I should preface this by saying that, for the most part, it’s a well-reasoned argument defending basic usability principles borne of decades of HCI research. The author’s point that iDevelopers would do well to review these principles and consider the successful applications built on these foundations is solid.

That said, there are two points of criticism I need to make. One relating to the article itself, and another as sort of a generic observation of usability.

First, the author seems to suggest that the foundations of modern Human-Computer Interaction are being dismissed wholesale by iPad developers, sacrificed on the altar of Novelty. The result is a landscape of applications invoking, as one of the article sources put it, “… memories of Web designs from 1993, when Mosaic first introduced the image map that made it possible for any part of any picture to become a UI element.” The author concedes- albeit begrudgingly- the value of experimentation in developing new models of interaction, but in so doing reaches a somewhat peculiar conclusion:

…some critics claimed it is reasonable to experiment with radically new interaction techniques when given a new platform. We agree. But the place for such experimentation is in the lab.

Maybe it’s a personal leaning. Maybe it’s because the author and I clearly come from different backgrounds (him from HCI, me from fine art). But I find this notion silly. I think that, when presented with a new platform and new models for interaction, the last thing developers should do is cloister themselves in a lab (or worse, wait for an HCI research group to tell them what works and what doesn’t). Don’t get me wrong- user testing is absolutely invaluable in crafting a service and experience that delivers value (aesthetic, intellectual, financial, what have you). But after a while, developers have to take a deep breath and ship. It seems to me that in interaction design- as in many other fiefdoms of human endeavor- the only way you know if something really works is to try it and see what happens. This is especially true in business, which natively offers a robust metric for determining success (i.e. sales and revenue). Early web developers didn’t wait for Tim Berners-Lee to release Scripture detailing usability standards for web pages. They just pressed forward and figured it out as they went along.

The author rightly warns against the folly of starting completely from scratch, or throwing the baby out with the bath water. There are decades worth of in-depth HCI research conducted to make silly rookie mistakes unnecessary, even with bleeding edge technology. But I believe the author is being too cautious, and in the process implicitly (and likely unintentionally) perpetuating an irrational fear of failure that weighs down developers and stymies innovation.

And with that, I move on to a more general observation of usability. There seems to be a growing trend among user experience folk repeating a particular mantra: Usability Is Not Enough. I tend to agree, but I should surrender the caveat that I do so from a different perspective, with a different skillset, and different goals than many of these user experience gurus who are furthering the meme. I’m approaching this idea as a fine artist, trained thusly, with an eye towards aesthetics and emotions and transcendence. Some of my favorite paintings take some time to absorb (note: I’m partial to the Surrealists). Some of our finest cultural artifacts aren’t immediately approachable. So is the value of an interactive experience diminished if the user must take a moment to divine an approach to it?

Let’s look at this another way. Say I’m a researcher in food studies. I focus my research in an emergent and arcane branch of scholarship called Human-Gastronoma Interaction. All of my work is geared towards articulating the concept of Eatability. Through my work, legions of food developers create digestive experiences that emphasize ease and efficiency of eating. Of course, you can see how absurd this is. The experience of engaging with food, and the value we derive from it extends beyond the measure of how easy it is to eat. Bananas are tasty, and easy to eat, but there’s more to life than bananas. Pineapples are also tasty, but they would rank pretty low in Eatability Studies because you can’t just bite into one (well, you can…). Surely that doesn’t mean that pineapples are an inferior food product, right?

So why do we apply the same principles to interactive media?

Again, my goals here aren’t the same as many others. I want to create interactive experiences that let people alternately embrace and transcend the world of their corporeal senses. But I understand that bringing myself into contact with my audience through my work isn’t straightforward. There will be times when people engage with something I made, and they won’t immediately understand what to do next. Sometimes it’ll be an intentionally-placed element in the work, sometimes it’ll be an unforeseen consequence of my process. I accept this- and I think most of the people who would engage with my work would understand it too. But I think this puts me in a curious position of being on the outside of the interaction room looking in.

