Stop. Design. Reload.
Douglas Bowman has redesigned Stopdesign, his professional/personal site, bumping the version to 3. Stopdesign, Reloaded, the officially endorsed redesign post, has all the details as per usual Bowman standard, although I suspect there is even more to come.
The result? Modern. Elegant. Beautiful.
Stopdesign version 2 was already an excellently designed website. Its one potential for improvement? Center the content. Which is exactly what the new design has done. The 750 pixel, fixed width container, now a de facto industry standard, is a good choice. Attentitive readers may remember that mono adopted the same standard for its recent version 3.0 redesign. But there the similarities end.
Stopdesign version 3 feels both refreshingly different and familiar at the same time. The colors, typography and graphics relate to the previous version, yet work harmoniously together to create something more than just a "tweaked" appearance. The new header photos in particular are stunning: powerful, dramatic even, but without stealing attention from the content.
The attention to detail is just as impressive; I particularly like how the date is displayed just above the post title, the larger font-sizes used for titles, the slightly off-white main content background, and the subtle hover effects on the input labels.
The comments look and work great too. Alternating colors are a great visual aid for scanning, and the use of definition lists in this context is an interesting approach.
And this was just the log section. As with the previous version, each section of the site has its own color scheme, with a matching header graphic and logo. The colors work very well together, and contribute to a modern, harmonious and soothing feel.
Some of the feedback so far has suggested using lighter colors for the portfolio and experiments sections of the site. Doug's response to this is worth sharing (excerpt from Stopdesign, Reloaded: comment #75):
Several folks commented on gamma settings and the darker Portfolio and Experiments sections. This was certainly something I was aware of as I was creating each of the headers and chosing color schemes. Initially, both those sections were even darker, but after checking them on the PC sitting next to me, I brightened both of them up considerably. The problem is that we have very wide extremes for which to account when it comes to gamma settings and values. On a Mac, those same sections look a little more "washed-out" than I'd like, because I lightened them up so they wouldn't be black on a PC. Unfortunately, the differences in gamma are even more noticeable when using photographic imagery, because our human eyes expect to see more variation in value and contrast. I think flat colors (as in the old design) and image-free headers wouldn't have made the gamma differences as noticeable. I'll take another look at colors later. But those who think certain sections are too dark, try looking at the site on an alternate platform. Depending on monitor calibration, and whether you're viewing it on a monitor or laptop screen, you'll most likely see major differences between Windows and Mac displays. Something we, as designers, have faced since the beginning of web design.
Structurally, the most significant change is found at the front page, now a three-column, mixed content layout. It is one the best three column layouts I have seen: it really pulls you in and makes you want to explore the different parts of the site. There is a lot of information, but Doug has managed to keep it well-structured and visually balanced, resulting in fast and easy navigation.
Put together, this makes for a very elegant and usable mix of professional and personal content. And another influential design.
Congrats Doug, and thanks for the inspiration.
8 Comments (skip to form)
Leave a Comment
Comment Information and Guidelines
- Trackback URI for this post
- Comments are the properties of their authors.
- Email addresses will never be shown or shared with third parties.
- Offensive, distasteful, and irrelevant comments will be deleted.
-
HTML is optional, but if you do use it, please make sure that:
- markup is well-formed and valid XHTML 1.1
- ampersands (&) are encoded as
& - angle brackets (< and >) are encoded as
<and> -
HTML allowed (please close tags):
seriocomic.com
Comment on June 9, 2004 at 1:25 am
Yes, I picked up on this the other day. Very 'tight' design. Nice integration of the header graphic with the page layout.
I don't know if I agree about the use of completely different color schemes for the different parts of the site. Too disparate for me and gives a feeling that I have left the site and visited another (equally well designed) one.
But the small attention to detail, much like your site Lars, is where the inspiration comes from. The fact that his comments stand out from the others using a different styling is a great idea.
I didn't even notice the 750px thing until I turned on my on screen ruler. In fact, I didn't even know MY width was 750px (been so long since the redesign) - but I did notice that yours was 757px (+/- 1 px)…
Lars Holst
Comment on June 9, 2004 at 10:51 am
Ouch. That hurts Mike. It hurts!
But you are right. I had forgotten about the 7px border I added on the wrapper. It was a last minute decision, which is probably why it slipped my mind. 757px, yes that is much better; you have no idea what those additional 7 pixels can do for you.
How do you turn on that screen ruler thingy?
seriocomic.com
Comment on June 9, 2004 at 1:12 pm
Mind you, 757 sounds like a boeing plane, and with your airport planey type themey thing you got goin' on it sort fits
As for my mega secret high-tech screen measuring thingy-me-bob:
spadixbd.com/freetools/.
Lars Holst
Comment on June 9, 2004 at 11:00 pm
It is a Boeing. Have a look:
Got the ruler: off to measure your site. Industrial espionage the old fashioned way…
Joel
Comment on June 10, 2004 at 6:28 am
This is a good pixel ruler: mioplanet.com/products/pixelruler/index.htm.
