I don't think there's much to say. It's just a vanity site.

I will say that the MN AIGA site, redesigned a year or so ago by B-Swing is quite nice + usable:

www.aigaminn.org

Ugh. As in ugly. The "skin" change is just swapping background images--the CSS stays the same. Zeldman (among many others) does it in the true sense of swapping complete sets of CSS (click the "abc").

At least they've revived the fascintaing debate about art versus advertising...not.

A cardinal rule of design — web or otherwise — is to know one's audience. Shouldn't fellow designers, of all people, be able to get and understand this design? Once you look past the Fellascrawling, the site structure is pretty simple with 3 columns of info and the site nav in the top left. At least it feels like a site for creatives. That AIGAMinn site is dreadful. It looks like an investor relations site for BoredStiff Co. And it's painfully slow.

i'll disagree. the navigation and organization is a little odd, but actually quite traditional and straightforward. the skinning is interesting. i've seen it before, and arguably executed better, but it works. the fella and holmes skins are nice, the other is a little lame.

the aiga minnesota site is hella lame. the usability is definitely better. it was built by b-swing in minneapolis, who makes about 50 sites a year that look identical to it! but style is not their thing, they're just information architects and good code people.

the LA site also has more of a community feel to it. something i would visit a little more often.

Apparently Ed Fella came to my school and gave a talk or something.

Before I was here.

Aside from not loading, what exactly is wrong with the aiga minnesota website? I think it's alright. Not great, but certainly not "hella lame."

> Shouldn't fellow designers, of all people, be able to get and understand this design?

It is definitely design for designers. And I got the design, I'm all for hip, cool looking web sites but that doesn't mean they are the most useful. If there was a place to apply this layout, an AIGA site is as good as any.

>the LA site also has more of a community feel to it.

I liked that too. New York's is also now open to comments from members. I can see the trend to make most AIGA sites commentable by their members, a good way to discuss past events. Although none of them don't have nothin' on us! (how you like that triple negative?)

the aiga minnesota site is hella lame. the usability is definitely better.

I don't know about you guys, but when I go to these sites, I'm there to get information. The next event, job postings, contacting someone.

I agree that an AIGA site should be visually presentable, and I find both sites are OK at that.

As for the previous MN AIGA site, I had to update that damned thing. Ugh. Clunky clunky clunky. Slightly clever visuals, but clunky and hardly dynamic.

but style is not their thing

They (b-swing) are quite good at style. They just don't bother with extraneous decoration. ;o)

They are also one of the few local firms that understand the balance of visual + usability + content + functionality. All IMHO, of course. ;o)

As for the LA site, it isn't too bad in terms of content and features. The decor is a bit distracting, but then again, we're graphic designers, and we always look at the pictures and usually ignore the text anyways. ;o)

>I agree that an AIGA site should be visually presentable, and I find both sites are OK at that.

New York's site is a great example of usability and good design. Want to see something horrible though? Check out Chicago’s. I think Tanagram did it, who also did the national site.

No information on the home page. For shame!

Jakob Nielsen must be turning in his grave.

Jakob Nielsen is still alive. As of last Monday, at least.

He is to me.

I like the LA site...there's a lot of content on the 1st page, the navigation seems pretty simple and it has a lot more style than most of the chapters. And the skinning could potentially satisfy both camps...those who like cool, stylish dynamic sites and those who like their warm milk and James Taylor.

The Minnesota site is nice. It seems a little bland when you consider some of the talent available in Minn.

And the Chicago site...yikes! It looks like they had a different designer layout every page--no consistency.

I think the most important function for any chapter's site is that it's easy to update. My chapter (Kansas City) hardly ever updates their site. As a result, I haven't joined. I can't justify the cost if they're (seemingly) inactive.

Jakob Nielsen must be turning in his grave.

Jakob Nielsen is still alive.

Somebody let him out quick!!

Now Lenny Bruce is turning over in his grave.

Anyone else see the LA site as a mock to conventional website? To me, it's forced and fabricated -- like a 30 yr old at a rave.

Nevermind style either -- it doesn't break any new grounds. It's mastubatory -- which I guess is ok if you're a design organization. But personally, I find no substance, value, or real functionality to the site. It's basically an online paper promo.

MN's and Chicago's sites are very business-oriented, which if you asked me, is responsible and supportive of the organization's mission and membership. I'm not crazy about the plain-Jane looks, but I don't think style was their objective.

i can understand the concept but unfortunately the execution perpetuates the my feelings that aiga knows and cares very little about the world of webdesign.

the saying "you must first know the rules to be able to break the rules" can be applied here. it looks like they tried to do a radical design before truly understanding the rules of the medium.

As for skins, I am fundamentaly against this type of user control. when I design something, I am a designer and i am making a statement. you are the viewer and you will accept my statement and perhaps even judge my statement. but i will not wimp out and allow you to pick my statement.

Steven Speilberg is a great story teller, I go to his movies to see the ending he chooses not expecting (or wanting) to choose an ending I like.

Oh, and usability. It sucks. I know that is a easy way out, unqualified statement, but it is bad in so many ways it is not worthy of a lengthyt dissertation.

For my money, I think the AIGA San Diego is going to be my favorite, once they finish putting in all the content.. It's smart, fun, and has a lot of style.. And beyond that, it looks like the designer (Paul from Juxt) actually invested a piece of himself when the AIGA asked him to help them out..