And I wonder if my approach is reconcilable with theirs.

Creative Code Workshops

workShop[0] = Processing;

Over the past several decades of advancement in computer technology, a fledgling movement of computational and digital media art has emerged. Initially the province of a handful techno-savvy pioneers, today there is a wide range of tools and resources available to artists and designers, drastically lowering the barrier of entry for anyone interested in computer art. This series of Creative Code Workshops explores the sometimes-nebulous territory of Code-As-Art, bringing creatives and technologists together to make interesting, complex work.

In our first workshop, we will explore Processing, an open-source programming language and framework developed for the visual arts community. Originally created to teach computer programming fundamentals within a visual context, it has grown into a robust yet flexible platform serving both artists and pedagogues. Its open-source license has led to a vibrant developer community that has contributed to its extension into other regions of computational media, including computer vision, audio processing, networking, data visualization, and tactile media. This hands-on workshop will help both artists looking to get their hands dirty with computer programming and programmers looking to explore their creative side.

Where: Pumping Station: One. 3354 N. Elston, Chicago, IL.

When: Saturday, September 25th, 2010, 4pm.

Cost: FREE

Accessibility: Open to the public

About the presenter:
James Patrick Gordon is an emerging digital media artist based in Chicago. His work covers a range of topics in digital and computational media, including responsive environments, augmented reality performance, virtual worlds, interactive narrative, sacred computing, the cultural and social ramifications of information networking, and the convergence of art and social justice.
You can find him on the web at: www.thaumatropia.net, or email him at: james.patrick.gordon@gmail.com

About Pumping Station: One:
Pumping Station: One is Chicago’s premiere hackerspace and community workshop. Its mission is to foster a collaborative environment wherein people can explore and create intersections between technology, science, art, and culture. Hackers, makers, artists, developers, scientists, and craftsmen come together in a collaborative environment that explores the intersections between technology, art, and culture.
More info can be found at: www.pumpingstationone.org, or email them at: info@pumpingstationone.org

Day 3

I spent the entire day on Tuesday working in the Emerging Technologies room as a Contributor Assistant. I worked with Dr. Akiko Yoshida as she presented her research on the QuintPixel multi-primary color display system. Essentially, it’s a prototype high-definition monitor that extends the standard RGB color profile to include Cyan and Yellow. In addition to covering a wider range of the color gamut, the monitor promises a much more faithful rendering of real-surface colors, making things like human skin, wood, flowers, etc. look much more realistic. From personal experience, the difference was pretty stark, and colors on the QuintPixel monitor were much more vibrant than the comparable monitor using the standard RGB color profile (both monitors were set to the same resolution, 1920 x 1080). Dr. Yoshida and her fellow researchers hope to push this technol0gy as a new standard in color display systems, so that the RGBCY profile will be built in to many different displays and devices over the next few years.

Day 4

Wednesday had me working in the Art Gallery. I worked mainly for two video installation pieces. One was Strata-caster, an installation that puts the viewer on a specially-built island in Second Life. The viewer interacts with the island via a physical wheelchair, which had been modified to serve as an input device for the computer controlling the installation. As the viewer powers and steers the wheelchair, he/she navigates the island. The imagery on the island evokes questions of perception, power, and separation. The second was Empire of Sleep: The Beach, an interactive installation where viewers navigate a 3D environment by taking photographs.

Since this was also an all-day shift, I wouldn’t be able to fully explore the art gallery (or e-tech) until the next day.

Day 5

Thursday. Last call. I worked an early morning Gatekeeper shift for two technical paper presentations. My shift was done by lunchtime, which meant I was done with Student Volunteer obligations. After returning my signature red vest and checking out, I ran to E-Tech and the Gallery to see some of what I had missed over the week. At E-Tech (where the overwhelming theme seemed to be haptic interfaces and tactile media), some of the highlights included:

Touch Light Through Shadow, a really fascinating haptic display.