First reaction to Bowman's redesign was that I liked it very much. The more I look at it though, despite its obvious polish and professionalism, I wonder what it is about it that makes me think it's lifeless. It has some lovely touches. Maybe it's like glass that's been polished to perfection, it just needs a scratch to set it off. I think sometimes it's possible to be "too good" and life drains away. It's like a new building perhaps, it's not got a lived-in feel. Can you call a desk your own until you have a coffee ring on it? To me, Bowman's design has so meticulously ironed out all such wrinkles that to me it *shows*. This is a very minor criticism, and yet… the very root of dissatisfaction in aesthetics.
Lars Holst
Comment on June 11, 2004 at 11:08 pm
Thanks Joel. I now have two rulers. I only need one ruler to rule them all, so it looks like I'll have to do a ruler's death match.
But before I move on: where has your website gone? Server crash or one of your unpredictable acts of offlineness?
Stopdesign: I don't see it as an example of what you describe, although I understand what you mean in the general sense. Personally, I often find that my attraction or desire for beauty is torn between the imperfect and the perfect, or between the asymmetrical and the symmetrical. And on both ends there is a fine line: to plain ugliness, or to the lifeless beauty you mention, depending on where you are standing. But as you say, this is an age-old aesthetical dilemma, well captured, I think, in that old Chinese legend about the painter and the dragon’s eye. I often find myself wanting to paint in that last eye, even if I know the consequences. But then again, I don't like coffee rings on my desk so I'm not always sure where I stand…
As for how this translates to web design, I guess you must like Cameron Moll's "Wicked Worn Look". I have found his two posts so far really inspirational, but have yet to try out any of the techniques he details.
Joel
Comment on June 12, 2004 at 3:49 am
Ah yes, painting in the dragon's eyes, a good analogy.
I'm in two minds about the "worn and torn" look on the web, that's where my original comparisons fall down. A coffee ring on a webpage looked good when I first saw it, second and third time it was already cliched. I suspect the same about nicked edges and battered paper effects. For one thing it has to look patently false. I think I'm more interested in how you could get the kind of effect that aims to be, but more in line with the medium, for example a smashed-in monitor look might be more appropriate. What would be the subtle version of that? Not sure. Many things get tired-looking far sooner on the web, with the potential for people to copy ideas at an exponential rate. I think the genuine retro look we were talking about is a good direction for inspiration, since that's open to so many individual interpretations. (I rather like the current design of lancearthur.com, it has a feel of a small pocket literary magazine from a few decades ago don't you think?) Bowman's site is nice-looking, professional, polished, ultra-modern, and slick, but it fits into the American corporate genre with just an extra toe or two dipped in the water. I'm tired of all that. I find Chinese, Japanese, and Russian websites more exciting really; the American look is getting quite boring. But, as you know, I find the "web design community" very small-town.
My site will return (as the blind dragon said).
Lars Holst
Comment on June 28, 2004 at 9:55 pm
That is good news.
The smashed-in monitor analogy is interesting. More appropriate to the medium, yes definitely. I have had similar ideas, but you expressed them more appropriately. I wanted to replicate the screen noise I remember from watching television as a child — I feel it has a certain charm, but maybe that's just because it belongs to the past? I also agree that the "genuine retro" look seems to be the one holding the largest amount of possibilities for individual interpretations, but I am also fond of the minimalistic school of design (not that these need be mutually exclusive). Yes, I like lancearthur.com, but I wouldn't have thought of it as reminiscent of the type of literary magazine you mention. Different frames of reference. Interesting.
But I suppose that the way web designers are getting their inspiration from the print medium (and have so during the last years, although it is only now that technology is enabling designers to do it reasonably well) could be seen as just a phase which cannot last long because all mediums eventually evolve into a set of characteristics and qualities of their own. Or don't they? But it may be too early to say. It makes me think of electronic books and the hype that has been surrounding them for so long now: will they really happen? Will there really be true paper-like displays some day? Part of me eagerly awaits this development, because it would be practical, and probably make me, and people in general, read more. Yet another part of me would miss real books, not just because of their different physical attributes — the format, texture, paper weight, smell, etc. of a real book could probably not be replicated in a reading device — but also, I think, because losing a medium usally means being deprived of a unique physical and sensory experience. And that risks making life a little less meaningful.
But conversely, a new medium has the potential to enrichen our lives with new experiences, has it not? This probably explains some of the fascination I have for the internet. And the fact that it is not a physical, and arguably not even much of a sensory experience, makes it a gift and a curse at the same time.
I am not sure if this makes sense, and I seem to have lost track of the original point anyway. Well, it is getting late. Oh yes, you also mentioned this:
Yes, absolutely, and this applies to a lot of areas. The great thing is that these differences still exist, and at times are quite evident, despite that the nature of the medium, the internet, would dictate a quicker process of merging cultural, social, and aesthetical values. Yes, there might still be some hope for humanity. But I haven't explored that many Chinese and Russian sites, and, to be honest, I am yet to come across a truly beautiful Japanese website. Interesting, yes; inspirational, sometimes; beautiful, rarely. I would of course love to be proven wrong.