4 ms·

This is a weird read. I think what the author means is that sometimes your design needs to "step out of the way" of someone else's design. This happened all the

This is a weird read. I think what the author means is that sometimes your design needs to "step out of the way" of someone else's design. This happened all the time for me in my early-20s doing band websites where there was usually album art, merch, logos, etc etc that were highly stylized... was it a bit of a challenge to deal with those assets? Sure... but when I realized that I just needed to "get out of the way" as the UX strategy things got easy. Frankly, looking at the site that is being discussed I would call it "good UX" for being simple and "getting out of the way" of the original artist's work (which is the point of the site anyway). I do criticize making me download 2-3Mb pictures when they should be thumbnails though - but really outside of that gaff it's a fine site. TLDR: Going on a "bad UX" rant feels disingenuous/silly when most designers would absolutely consider this good UX for getting out of the way of the original artist's work.

claes-magnus 6y ago
Your estimate is correct: I try to keep out of the way best I can. The covers are amazing if you ask me. It would be stupid to 'compete', and I am not even a designer. Besides, they did not want the 'professional' feel - they wanted the 'shop' described in the about page. As they add more content, the site will look like this shop and will be hard to use. This is why I use the oxymoron. But I guess I tried to make a more general point. Sometimes my feeling is that blogs, small businesses such as this one, well... pages, in general, are overly complicated. Both in terms of technology and interface. Overly complicated is unfortunately often spelled professional. And professional often means the quite opposite of personal. Headache Comix just want to post stuff. Actually, one comment was that they don't care if things, in the end, would be hard to find given way more content. And that the people reading the magazine expects this. No, even wants it. Like walking in a museum as they should be (in my view), paintings all of the place - not perfectly aligned, not perfect degrees and lots of whitespaces and so on. :) I don't know if this explanation helped to clarify my take here, but... yeah. I guess this is your point also, kind'a. And thank you btw! But I disagree with you about the 'silly' part. I actually think this is an important question. If it is true that some sites are overly complicated without good reasons, what then? :) Also, I make the case that the Web should house these sites as well as more 'professional' ones. That's the beauty of the Web if you ask me.
- folkhack 6y ago
  Before I respond to your points - I conflate UX and design in my mind as I see UX being a subset of design by definition. > Sometimes my feeling is that blogs, small businesses such as this one, well... pages, in general, are overly complicated. You're not alone in this, and good design is achieved when you can't take anything else away from something because the only components that are left are necessary to function. > Overly complicated is unfortunately often spelled professional. Ain't that the darn truth =| > But I disagree with you about the 'silly' part. I actually think this is an important question. If it is true that some sites are overly complicated without good reasons, what then? As a design-capable engineer I think you're painting with too wide of a brush in this blog post... and even against your own interests/ego. Sorry to get preachy but I love engaging people on these topics for learning. You state: "and I am not even a designer" - but you clearly are capable of solving a visual problem in a functional way. At some level, you are now a designer. And, frankly, it feels like you're dealing with some impostor syndrome here. Your post felt like it was weird with "bad UX is good" then positing a very good example of UX that problem solves in an appropriate way for both your client and your audience. You did an outstanding job of creating functional design, which is aesthetically pleasing, given the constraints of the web/the original art/etc. The simplicity of it all means that it is functional to both your client and your audience - I can't stress this enough. If I were to write a post on your post it'd be entitled, "designer hits mark 100% for client/audience but isn't sure it's good design because we over-complicate UIX in 2020". Or, "Let's all stop being so pretentious because people are conflating simple functional design with bad design..." Sorry if I sound aggressive. It's just a damn good site and I refuse to even remotely label it as "bad" outside of your image optimization issue. > Also, I make the case that the Web should house these sites as well as more 'professional' ones You're talking to someone who browses neocities daily because it's interesting so 100% agree! --- All-in-all sorry if I was too harsh but I think you're being too harsh on yourself by writing this. As a 15 year design professional - You nailed it, and I'll be happy to crucify anyone who thinks otherwise. This is the definition of "good design". Period. Just - whatever you do. Keep doing what you're doing - we need more people with your same design ethos out here building great tech experiences that are respectful and tasteful like your Headache Comix site. <3 PS: Fix those darn images. <3

claes-magnus 6y ago

Your estimate is correct: I try to keep out of the way best I can. The covers are amazing if you ask me. It would be stupid to 'compete', and I am not even a designer. Besides, they did not want the 'professional' feel - they wanted the 'shop' described in the about page. As they add more content, the site will look like this shop and will be hard to use. This is why I use the oxymoron. But I guess I tried to make a more general point. Sometimes my feeling is that blogs, small businesses such as this one, well... pages, in general, are overly complicated. Both in terms of technology and interface. Overly complicated is unfortunately often spelled professional. And professional often means the quite opposite of personal. Headache Comix just want to post stuff. Actually, one comment was that they don't care if things, in the end, would be hard to find given way more content. And that the people reading the magazine expects this. No, even wants it. Like walking in a museum as they should be (in my view), paintings all of the place - not perfectly aligned, not perfect degrees and lots of whitespaces and so on. :) I don't know if this explanation helped to clarify my take here, but... yeah. I guess this is your point also, kind'a. And thank you btw! But I disagree with you about the 'silly' part. I actually think this is an important question. If it is true that some sites are overly complicated without good reasons, what then? :) Also, I make the case that the Web should house these sites as well as more 'professional' ones. That's the beauty of the Web if you ask me.

folkhack 6y ago
Before I respond to your points - I conflate UX and design in my mind as I see UX being a subset of design by definition. > Sometimes my feeling is that blogs, small businesses such as this one, well... pages, in general, are overly complicated. You're not alone in this, and good design is achieved when you can't take anything else away from something because the only components that are left are necessary to function. > Overly complicated is unfortunately often spelled professional. Ain't that the darn truth =| > But I disagree with you about the 'silly' part. I actually think this is an important question. If it is true that some sites are overly complicated without good reasons, what then? As a design-capable engineer I think you're painting with too wide of a brush in this blog post... and even against your own interests/ego. Sorry to get preachy but I love engaging people on these topics for learning. You state: "and I am not even a designer" - but you clearly are capable of solving a visual problem in a functional way. At some level, you are now a designer. And, frankly, it feels like you're dealing with some impostor syndrome here. Your post felt like it was weird with "bad UX is good" then positing a very good example of UX that problem solves in an appropriate way for both your client and your audience. You did an outstanding job of creating functional design, which is aesthetically pleasing, given the constraints of the web/the original art/etc. The simplicity of it all means that it is functional to both your client and your audience - I can't stress this enough. If I were to write a post on your post it'd be entitled, "designer hits mark 100% for client/audience but isn't sure it's good design because we over-complicate UIX in 2020". Or, "Let's all stop being so pretentious because people are conflating simple functional design with bad design..." Sorry if I sound aggressive. It's just a damn good site and I refuse to even remotely label it as "bad" outside of your image optimization issue. > Also, I make the case that the Web should house these sites as well as more 'professional' ones You're talking to someone who browses neocities daily because it's interesting so 100% agree! --- All-in-all sorry if I was too harsh but I think you're being too harsh on yourself by writing this. As a 15 year design professional - You nailed it, and I'll be happy to crucify anyone who thinks otherwise. This is the definition of "good design". Period. Just - whatever you do. Keep doing what you're doing - we need more people with your same design ethos out here building great tech experiences that are respectful and tasteful like your Headache Comix site. <3 PS: Fix those darn images. <3