Haptic Canvas, a haptic interface system that uses dilatant fluid to convey information. The feedback the users experience in the interaction loop is expressed through changes in the state of the fluid.

LED Tile, a modular drawing medium that uses LED matrices built on small microcontrollers that interact with each other.

Over at the art gallery, I got to check out three pieces and meet the artists behind them.

The first was Glowing Pathfinder Bugs, developed by Anthony Rowe and squidsoup. I was struck me was how elegant and sophisticated the excuse was given the relatively dated technology. (The installation depends in large part on a program written in Macromedia Director.) It proved a point that my undergraduate program tries to drill into students from Day One: Ideas, Not Applications. In other words, think of technology in terms of what you can do with it, and not how new and awesome and “standard” it is. I also had a wonderful chat with Anthony as the gallery was closing down, where he shared some thoughts on his work, the Interaction Design post-grad program he runs, and some of the work he’s done with squidsoup. I was especially inspired by his thoughts on taking media off the screen, and finding ways to surround and immerse a viewer in Art.

The second was Final Wisdom I, an interactive installation that links sensory perception to spatialized poetry. I talked to Jesse Allison, one of the co-collaborators, about the piece. We talked about his previous work in tactile media and his background in electronic music. It was his background in EM that exposed him to Max/MSP, which opened up new doors in installation art. He also talked about the Institute for Digital Intermedia Arts at Ball State University, which I’m now investigating as a viable possibility for graduate school.

I also got to talk to the artists behind In The Line Of Sight, a light installation that uses an array of small projectors to create a low-resolution projection of a video. The two artists are studying at the Electronic Visualization (soon to be rechristened New Media Arts) MFA program at the University of Illinois at Chicago. I didn’t get to spend a lot of time with them, as the gallery was closing down and they had to start dismantling the installation. I’m hoping to touch base with them in the coming weeks and find out more about their work and the new NMA program at UIC.

After E-Tech and the Gallery closed down, I grabbed a quick cup of coffee. (Sidenote: if you ever go to SIGGRAPH, especially at the Los Angeles Convention Center, be sure to bring extra money with you if you plan on eating in their food court. Seriously.) Then I headed to a quick talk by Mark Milloff, a faculty member in the Digital Media graduate program at Rhode Island School of Design. He gave a presentation on his, and RISD’s, experience using Processing as a way to introduce first-year art students to digital concepts. It inadvertently served as an interesting counterpoint to my department’s recent experiences with Processing and pedagogy (my department’s course that deals extensively with Processing, Generative and Algorithmic Art, was pulled from the upcoming fall term due to low enrollment).  Afterward, I talked to him briefly about his work and the DM program at RISD. I’m hoping to follow up with him later this fall when I head out to the East Coast for graduate school interviews and open houses.

Soon after that, the conference was just about wrapping up. I headed back to the SV office for the big end-of-week raffle (sadly I didn’t win the iPad) before calling it a day. I headed back to the house where I was staying (the home of a friend of mine in K-Town) and tried to get some sleep before a long day of travel.

So what were my big takeaways from SIGGRAPH 2010?

• Technology changes fast, but people change faster. If you have to choose to keep stride with one or the other, choose people.
• Cultivating excellence in whatever you do is important. It’s better to be amazing at one or two things and terrible at one or two things, than being okay in a few things. People will remember you for the amazing stuff.
• Seriously- don’t overthink networking. If you’re polite, and you listen more than you speak, and have interesting things to say that aren’t necessarily about you, you’ll be fine.
• IAM Students should seriously consider attending SIGGRAPH at least once during their undergraduate career. Especially game design students- this event is at least as valuable for getting into the industry as GDC is, possibly more so. If you’re intimidated by cost, consider applying for the Student Volunteer program. You get great experience and networking opportunities, as well as presentations and workshops from industry professionals offered ONLY to SV’s.
• I’m more convinced now that over the next few decades, the right-brain/left-brain dichotomy will be rendered irrelevant. Engaging with the vast pool of raw talent at SIGGRAPH drove home the point that creativity is not the sole province of artists and performers, nor is deep technical inquiry the sole province of scientists and engineers. They all blend into a powerful swirl of human endeavor. Moreover, the challenges that the next century will present will require an increasingly interdisciplinary approach to problem-solving. Moving beyond the right-brain/left-brain conflict and embracing creativity, whatever your chosen discipline, will put you demonstrably ahead of the curve.

