Website DOS

BLIND
http://www.blind.com/

NAVIGATION:

Is it easy to navigate or difficult?
Extremely easy, everything was very clear on what it does.
What visual clues are given to tell you how to interact?

Does the designer use a metaphor to get you to move through the website?
I think they use to functional metaphor because every button is exactly what it is, and under that they have submenus when you go into the actual page.
What kind of metaphor are used?
1. Organizational metaphors = organized by type, kind, ect.
2. Functional metaphors = performs a “real world” function (in Photoshop you can
figuratively “cut” and “paste”)
3. Visual metaphor = common graphic elements familiar to most – the traditional
“play,” “fast forward,” and “rewind” buttons found on CD player.

INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE:

Does the information in the site make sense?
Yes, because they are a design company and have their work in blog form on their home.

Can you access the content you want easily?
Yes, yes yes! Laid out very well, I know where to click for what I want.

How is the content organized? (by location, alphabet, timeline, category, ect.?)
Its by category and what you are looking for, or what umbrella what you’re looking for would be.

Is there visual and content hierarchy that allows you to easily understand and access the information presented to you?
Yes, the main headline says in no matter what page you’re in, but it changes colors.

USABILITY

Is this site easy to use?
I think so, I think anyone who can use the internet can find what they are looking for pertaining to this company in their website. You can even their portfolio things to be displayed in alphabetical or chronological order.

How do the two above concepts, (navigation and information architecture) work in terms of making the site usable or not? So the metaphors make sense with the content?
This is an example of very clean design, easy to use and easy to understand the point. They even have thumbnails of work so you can preview ahead of it before clicking on it and its organized by date, so you know their most recent work. Then in the work they list the agency and other information about their work.

Overall, does the site sustain your interest and engagement?
It does, because it’s a design site. Also, their work interested me, and I even went into their designer bios which was cool to see they had.

MEANING-MAKING:

In what was is the designer creating meaning in this site?
I guess that they get to root of the design problem and solve it.

Are they using metaphor?
The functional metaphor

Is there a narrative story or event that unfold over time?
Not really, just as you get farther into the site you get closer to viewing their work.

Is this narrative linear, non-linear, or multi-linear?
I think its linear, it get down to a certain point. It ends up leading you to what you are looking for.

REFLECTION OF THE USER:

Is there a reflection of you, as the user, on this site? Does it change according to your specific visit? Do you receive mouse feedback? Text feedback? Does the site store any choices you have made? Are you engaged enough in the site to linger and explore?

It doesn’t have reflections of the user, but that would be cool if they did. Everything stays the same but it engages me to look at their portfolio.

TRANSPARENCY OF DESIGN:

Does the design of the site lead you to pay more attention to the content or to the design itself? Does the design feel transparent or “natural,: leading you to focus on the content and forget the design completely or is attention called more to the design itself?
The design of the site was notice about because it was a piece of art in itself, but what they had posted on their site called attention to itself because it was beautiful too.

Does the transparency or lack of transparency of the design make sense with what the site is intending to do?
I think so, I think this site is wanting you to notice their great design, both in their portfolio and their website.