Keep it creative!
Don’t let the technical processes of web development stifle your imagination, urges freelance designer Laura Kalbag
In my experience, web designers talk far too much about development. We're worrying about how something might look in IE8, swapping rounded corner fallback solutions, and now stressing about fluid grid frameworks. The danger is that technical constraints will stifle our creativity.
How often do you lay an idea to rest because it's just going to be a nightmare to implement in CSS? How soon do you crush that idea? Do you let it develop a while to see if it's the best possible way to communicate your site goals to your user? Or do you just shelve it as soon as you consider how much markup it will require?
Designing in-browser
Since the advent of responsive design there have been an awful lot of zealots telling people if they're not designing in-browser then they can't possibly be doing it right, because the only way to realistically show the natural flow of content as it is in the browser is in the browser itself.
But this bothers me. I really want to be able to design in the browser, but I'm just not capable. If I think in CSS, everything just ends up being boxes with borders, because that's what is easy to make in CSS.
It's not because I'm a bad front-end developer: I know I'm capable of building very complex designs. It's just as if the technical and creative sides of my brain just don't want to interact in such a way.
As Robbie Manson so beautifully put in his talk at New Adventures, "Designing in the browser doesn't necessarily foster creativity". I was so relieved when Robbie said this that I had to hold myself back from standing up and cheering.
[Editor’s note: also see Sarah Parmenter, ‘I can’t design in the browser’]
Rethinking processes
The creativity we lose when designing in the browser isn’t my only problem. We're rethinking our working processes at the moment, trying to accommodate new devices, and I wonder where browser-based design should fit into that process.
Previously we had processes that were generally a variation on Research > Planning > Design > Development > Testing. Looking at this process as a rough overview, development in the browser comes somewhere towards the end.
Now I know that we all think we're very clever and won't ever skip important steps, but what happens when we start to 'build' our designs in-browser as early as the planning and design stages? I worry that once people have started sticking in their prototyping and grid frameworks, they're already constraining their designs with development tools. You're already starting to think in terms of the solution to your development problem before you've even started identifying what your user experience or design problems might be.
Big, scary & different
I have a theory why we're doing this, why we're going on about markup and device testing and all these other very important, but not-necessarily-appropriate-at-the-design-stage, issues. We're overcompensating because we have absolutely no idea what we're trying to design.
Responsive, adaptive and otherwise flexible layouts have completely changed how we design and the environments for which our designs are destined. This is big and scary and different. No longer are we decorating 1024 pixel-wide rectangles, we've got to come up with design strategies that will work across a multitude of viewports. We've got to understand and decide upon what will differentiate a site across these viewports and what will unite the elements to give a cohesive cross-device experience.
As designer-developers, development is a great excuse to avoid our craft as designers. Technically development might be harder, but in design we're more likely to come across challenges where the solution isn't straightforward or has already been shared by another developer.
Development is important
Of course a lot of development has a bearing on design. For example, I believe media query breakpoints are really a design consideration. We decide on the viewport sizes we want to accommodate in the early planning stages of our site design, we structure our layout around our content which we usually have in our late-planning early-design phases. The development of media queries is about planning the breaking and changing points of a layout based on a balance between viewport widths and content structure. Therefore this is fundamental to layout decisions.
I don't think we need to be technically ignorant, but rather agnostic to the technical solutions that may be here today but solved in a polyfill or spec next week. User experience is ongoing and is affected by the ever-changing contexts of our projects.
We're incredibly fortunate to be working in a time where the web is improving and moving at such a fast pace. We need to take responsibility as pioneers of the responsive web and start openly discussing our design challenges in order to forge the standards and conventions of the future.
Now check out the latest features in Photoshop CS6.




12 comments
Comment: 1
Comment: 2
Designing in the browser seems to be one of those industry themes that crops up where some people say they do it, some don't and some don't believe it can be done (see recent nonsense here http://www.netmagazine.com/opinions/there-no-such-thing-designing-browser) but to be honest, you should be able to decide when it's appropriate and when it's not (http://www.welcomebrand.co.uk/thoughts/designing-in-the-browser-isnt-the...) and tailor your process and what you deliver to your clients.