Thanks for reading my recap of SIGGRAPH 2010. Hope to see you next year in Vancouver!

My week started on Saturday (SV orientation), but the past few days have been a bit hectic, so this post covers my first two days.

Day 1

Sunday, I had to be at the conference center at 7:30am. The LA Metro being what it is, that meant getting up at 5:30am. I was pretty sure that would be the hardest thing I’d do all week.

Since there wasn’t a lot of programming going on, I took an extra shift and used the running around to familiarize myself with the layout. Before I left, I had an opportunity to have my portfolio reviewed by a conference mentor. It went really well, and I got some solid guidance for my grad school search and my professional art practice. I headed home a bit early to try to catch up on sleep (a precious commodity this week).

Day 2

Today meant getting to the LACC at 7am. I was wrong about yesterday- THAT was the hardest thing I’d do all week.

I spent the morning helping out at Registration, followed by a short afternoon shift on call at the Ready Room.

After my shifts, I headed over to a presentation by Riot Games aimed at students, with helpful tips for anyone looking to break in to the game industry. After that, I swung by the Disney Research Center to see some of the work the company is doing in Educational Gaming. Then I headed over to the Computer Animation Festival and saw some amazing short films. The three films that really stuck out to me were The Guest, Meet Meline, and Nuit Blanche.

The highlight of the conference so far has been the people I’ve met. Student volunteers, exhibitors, contributors, conference officials- everyone has been approachable and friendly, even when busy. I think I was nervous about the conference for the same reasons I’m always nervous about networking opportunities- the networking itself. This conference, though, has confirmed for me something I had suspected for a while- I, like many other young students in my position, tend to overthink networking. I’m starting to realize that networking is really just about making friends. Deliberately making friends, perhaps, but making friends nonetheless. If you’re friendly and laid back, and you have interesting things to say (preferably not all about yourself), people will want to talk with you, and even stay in touch afterward. (Then again, I’m not actively looking for a job, so I don’t feel the pressure that other students might. Your Mileage May Vary.)

Tomorrow, I’ll talk about my day working in the Emergent Technology hall, and other adventures.

crowdSource() modifies and recontextualizes video media from pop culture to highlight and explore ideas of Crowd Mentality. The source material drawn from includes music videos, cult cinema, children’s cartoons, and other corners of pop media. Slivers of content that feature crowds are taken and modified, highlighting popular culture’s tacit encouragement of surrender of personal identity in the name of salvation through groupThink().

One of my instructors and mentors proposed a definition for installation or environmental art. I’m paraphrasing somewhat, but it goes something like this:  Installation, environmental, or otherwise “public” art, is the re-purposing or re-contextualizing of a space into an aesthetic or experiential artifact.

Some argue that it’s not applicable as a definition for Public Art- largely because of a perceived lack of transformative quality. I disagree. The difference is that its transformative quality is bound up with seemingly external actors- namely, the politics of public art.

So far in this course, we’ve seen examples of work that were financed or produced by a state body. We’ve also seen work financed or produced by private citizens which ostensibly make up the bulk of “the public.” There’s state-approved work co-opted by private artists. And possibly vice-versa.

Public life is defined by the conversation between the governors and the governed. Often, it’s more like an argument. Naturally, art- which I’ve always seen more as a conversational catalyst than a created object- furthers than conversation by expressing, instigating, or provoking those embroiled in the debate. Conversation is inherently transformational- even with smalltalk, the connection made with someone else changes you.

