heh...something about presenting...

So let’s present these puppies already!!!

Baron suggests things that we should go through to test our websites…
They include:
-Test against our site maps
-Test on different computers
-Testing on different platforms
-Testing at Random places (I’m pretty sure this classifies as different computers, but you know that Cynthia…she’s just being thorough)
-Test with a dummy audience…like your friends.
-Test each media. Do it. The last thing you want is someone looking at a flash animation that doesn’t work.

I’ve run through all this stuff already, including the test of every page for proof that they work. Personally, I think windows machines suck…especially internet explorer. Excuse my bluntness, will ya?

Packaging

Make it pretty. Yeah, you heard me.
Give it uniformity. Yeah, I said it.
Aim for legibility. Oh stop it, you know you want to.

Other than that, Baron makes a suggestion that I have seen in a few people’s blogs already….she suggests that we send out a postcard with one piece of work on it. Sounds strange, but I suppose it could work.

And on a final note, what you should do when you present:
Face your audience, speak up, make eye contact, show interest and enthusiasm, and BE PROUD OF YOUR WORK.
your portfolio

Otherwise, what are you really applying for?
‘nuff said.

Copyright? Right, copy that.

Hey Hey, terms of ownership come down to intellectual property, copyright, trademark, fair use, infringement, and cease & desist orders. Are you excited?

Actually, copyrighting and infringements in the creative business are really interesting things because ownership is tough to pinpoint. If you freelance an illustration and have the rights to it, then someone has to pay you to use the image, similar to a stock photo website. But if you work for the company and do that same illustration, it may be the companies, not yours.

It’s like after I finished with IBM…they told me I could use the jpgs for my portfolio, but I couldn’t take any of the working files with me because they belonged to IBM. Because IBM paid me to design it, it is therefore theirs. Makes sense, but kind of stinks.

But then there’s fair use. And yeah, fair use says I’m allowed to show the jpgs for my portfolio. It also would go towards showing other work to potential employers when/if I get and leave a job. So there-in lies an importance to correctly describe the exact details of your role in a specific job. If you only designed the logo, it would be in your best interest to mention it…because hey, the same finished piece may very well end up in more than one portfolio…hence collaborative efforts in college kind of stink.

Baron is basically saying to give credit where credit is due. You can’t claim sole responsibility for work that you’ve done for major companies, et cetera. While some of my projects at IBM were mine from sketch/idea to post production, I give my mentor, Garrett, credit for his help. Really, when you think about it, if it weren’t for him I wouldn’t have had the job. So naturally, he helped me. And even though I created the idea, I don’t own the rights to it. Amazing.

It all comes down to circumstances.
Was I working as an employee or as a freelancer?
Was it a work for hire basis?
Where were the traces of teamwork, if any, and what individual rights exist?
Was the assignment of rights clearly established?

And yeah, that’s really all I have to say on this chapter.

‘Schematics’ make me laugh.

Unfortunately, the reading we’re finishing up in Baron’s book doesn’t really equate to our class timeline. In order to be on the same page as Baron, we would have had to read ahead by two or three chapters. I mean, I’m done with creating my interface, and there are others who are a decent way through…and probably some who have done very little. Anyway, moving on…

We’re looking at creating an interface for our portfolio, which entails maximizing interaction while being able to correctly manage data and be visually appealing all at the same time. Wow…you get all that?

Four stages of interface design:
Group, Map, Schematic, Look & Feel

Oh look at me I’m all tingly with excitement.

Grouping can be done with spreadsheets before becoming a visual masterpiece, but that’s when you’re not already done with your interface. There’s a bunch of ways to group things…I suggest starting with your strongest categorization and work backwards. Personally, I don’t like splitting up my work into groups. If the max is around 15 pieces, why do you need to split them up into groups? Couldn’t you just put them all on the same page and talk about them in the description? It seems easier to me, and puts less pressure on the user to have to figure things out. At least this way they’re directed to one page instead of 4 or 5 separate ones.

As far as mapping goes, you need to look at grouping, your hierarchy, and any connections that might make your pages fit together…uhh…better.

‘Schematics’ makes me laugh. I feel like if I have schematics then I’m like James Bond. I feel like if I go into the library in my house, pull the secret book and watch the bookcase spin around…then walk into my secret laboratory where there’s like 50 bunsen burners going off…yeah, I feel like I’ll see schematics.

Schematics…a creation of a grid for a given set or level of my map. Yeah, you heard me. Not only was the first sentence of this paragraph a major, major fragment, but it also used that silly word; schematics. Anyway, schematics supposedly help you decide on where to put any recurring stuff…yes, stuff. Like images, text, et cetera.

And as we all know, typography is key. Just have good type. That’s it. Otherwise, you’re fired. We should all know the rules of type by now, so it’s not even worth it to list the things Baron does.

The good Pontiac commercials used to say “wider is better.” Well, in this case, simple is better. Always has been and always will be. To me, that’s what’s hip right now. Simple design with lots of white space. Am I wrong? Someone comment.

Simple designs, when it comes to the web, are very easy to create…and easy to create makes me happy.

The hardest part when we first started creating our portfolio comps was not to fight with our artwork. So there again, simpler is better.

And that makes me happy.

Losing My Marbles...

Metaphors? Totally not necessary.

I really don’t have much to say about this production chapter.

I mean, before we can do anything we have to have a foundation…I agree. However, Baron suggests that we have to have all three parts figured out before we make any decisions about graphics or page content. I disagree with that because I don’t know about you…but when I have a good idea, I go right to the computer and flesh out the idea. None of this “oh I have to figure out all three parts before I work on graphics crap.” Because if I have a good idea and I’m inspired by something, it may help to shape the technology I use, the structure I envelop my work in, and certainly my visual concepts.

Types of portfolios include instant, static, simple, or complex. Ok, instant is too fast and boring to me…seems like an employer would skip over this, even though I wonder sometimes if some in this field are capable of creating anything more than that. Then there’s static and the use of frames. Again, probably too simple. Sure, you want things to be easy for you, but frames aren’t always a great solution, especially when it would take what? An extra five minutes to slice that same page up in image ready? Now you have two completely separate pages instead of having to use frames…which have a tendency to screw up in Dreamweaver MX, I might add.

Simple seems like the choice of champions here. Not because that’s what I did, but because you want your artwork to do the talking…not the site. The way I look at it is that we don’t need a 30 minute intro flash animation followed by a 2 minute segue from one page to the next. It’s just not necessary. I see using a portfolio website as portfolio piece as not entirely necessary. I can see why people would do it, but if the actual work you’re putting in is good enough, shouldn’t that be enough to get you the job? Maybe I’m off base here…I’m not sure.

The whole metaphor thing kind of bugs me, especially because this book is probably mass produced and used my many colleges/designers. Let’s think about this….we’re supposed to come up with original ideas, and yet you’re giving us metaphors that we can use to become original? Well no matter what you do, then, you’re creating similar metaphors.

Sure, nothing is truly original, but it seems by adhering to gallery, spec sheet/brochure, outreach, narrative, diary, or experience metaphors, you’re creating cookie cutters. You’re using the same formula for everyone…that’s not at all original and hence, it bugs me.

Oh but wait…you can use more than one metaphor. YES! I’ll dance in my chair now. Oh no, sorry, the plasticity of using multiple metaphors isn’t all that flexible…you’re still adhering to something other people have done before. Where’s the originality that’s supposed to be a part of this profession?