It's important to separate the thinking that all that visual goodness is done in a browser, it's not. For want of a better description, I'd prefer to call it what is probably more like which is "prototyping in the browser". It's part of a bigger process to arrive at a result.
It's not the browser or technical requirements that stop people being creative, it's people having creative blocks. The browser, graphics programs, css, etc are here to help. The moment they start to hinder - step back for a minute.
I'm finding I spend more time than ever before working on scraps of paper, my desk is untidy for the first time in ages but I'm happier with my workflow than ever.
James.
@welcomebrand
Comment: 3
- Yes, discover the why behind the project. Get to know the business/org needs.
- Abstract the content from the design. Understand it in priority./hierarchy. Chunks, not blobs.
- Let the content inform the interactions and early sketches. Real content brings real solutions.
- Sketch, sketch, sketch! Ideas on paper are some of the best.
- Wireframe in the browser. It is fine for it to be boxy at this point. Seeing real problems helps you dig in as a designer to find real responses. Design is about responding.
- Use style tiles and an interface harmony canvas to explore creative solutions. These are mostly out of the browser, but allow us to be creative with our solutions while still seeing how it will all come together.
- Back to the browser! Exploring how the wireframed solutions can truly come alive in your creative response.
- In and out of the browser is really what happens here. We need both.
I agree with James that it something is hindering you it is time to step back. I also think it is important to continue to push ourselves. CSS, browser based design, can be VERY creative environments, but it is an adjustment for many. I believe in finding solutions that are going to positively advance our craft.
In the end, we are all struggling with new workflows and finally understanding our medium (one web to rule them all!). Discussions like this and sharing ideas (http://www.responsiveprocess.com) are so valuable to all of us.
Also, great post Laura!
Comment: 4
I agree with both of you! I think that the browser is an obvious tool, and that sketching and planning on paper are the ideal way to lay the foundations of a strong design. My concerns are less that the browser is useful in the process, and more that people are mistaking development for design so early because we're so used to working in-browser during the development stage. Maybe I'm generalising based on my own experiences, but it's hard to get out of the mindsets that our previous processes left with us.
As James said, creative blocks are often the problem but I don't know that there's an obvious solution, especially one that is a fit for everybody. And I certainly don't doubt the creativity of those who are more capable of designing in-browser, I very much admire and envy them!
I'm intrigued to see more tools and ideas that bridge the gap between paper and the browser, to help us make the most of CSS and browser-based design as solutions. I love style guides as a way of designing in-browser, but to me it is still a point in the late stages of the design process.
Steve: I love the http://www.responsiveprocess.com site, and the way that you're helping people uncover better working processes through your talks and sites have definitely already helped me out considerably!
Comment: 5
I am an advocate of things along the lines of low-fi pen & paper for planning (hierarchy, layout, content planning) and then moving into Fireworks for a "look & feel". You might call that a mood board but I think it should be something with a bit more structure. Things like Style Tiles (http://styletil.es/) also bridge the gap between mock up and browser quite nicely. Once you've got an agreed style and have designed some key layout elements / content blocks then I say go into the browser as early as possible.
Even designing something maverick like a poster first (as Paul Boag's team did here - http://boagworld.com/reviews/why-some-projects-just-go-right/) can help creativity, get client buy in at the design stage and allow you enough of a platform to go into the browser.
One problem I do see as quite important is the lack of a better design tool, especially when you consider font services. How are you meant to do an accurate design treatment when you don't have (legally) access to fonts you might use later via Typekit or similar? I think that's why a lot of people go straight to browser, especially those making more "typographic" sites. Typekit is the best service I've used and now it's owned by Adobe it would be great if they could merge it in with Fireworks giving you access to all the font foundries.
I think the problem's even bigger than that though, taking into account responsiveness. I would _love_ to see a design tool similar to Fireworks, allowing you to draw a box, assign some basic CSS properties with the software working in a responsive manner (you resize the window, everything re-flows).
