Web Standards Awards

WSA Winner

---

---

#1

This one is a bit bland. While structurally nice, the photo treament leaves a lot to be desired. They feel just thrown in the layout without regard to their surroundings (why is the woman on the homepage blurry?). The graphic type (some headers and buttons) could using some kerning, and there are way too many large blocks of misused whitespace. Hmm. For CSS this is nice, but for design, not so much.

Posted by Jason Santa Maria :: May 20th, 2004 at 12:16 PM

---

#2

very nice, although they dont know their west from their east - the map on the homepage has the wrong links for north east and west ;)

Posted by gray :: May 20th, 2004 at 02:32 PM

---

#3

Are you critiquing the site or its photography?

I think its nicely done, with a refreshing minimalism.

I would like to see a bit more information about each product line, even a downloadable PDF file... but as I have experienced with clients in the past, sometimes you just don't have much to work with.

Posted by Todd Lambert :: May 23rd, 2004 at 08:37 PM

---

#4

I am critiquing both. The site was designed just as much as it was programmed and I think there is ample room to discuss both. The editors obviously care about design as well since they pick so many strong visual winners.

Posted by Jason Santa Maria :: May 24th, 2004 at 04:51 AM

---

#5

I like the simplistic design and the usability, but the site's a bit buggy in Opera 6 (PC) and there's a really funny bug in ie5.0 (PC).

It is totally possible to make standards based sites that work perfectly in nasty yet popular browsers like ie5.

Posted by Vova :: May 24th, 2004 at 03:17 PM

---

#6

I am so pleased that our work has been listed here, and I have been very nervous at the thought of the comments that we might attract (being in such esteemed company).

One of the things that often worries me about being included in sites likes this, is that commentators sometimes forget that as businesses (in provincial regions) we are often limited by;

* Time
* Budget
* Elements supplied

Every project only has a finite number of days that can be spent on it due to the budget allowed for a job. While professional pride pushes us to do the best we possibly can, sometimes certain things have to give.

The photography for this site was shot for the client's printed brochure and the 'blurry' image is on the front cover. The client rightly wanted to maintain a degree of consistency across web and print.

Sites such as this often develop over time, and as budgets become available we will suggest to the client the possibility of separate data sheets for each product, as well as other features.

As for the browser issues, we will look at them as a matter or priority.

Thanks again to Cameron and to everybody who took interest in this site. (Jason, you're still my Diamond Geezer ;) )

Posted by Malarkey (Creative Director, Stuff & Nonsense Ltd.) :: May 24th, 2004 at 04:06 PM

---

#7

Hey man, you don't need to explain yourself. We all work in this business and understand the limitation of the work due to client tomfoolery. I just believe that we shoudl constantly be critiquing our work. That is one of the best ways to improve and see where our work is lacking. Any time sites like the WSA pop up we should try and treat them as venues to discuss and develop our ideas for future projects. Everytime I talk about this stuff I try to keep in constructive. I don't think its a bad design, but I also don't think its perfect. People say the same stuff about my work. None of us make perfect websites. We just need to take teh criticism and work with it, getting better every time.

Posted by Jason Santa Maria :: May 24th, 2004 at 04:18 PM

---

#8

Like I said Jason, you're still my Diamond Geezer :)

I agree with more-or-less everything that you and the other commentators have said, it was more of a comment about commenting.

Cameron wrote a column on the same subject recently (http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2004/05/07/) .

Posted by Malarkey :: May 24th, 2004 at 04:26 PM

---

#9

Thanks for the background there, Malarkey. It's often those kinds of circumstances that need iterating, to set the criticism of a design in a (naturally, explanatory) context.

Though it's presumptuous of me to say it, I'd like to say you're a top bloke for acknowledging a couple of valuable criticisms here. I hope you get the time and client willingness to go back to the site at some point and tweak as you see fit.

Posted by Martin :: May 24th, 2004 at 09:27 PM

---

#10

As one of the "monthly judges" I'd like to give extra kudos to anyone who manages to create an attractive, yet standards-compliant, commercial site like this one. I think that we all know the restrictions that are placed on us from clients, the server-side program(ers), and whatnot. When your client is yourself, or someone creatively minded, you have the sort of freedom that you rarely, if ever, have with a commercial site.

So..just my 2 rappen worth (about 1.5 US cents) :P

Posted by maki :: May 30th, 2004 at 07:06 PM

---