Self-criticism.

I suppose it's only fair to begin by criticising my own work.

When I was in class, the people who weren't afraid to stand up and point out the weak parts of their work were the students who would defend their work (intelligently and articulately, mind you) to the death. So, here goes: the tear-down of my own site.

For reference, the previous version is still online, and the site prior to that as well as well (for now, they're the 'old version' and 'the really old version.'

So, why did I leave the really old version?

Well, first, it ended up looking alot like ISO50. Also, the site was thrown together in what might be described as a panic. My employer at the time was laying off lots of people, and had essentially told me to not except any more interactive work. Since I was the last remaining Interactive Art Director, I saw the writing on the wall. The actionscript was messy, and after it was done, I realized that I could've done the whole thing much more cleanly.

Starting at the top, I changed the logo as well. I had started to redo my business cards, and darkened the logo and tweaked the type. I also got rid of that text underneath the db.net logo. I came to the conclusion that I had done so little recent photography and illustration that it should just disappear. And the 72dpi section (for small comps and one-offs) was dormant. And the white background behind the text? Hideous. I have no idea what I was thinking. Not to mention I went with a 'mystery meat' project nav, which is something I hate to this day. Overall, the navigation was workable, not inspired. On a purely aesthetic level, I was starting to see more and more sites blending the active area of the site into the page background, and the current look wasn't doing it for me.

Getting into the technical underpinnings, the site is XML based and even featured a 'news editor' that allowed me to change the front page images and text without opening a text editor). Despite the XML backend, it wasn't a truly dynamic site - if you go into the project listings, each project was added by hand, and actionscript copy-pasted onto the new button (and numbers changed to reflect the right project). Then I had to create a .SWF for each project, and add the images by hand. Y'see, in my rush, I figured it'd be easier to create small SWFs and statically add the images. And it was - at first. After I did that for 1 or 2 updates, I realized it defeated the whole point to having a dynamic backend in the first place.

Enter The Old Version

Going into this version, I had a couple goals: 1. Truly dynamic. Keep using XML to store the data, and minimize the amount of static graphics & code used. 2. Better navigation. Get rid of the 'mystery meat' and let people know what they're about to click on. 3. Break the 'box'.

Actually, they all succeeded, at least on a certain level. 45° angles have almost become a joke, but it actually looks pretty good, and makes the page feel unified. Likewise, the project lists and news entries are now dynamically generated, and you get a pretty big thumbnail image that shows you what you're about to get.

So why did I ditch this one?

Again, there was coding optimization - after I finished it, I realized there were simpler ways to do things. Fortunately, updating the site was a simple matter, so I didn't think about it too much for a year or so. To be honest, there's only 2 things I actually don't like about the site: The header (it's overwrought), and the downwards motion of the content. At best, it's awkward, at worst, it's ugly and overlaps other content, and the lines at the bottom act funny from time to time. Most of all, I realized that the 72dpi section was useless, and that I wasn't going to be adding photography or illustration to my portfolio. It wasn't applicable, and I didn't have enough to make a real update anyway.

So, it's gone.

The current version (let's call it eleventy-nine, because I've lost track of the number of redesigns) went up a couple months ago. It's still XML based, and even more dynamic. I keep using that word, I should define it. When I say dynamic, I mean, I don't create 5 news boxes on the right, and add the text by hand. It's all stored in an external text file, and Flash creates them, and adds the text and styles how I specify in code. It's nifty. There's more care given to the typography, including how it's generated. All of the body text is placed as HTML text in Flash, which allows me to apply CSS styles (that's how you get those nice red links), and embed the links themselves.

I'm not necessarily a fan of 'one page' portfolios, but with the removal of the 72dpi, photography, and illustration sections, I was left with a lot less content to deal with (or at least fewer sections. Since it felt strange to have 2 sections, the content was combines, and tagged. This also cleared up what to do with projects that lived in both print and web, or projects that didn't have a clear category.

The downside is that Flash is back in a box now, and the right sidebar could be prettier. Also, the navigation still feels boring to me. It's servicable, and each version gets better, but it's still not 'there.' That said, I like the simplicity, and I plan on maintaining that aspect. There's a new way to present my work, or to navigate the list, and until I figure it out, there's no redesigns happening.