Pixel Liberation Front

So it seems ugly web sites can work better. I guess we all know that, deep down.

I've been thinking recently, when is the point that you tell a client, "No, I'm gonna make you a plain Jane looking web site, because that'll work better."

I've got a case in point now. I've done a simple redesign for a client who's had his site for about 10 years. I've freshened up the branding, thrown away some pixels, breathed in some white space, added a splash of colour to draw the eye to the right places, and made stuff generally larger and more readable. A definite leap forward in usability, producing a site that I think would feel a lot more friendly and fun to use.

Here's my version 1.

Now my client has said he just doesn't like it. Basically, it lacks a consistent, strong brand. You know, the sense that you're really somewhere memorable, with a burly personality that you can't avoid. I totally understand and appreciate that, yet there's something causing smoke in my head, which I can't quite pinpoint.

My gut instinct is to want to say to the client, "Look, it may be kind of plain, but I promise you this will work."

Of course, there's always the client's prerogative to get what they think they've paid for. But clients also come to us for advice and action on what will bring them the best results. Sometimes, that could be plain. Other times, it could be something downright ugly. But would we (or you) ever consciously create an ugly site?!

I've been promoting the view, over the past few years, that a web site can (*should*) be really easy to use, clear etc., and appealing at the same time. Note, I don't say "beautiful", because beautiful can stop you in your tracks and make it harder to get on to your goal (like having Brad Pitt as your bus driver).

But appealing means you like the page, you feel good, and you want to keep clicking and digging to your goal.

How can I justify that statement? Is it actually universally true? Can appealing be wrong?

I don't have the answer, but my job right now is to see how I can inject a strong personality into the design above without sacrificing ease of use.

Do you know of sites that have a very strong personality and are super-clean and simple?

Here are a few I collected on WDFS:

• 9 highly functional sites
• 8 clean site designs
• 8 rich sites

These span the spectrum of simplicity, but all have a good balance of appeal and usability. Apple.com, of course, is a great example, maybe the best-designed site on the web today IMHO.

The search continues..

Apart from the awful designs I did years ago before I designed to get some knowledge on the subject I dont think I would ever get away with a ugly site IMHO

Becuase of the customer being the guy with the money to spend, I recon he would pretty much think that I had lost my mind if I presented an ugly but successfuly design to them, even if I explained exactly HOW it was going to work for them.

I still feel that alot of customers in the UK are still thinking of the web as it was about 4 or 5 years back and STILL expect that sort of website too, which is cleary mad.

Mike

Over the last few days I've been mulling this over and I think the examples in that article are kind of doing what the three blind men who tried to describe an elephant did, (http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/1)

He describes them as ugly becuase they have problems with polish, but clearly they are good in function.

Also, what stops a designer from making a website look like its more 'done by an individual'?

And finally, what exactly is it about the designs of these sites that can be used to establish that effect in a well formed design without sacrificing good appeal?

hmmm now you have me thinking :D

Mike

Hey Ben,
I still think I pretty much suck at web design, but just looking at your castnet design, I would say that you might very well be able to add in some more personality without having to sacrifice much functionality just by changing the header.  I like the peachy red, but if you gave it another strong color, and made the little round logo a lot bigger, it might make the header appear to give a lot more personality without really affecting the usability of the page at all.  In fact, maybe you could accomplish these two goals in one fell swoop - making her little swirly logo large enough that it bleeds off the header (switching it to the other side of the title, and then having it push the "my home" button over to the right a bit), and then making it a different strong color as well?

I personally think that having a more "beautiful" header is a great way to strike that balance between functionality, usability, and, well, atractiveness...  So basically, limit the atractiveness to a certain part of the page, where is grabs you the first time you see it, but then its the same on every page, so after that first viewing it doesn't really get in the way.  If you want an example of what I mean, here is one of my (humble) websites.  It doesn't really have much content yet (one of those side projects that you always think you're going to work on and never do), but the design has a bit of what I mean...

The Solar Green Home Design Resource.

Is that clear what I mean - kind of gimmicky, more noticeable header, and then the rest of the page is pretty straightfoward and easy to use.

Peace,
-Matt

I'm not able to load your link Matt

Mike

Hi Mike,
Thanks for the note, the site is indeed down.  I've notified my hosting company and hopefully the problem will be fixed soon...

-Matt

Ok,
It seems to be working again...  I haven't actually heard from my hosting company whether or not they have fully fixed the problem (seems that php wasn't running on any of my hosted sites actually), but at least http://www.solargreenhome.net appears to be working fine now.

-Matt