Website design / design audit (your feedback)

Primary tabs

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Michael Greenwood's picture
Joined: 8 Mar 2002 - 3:37pm
Website design / design audit (your feedback)

I didn’t design this site but I’m redesigning it. I’ve voiced a few of my concerns with the current design that they are using, but they don

Dmitry Taranov's picture
Joined: 19 May 2003 - 8:29am

it’s too much photos for me at this page.. it’s looks too havy..

Eduardo Omine's picture
Joined: 18 Jan 2003 - 6:08am

Not Avenir either. Century Gothic.

Benjamin R Thompson's picture
Joined: 20 Nov 2003 - 12:09pm

an identity design and consulting company might want to stay away from stock photos of smiling people in suits. they don’t say much… particularly about creativity.

David Roughs's picture
Joined: 16 Jul 2003 - 4:03pm

Here here!

Blatantly stock photos. Either hire a photographer, or go a little more upscale into the rights managed schtuff where you get a little more edge. The pics they’re using look like mid-90s PhotoDisc, bought on sale as part of a warehouse clearing “Business Bundle”.


David Roughs

Tanya Sprowl's picture
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 - 11:00am

yeah those people don’t look too creative — nor does the typography.

I get a feeling of vertigo too. not everything has to move.

Van Anderson's picture
Joined: 4 Jan 2004 - 7:33am

When I visited the site, I didn’t even see the identity consulting/mobility/products/User Experience options (I’m calling it frame 2), it was so far right. And what’s up with the inconsistent capitalisation? The MS certified, DigitalIDWorld, VeriSign logos (frame 1) are all superfluous, and need to move somewhere less obtrusive. The links on the header — Home, About IM, Solutions, Industry Experience, Careers, Contacts Us — need to stand out more: I looked over this page for three minutes before I even noticed them.

I would probably start at the top with a header with less motion and more contrast — there’s no reason for those squares and arrows to move except that the designer was pretentious. Then below that, from left to right, I would have frame 2 and the main window. Frame 1 would, at most, be incorporated into the footer. For some reason, it was important enough to be on every page, so I guess subjugating them to their own page isn’t an option, but they don’t even link!

That’s my significantly more than two cents worth.


steve paxton's picture
Joined: 7 Apr 2003 - 4:30pm

The text on the front page is long-winded, dull and poorly-written, both in terms of grammar and in terms of providing information.
The (lack of) spacing around the hyphens in the quote at the bottom turns the words into nonsense.
The links down the right all go to the solutions page — this is an unnecessarily confusing approach to site navigation.
The logos on the left add little to the site — we’ve seen them often enough to know that they are no indicators of quality.
Most of their ‘industry experience’ seemed to be IT admin stuff — what’s it got to do with identity?
The information architecture needs work.
They need to believe you when you tell them to:
Start by deciding what the site is for. What info needs to be there, and for whom? Purge the text of all that management bollocks, organise the info, then design the site navigation structure according to the structure of the information.

brian jaramillo's picture
Joined: 3 Nov 2001 - 11:00am

Hi Mike.

besides all that other jazz, the IM logo itself needs reweighted.

Chris Rugen's picture
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 - 11:00am

The problem with this site seems to spring from a problem with the company’s image of itself. Identity Mine appears too scared to actually tell anyone what they do. Instead, they all their energy telling you why they’re certified, great, and business savvy, with, as steve pointed out, dull, poorly set, and poorly written copy. It’s also so laced with business-speak that it ends up communicating nothing but cognitive vacuity. On top of that, the ‘identity’ stuff is based on some nebulous concept of technology and IT structuring determining identity. This connection is confusing.

The ‘Solutions’ page should be on the front, as it provides the most actual content, with the righthand navigation fromt the home page being the content, rather than existing as an oddly-placed series of faded stock-art.

Don’t even get me started on the useless random Flash animations that refer to nothing at all. Circling arrows??

Again, Steve is right. They need to know why they want/ need a website, not just that they want one. This is a problem that goes to the core of their marketing (on this site). If you can step into a meeting with them and get all that across without making all of them hate you, my hat goes off to you. Design is the least of their problems, but hopefully it can help them organize their thoughts. Good luck, Michael.

Joe Pemberton's picture
Joined: 8 Apr 2002 - 3:36pm

- The text spanning the full page is a bad idea / difficult to read.
- The body text size at such a small size exacerbates that problem.
- Avenir and Helvetica don’t mix well (that is Avenir, not Futura, right?)
- The navigation, heads and subheads are all the same size (or very nearly the same size).

(FYI, I’m on a Mac/Safari)