perhaps you could have a few other backgrounds at the top, and the users could select what they want as the bg? Just a suggestion :) Looks great.
On 02/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
Oh my god, you're a fussy bunch! Maybe a button to make you a cup of tea too?! :D
On 02/10/2006 Elessar said:
Only if its the best tea :P Its your site, so only do what you like. I was merely throughing out some suggestions :) It looks great either way, and i love the static background.
On 02/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
I do really like websites that allow customisation (yours for one is a brilliant example Elessar), and I'm definitely going to consider it, but right now im focusing on bug-fixing. Glad you like that static backdrop :)
On 02/10/2006 kitsimons said:
Oooh. I like the static backdrop too. Didn't think I would either ;-)
I've had a look at your old site, and the menu slides over the article title, but under the "Date" text - as the Date text is smaller I didn't spot it before...
Dreaded z-index problems?
On 03/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
It would appear so! I've made some CSS changes, but the problem I've got now is testing, as ive not got a mac :\
On 03/10/2006 P.J. Onori said:
Nice work man - it's looking really good. :)
On 06/10/2006 lorissa said:
very nicely done! you've inspired me to actually really think about a redesign. my current design is probably about 2 years old now...if not more...how sad..
i love the static background.
On 06/10/2006 Steve Tucker said:
Thanks for the kind words all :)
@lorissa: nice to know im now an 'inspiration' ;) Your existing site emphasises your photography excellently by being so very minimal in design. If you do go for a redesign then keep that style - it works great