I would say that public art is transformational, in that it continues the conversation within the public square that defines the development of culture. The vector that this transformation follows is the same as in other categories of human endeavor in which narratives emerge- that of Conflict, and it’s ultimate Resolution.

The 3G Summit is a rare opportunity to learn what young women want from electronic and online games, and according to organizers, is specifically designed to help change the conversation in education and in the world of technology as it provides insight into gender equity and gaming.  It also looks at how digital games delivered over mobile phones and social networking sites can be used for social awareness, civic engagement, and cultural expression.

Featured speakers include Mary Flanagan, Tracy Fullerton, Erin Robinson, Jennifer Jenson, and Susana Ruiz. The summit meets August 12-15 at Columbia College, culminating in a juried selection of a game idea pitched by area high school students which will be developed by IAM seniors.

You can join the discussion at the 3G Summit Team Blog.

…we as a community could be inadvertently shooting ourselves in the foot while we try to make our own browsing experience less ad-intrusive, and more comfortable.

While I’m not normally in the habit of rebutting other bloggers, I feel compelled to respond to this.

Those Ingrates!

The author starts by trying to link the strength and vitality of the online web design community to the prevalence of ad-supported blogs. Basically, the argument goes that the community turns on quality content produced by bloggers and design professionals- tutorials, previews of new technology, in-depth analysis, freebies, etc. He says these design bloggers depend on income to sustain their work, and that the time they (presumably) spend not designing should be compensated. Also, our professional ecosystem, our livelihoods, are sustained by the software companies who buy that ad-space, and we, as designers, are honor-bound to consume their ads and- hopefully- be converted into sales.

We should be proud that we are part of a community whose advertisements are often from high-quality software and app development companies. Many of these companies have worked hard to produce useful and beautiful products that assist us immensely in our workflow. Many of such products are offered free of charge, with pay options for enhanced versions. You don’t find that kind of thing very often in other media, so we should be willing to support our advertisers fully, and should from time to time take a look at the products they offer and, if we genuinely find them useful, share them with our contacts.

So basically, without ad-supported design blogs, the web design community would collapse. I disagree. For one, if there’s one theme that’s developed over human history, it’s that anytime people share something- anything- in common, a vibrant community develops around it. The idea that web designers wouldn’t have a community if a few people within that community weren’t compensated for their time is silly. Additionally, online communities have a long, storied history, and got along just fine without ad-supported blogs for quite a while. Would some design bloggers be negatively impacted if the popularity of ad-blocker programs scared advertisers away? Sure. But to imply that the community itself would deflate is intellectually dishonest. The online web design community would be no worse off than the Linux dev community. This is clearly an attempt to shame a particular demographic into upping the eyeball count for a select group of design bloggers who choose to sell ad-space to support their content development work.

All Aboard The Blame Train

The author wastes no time in pulling out his A-Game: Guilt.

Nothing succeeds when individuals are selfish. Ultimately, selfishness will lead to demise because a community cannot truly thrive if the individuals that comprise it are only in it for themselves. When you choose to block ads while you surf the web, you’re basically saying “I only care about my own comfort, and I don’t want anyone else to benefit from my web surfing.” It’s a shame that any web designer would have that attitude.

What would happen if ad blocker plugins started spreading like wildfire throughout the design community, rendering virtually all ads useless? That would be a terrible thing, and would effectively destroy many of our favorite blogs, and would negatively impact many of the very people in the community we claim to be “friends” with.

Classic Straw Man argument. The author is either making assumptions as to the motivations behind users of ad blocker programs, or simply dismissing them as insufficient defense against the scourge of low eyeball counts. Further, it casts ad blocker users as Constitutive Others, saying that these users don’t care about the community- and are, indeed, a pox on that community. If you use ad blocker programs, you are not one of Us- you are one of Them.

There are two things going on here that need mention.