Comment: 6
Comment: 7
This is something that we should definitely be talking about. Responsive design has somehow managed to cause a mini-schism in web design, with some people now suddenly convinced that there is a "right" or "wrong" way to build a website, and that – of course – theirs is the right way. I'm reminded of the switch from tables to CSS for layouts, except this conversation seems a bit daft now. We should all know better, really.
I don't do much design, but when I'm building a site I definitely prefer to have a fleshed-out design to work with. It makes it much easier for me to build complex interfaces if I know what you're facing before you start. But that's just it: for ME.
I also think there's a place for designing in the browser too. It's how I built my site (again - not a designer), and is useful for prototyping too. That also works for me. It's a matter of picking the best tool for the job at any given time.
Front-end developers are often too quick to pick the "best" tool for the job, before they've really considered the problems they may have to solve. I think that the "design/don't design in the browser" argument is basically an extension of that. Both options will suit you for different development challenges you may face, and it's ok to mix them both up, even on the same project. After all, there's no right or wrong way to build a website.
Except if you're still using tables for layout seriously cut that out.
Comment: 8
Web design is far too generic. It can be a wonderfully visual and informative medium, but most of the time it isn't. I think that the biggest reason for this is that we are *far* too wedded to a process that considers the technical limitations of the medium too early in the process. Web design showcases and blog articles highlighting "great websites" can be counterproductive because they keep us in the mindset of using existing web design to inspire new web design.
My best design work comes when I run the hell away from a computer, from software, from a screen. The better I force myself to completely ignore the technical limitations of the medium I'm designing for, the better that design will be. Don't think CSS, don't think HTML, don't think screen resolution, don't think device. Just think about cool, effective ways in which the content you have can be displayed and interacted with.
The vast majority of the time the technical difficulties of a particular design are something that can be overcome. They can only hinder the design process if I take them into consideration too early, and let them limit my vision.
Seriously, run away from your computer. Work on the basis that you can do *anything*, that there is no technical considerations, only your creativity. Everything else can be addressed *after* you have your vision.
Comment: 9
Whilst IE6 seems like a distant nightmare and CSS3/HTML5 and responsive design offer unlimited control, maybe the pressure on development time to design to varying canvas sizes has taken it's toll on the visual side.
I, like most, used to bookmark interesting designs that would inspire me to keep thinking differently but I have stopped doing that lately because the once fun sites now all seem to have been redesigned to look... well bland. Grey background, oversized header type, ribbons, 3 column main content, 4 column footer....It feels like, for the moment, some of the fun has gone out of the way sites look...
I agree with shinytoyrobots that blindly following the latest Top 10 in web design etc devalues what we offer as designers. I know there are better visual website designers out there than me, but maybe we all need break out a little, and take a few risks. That's my goal for my next project.
Comment: 10
seo company in india
Comment: 11
I would agree that in-browser design results in a particular "style" of website - but so does designing in Photoshop, and that's fine.
How do I stay creative? Simple. I have a much wider interest in design than just websites (I studied Product Design which is a completely different subject) so I often source my creativity from admiring everything and anything I see around me, from a chair to a mug to the little buttons you press on a bus to make it stop.
I also keep a visual diary, where I put everything that inspires me and that I love or hate. So basically I'd say it's just about expanding your horizons. Too many web designers concentrate so hard on web design they ignore every thing else. There's a massive, amazing world of design out there, and it can all be a source of creativity.
The tools you then go to use to express that creativity are up to you.
Comment: 12
I am a designer but with development abilities.
I saw on the Adobe Creative Week website the debate topic:
Should designers/developers be a Jack of all Trades, or the Master of One?
What do you all think? Opinions from both Designers & Developers welcome.
Should there be a crossover or are these two separate disciplines that should be kept separate?
Anyone annoyed or pleased by the blurring of design vs development roles?
Look forward to your opinions folks.... Cheers
(Link to the Adobe Creative Week site here: http://bit.ly/Kic1Fk )
#CreativeWeekUK