In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?
My aim for this project was to produce a website that would be able to stand strong in comparison to real life websites on the internet, by fitting in with the general conventions. By using iWeb, I wasn't fully able to create the ideal detail of websites, that the majority of popular websites use, however it was simple and easy to lay out from the ideas I had. It's particularly useful if you have a clear idea about how you want your site to look visually, as the placement of items is relatively simple to match you initial ideas. (Rather than having to use complicated HTML, Javascript with programs like Dreamweaver). I was still able to incorporate html snippets into my website in a simpler form.
Overall my website did manage to look professional and easy to navigate around if I was to compare it with general websites. It was not as technically advanced as most but the basics are there for it to perform well.
From my previous website research I tried to incorporate the main conventions on websites currently by having a unique logo, pictures, news pages, twitter feeds/live feeds of some kind, links to social networking sites (i.e: facebook) as these sites are the most popular way of communication, by linking these you are creating more awareness of the site and will also allow more people to be interested if it is associated with a popular site. I personally found the sites which were plainer to be more appealing, so I kept my colours to a minimum and tried not to overcrowd the components. For charity sites, most had donation buttons clearly visible, to catch the eye of the visitor and I included a link on the sidebar so it was there every page. I didn't use pictures of the 'poverty' that most sites would use to draw people in, but although that may have been hard to achieve - I decided to try and connect 'music' with the charity to hopefully allow more people to pay attention.
Most layouts on the websites I looked at are rather wide and can sometimes be complicated to look at and I decided that I wanted the main body of my website to not be that wide. I liked how much more simple and neater it looks by being smaller. I think it stands out from the other websites as it's not fitting in with the general layout conventions.
Overall my website did manage to look professional and easy to navigate around if I was to compare it with general websites. It was not as technically advanced as most but the basics are there for it to perform well.
From my previous website research I tried to incorporate the main conventions on websites currently by having a unique logo, pictures, news pages, twitter feeds/live feeds of some kind, links to social networking sites (i.e: facebook) as these sites are the most popular way of communication, by linking these you are creating more awareness of the site and will also allow more people to be interested if it is associated with a popular site. I personally found the sites which were plainer to be more appealing, so I kept my colours to a minimum and tried not to overcrowd the components. For charity sites, most had donation buttons clearly visible, to catch the eye of the visitor and I included a link on the sidebar so it was there every page. I didn't use pictures of the 'poverty' that most sites would use to draw people in, but although that may have been hard to achieve - I decided to try and connect 'music' with the charity to hopefully allow more people to pay attention.
Most layouts on the websites I looked at are rather wide and can sometimes be complicated to look at and I decided that I wanted the main body of my website to not be that wide. I liked how much more simple and neater it looks by being smaller. I think it stands out from the other websites as it's not fitting in with the general layout conventions.
No comments:
Post a Comment