First, the suggestion that ad blocker users are compromising the integrity of the web design community runs counter to one of the fundamental components of the web experience (and, more broadly, computing)- that is, the ability of the user to construct his or her individual experience. The web is about empowerment- the freedom to consume information and content where we want, when we want, however we want. If some people want a web experience free of advertisements, that’s their inherent right. It may run counter to someone’s business plan, and I’m sympathetic to that. But we cannot restrict a user’s right to do that anymore than we can restrict the free speech rights of a political group whose agenda we disagree with. We may not like what they’re doing, but they have the absolute right to do it.

Second, advertisers support the community- not the other way around. Business, and especially their marketing teams, are staffed with smart people. They’ve studied web user’s habits for a long time, and continue to do so. They pick up on trends pretty quickly. They’re constantly thinking of new ways to get their message across. They purchase ad space on design blogs because the opportunity presented itself. If the Conversion Rate fell below a particular threshold that made the practice unsustainable, they’d figure out a better way to reach out to their audience and use it. After all, it’s not like Adobe is just going to stop trying to spread their message to designers- we’re too valuable to them.

On that note, I need to point out a niggling little detail. Advertisers buy ad space on websites based on the site’s traffic. They’re buying eyeballs. But eyeballs aren’t what makes them money. The profitability is based on the Conversion Rate. The Conversion Rate goes like thus: r = x/y, where ‘r’ is the Conversion Rate, ‘x’ is the number of achieved goals (for example, people who click through the ads), and ‘y’ is the number of visits. Websites can’t guarantee a Conversion Rate, anymore than retail outlets can guarantee that everyone that walks into their store will buy something, or a state transportation authority can guarantee that everyone who sees a billboard on the side of a highway will patronize that business. All the website owners can do is present advertisers with their average number of visits per month and make the case for a compelling value proposition. Which makes many of the author’s claims that much more disingenuous.

Who Wins, Who Loses

The author continues with the guilt trip:

Sure, you can have a negative, selfish view of this, thinking that these sites are getting rich because of your web browsing, but that would be a terrible attitude to have. No, these advertisers are not making these website owners rich, they’re putting thousands of dollars into the design community, which is positively affecting all of us.

If we ignore the contribution these advertisers are making, we could inadvertently cause our own little bubble to burst. That’s why it really upsets me when I see design blogs promoting the use of ad blockers, and even worse when I see design bloggers writing about blogs being too ugly because of ads.

This is a good time to discuss who really wins and loses with ad blockers. As I mentioned before, advertisers are smart and adaptable. They also know that they can only bank on eyeballs, and the Conversion Rate is subject to other factors (some of which, like content quality on the site, are outside the advertiser’s control). So, these companies will survive, and find new and creative ways to sell their products to us.

The people who are really affected are the those who maintain design blogs and base a significant portion of their income on advertisement on their site. Like, y’know, the author. His argument is that, without advertiser support, these scrappy design bloggers will be forced to find other ways to make a living. Like, I don’t know, design websites. And if they can’t share their Photoshop tutorials, or their 5 Reasons Why You Should Be Using jQuery Right Now, or their 20 Reasons Why HTML5’s <canvas> Will Change The Web, the web design community loses invaluable resources and declines as a community.

Hmm, okay. But what about all those design bloggers (or designers who blog, or bloggers who design) who don’t make advertisement a central focus of their web presence? Like Matthew Inman? Or Amy Steen? Or Melody Nieves? These are all accomplished designers who sport little or no advertisements on their sites. Why? I would wager that they chose instead to focus on high-quality content to drive their business. I firmly believe  that if you’re good enough at something, someone will want to give you money to do it for them. This includes blogging about design. Using advertising dollars to supplement income is one thing. But I believe that, as a designer and/or blogger, if your business goes boom or bust depending on advertising revenue, you need to revise your business plan. One other thing I believe: if you do design blogging, and your #1 focus isn’t on creating outstanding content, the “community” doesn’t need you.

So, beneath the trickle-down economics, and the chastisement of users who complain about the aesthetics of excessive advertisement, we uncover the author’s true message. This isn’t about what’s bad for the community- this is about what’s bad for him. Ad dollars, eyeballs, and conversion rates are good for him- and what’s good for him, is good for the community. (Based on some of his articles, I’m not entirely sure I would agree.) What we have here is someone trying to maintain and grow their business- producing design-related editorial content- by directly invoking the emotionally manipulative language of Community.

At least advertisers are explicit about their intentions.

Make Up Your Own Mind

He finishes with a Call To Action:

As a community, we should take a stand against any person or blog that promotes the use of plugins or other methods that effectively take money out of the pockets of the very people who are willing to put money into our community. I wrote this article because I saw a tweet promoting a roundup of Google Chrome extensions, one of which was an ad blocker. I found a few of the extensions useful, but I wouldn’t bother promoting the roundup myself because I don’t want to promote the use of such a plugin.

If you run a web design blog, don’t promote the use of these browser plugins, and don’t complain about the amount of ads that appear on your favorite blogs — because you probably wouldn’t even know about those blogs if they didn’t have ads on them. Instead, have a balanced view of ads on design blogs, and help support the community by using the products and services that our advertisers are selling (or in some cases, generously giving away).

Let’s drop the pretense and call this what it really is. This is viral guilt marketing. The author is clearly one of the design bloggers who stands to lose the most from loss of ad revenue- and, very likely, may not have much of a backup plan. So he’s appealing to the design community he apparently “loves” so much by bombarding them with advertisements to turn off ABP and boost his site’s Conversion Rate. He’s also trying to shame the design community into adopting behaviors which, in the long run, will make the web design community beholden to bloggers like him and their advertisers in the same way that science fiction fans are beholden to media conglomerates.

And so, I would issue my own Call To Action to the design community: Don’t Fall For It.

Use the web as you see fit. Focus on quality content. Share what you know generously. Give credit where credit is due. Network. Build real connections. Share opportunities with your colleagues. Use advertisement to help cover your costs, but balance that with the need to deliver a compelling user experience. Accept that some users will do things you didn’t plan for and might not even approve of. Design, and blog, for your users- not your advertisers.

(As an aside- I don’t feature ads on Thaumatropia.Net, and I never will.)

After a dismal first outing for a class years ago, I decided to make an earnest attempt at a CSS Zen Garden design. I set out to create a compelling minimalist design that features type as a centerpiece. The result was a design with three simple ingredients: oversized web-safe type, solid colors, and one image (the banner logo). Altogether, the design (layout + code) took just over an hour.

I was approached by the people at Tribal Elder Productions to create a site for their new documentary project, From The Ashes Risen. The filmmakers were getting ready to release a preview in a few weeks, and wanted a clean new website to launch alongside.

One of my primary aims was to create a web presence which visually conveyed the themes of the project. The film, a documentary chronicling the life and struggles of older gay men living with HIV/AIDS, called for a visual presence that expressed quiet dignity while betraying a sense of vibrant spirit and life just beneath the surface. With that in mind, I originally designed the site in black & white, then gradually added flashes of color- primarily reds and purples- to reflect that understated resonance.

The site needed to accomplish two main objectives: showcase enough media related to the film to draw an audience in to this compelling film, and invite visitors to connect with the producers and get involved with the production. These two aims were the driving forces behind many of my design decisions, including navigation, information architecture, Calls To Action, etc.. Every page on the site either showcases media or other information from the film (video, production stills, text from the original project proposal, etc.), or offers a means for users to contact the producers (a page to make donation, another to share stories of their experiences with HIV/AIDS, etc.).

After the design was signed off on, I developed the site in HTML 4.01 Transitional (which I tend to favor when I’m working with embedded video media, as embed code often doesn’t conform to stricter standards), CSS (including some  new CSS3 features), PHP, and Javascript (using the jQuery framework). The design (including the development of image assets) took about a week and a half (following several requested revisions), while the coding and buildout took about four days (mostly due to a holiday weekend which slowed development).

Back to Web.