--=Adam

DOWN WITH AIGA

>DOWN WITH AIGA

Uh... don't, not like that.

>For my money, I think the AIGA San Diego is going to be my favorite,

I like it too. Some nice eye candy, I could do with simpler rollovers on the left menu though. It's really trendy, in a good way, not sure what I'll think of it in year, but for now it's pretty hip. Did you check the site credits? Last link, bottom right. My favorite part of the site.

MN's and Chicago's sites are very business-oriented, which if you asked me, is responsible and supportive of the organization's mission and membership.

I agree. MN's and Chicago's site are business oriented like the organization's mission. But... You all know the heated AIGA conversation's this site has had lately and I don't mean to start another. But...

Should these chapter websites show what design can do (experimental - our chapter is cooler then yours) or should they show what design can do for the client (corporate - AIGA's mission)? "Cool" sites could lure new and talented designers that could bring AIGA's business message to the client or they might just be preaching to the choir. LA's seems extreme, MN's kinda boring - but San Diego's could be the balance.

I went to school in Boston. Here's their site. It's very Boston.

Dang...San Diego's tight. A little Flashturbation never hurt nobobdy.

>A little Flashturbation never hurt nobobdy.

Right! I don't encourage this kind of flash behavior, but for some reason it works for San Diego's site.

Mmmmm, Clarendon.

Should these chapter websites show what design can do (experimental - our chapter is cooler then yours) or should they show what design can do for the client (corporate - AIGA's mission)?

Neither. They should serve the needs of the paying members.

I do like San Diego's site. The only hitch with flashturbation sites is they tend to be really cool the first time you visit and then rather annoying every visit thereafter.

I like Boston's site with the full calendar right there on the front.

>Neither.

I disagree with Darrel and agree with Kiran. AIGA chapter sites are the perfect soapbox to establish what design can do. Whether it representes the AIGA's overall mission or each chapter's personality. Serving the needs of the paying members is a given (although not as obvious currently.) That should be the goal of the site, how you dress it up (and make it work) is the optional part and the one that could represent intangible values.

I also think there should be uniformity amongst the chapter's web sites. Not that they all have to look the same (heaven's no!) but they could at least try to call things the same (i.e. is it a board or a committee?.) There could also be content requirements that all of them should meet. That could help establish a starting ground, and then everybody can paint them whichever color they fancy.

I could do with simpler rollovers on the left menu though

The San Diego site is excellent but I agree, the navigation rollovers could be much less irritating. This is my first post by the way, this is a great site - please keep up the excellent work!

Armin, you seem to have an affinity for the hand drawn design aesthetic. Can you tell us where that comes from? I think it's rarely done well and I don't think the Fella design is particularly interesting.

Great, now I have a headache.

Maybe next time they can go old school, web style, and just employ a splash page or flash intro to get their artistic style across.

That way I can skip it and get on to a site that I can make heads or tails of.

BTW. You're right, this does invoke thoughts of the early 90's - when there wasn't really such a thing as a Web designer.

>you seem to have an affinity for the hand drawn design aesthetic. Can you tell us where that comes from?

Well... I guess the fact that I suck at anything that involves hand drawing is one reason, I mean... if it weren't for the computer I wouldn't be able to design shit. I flunked most of my drawing classes and my hand writing is horrible. Another reason is that I'm reminded that humans are behind graphic design, not only software. Plus it looks fuckin' (trying to ctach up to Tan) cool.

> I don't think the Fella design is particularly interesting.

I agree, it's probably some of the worst execution and use of his work, it looks like everything was recycled from past work as opposed to original artwork provided by him (please somebody correct me if I'm wrong.) Ed Fella's work is undeniably some the best, too bad it wasn't well translated into the site.

> I also think there should be uniformity amongst the chapter's web sites.

you're kidding, right? HA! it'll never happen.

Work for a chapter website is always donated, which means every firm is going to try to use it as a vehicle for their personal self-gratification. The sheer nature of the process will never support consistency.

Given the circumstances of the work, it makes MN and Chicago's sites the more impressive.

It's easy to make broad, but shallow eye candy websites. It's much tougher to make focused, substantial work that speaks intelligently to a targeted audience.

Take Speak-Up. I think the site's design is great -- but I'm more drawn to the content and the editorial management of the discussions. AIGA sites shouldn't be any different.

What if the group that did LA's site got a hold of Armin's baby? Could you imagine the result? I shudder to think...

>you're kidding, right? HA! it'll never happen.

I think it could happen.

>Work for a chapter website is always donated, which means every firm is going to try to use it as a vehicle for their personal self-gratification. The sheer nature of the process will never support consistency.

I see what you are saying, but what if there were a minor set of guidelines to follow? at least in terms of sections (events, board, contact, join, whatever) and then whoever donates his time, talent and ego can design the shit out of it.

>Given the circumstances of the work, it makes MN and Chicago's sites the more impressive.

Chicago's site can use a LOT of work. What's impressive about it is that it still works.

> What if the group that did LA's site got a hold of Armin's baby?

I would kick their tanned west coast asses man. Mexican style.

Hi. As a member of the committee that did the AIGA/LA website, I've been following the discussion here today, and have been really pleased with what I've read. Not everything is positive, but I think you get a sense of the project's scope. But I'd like to point out a little about how this site got developed and its history.

The previous two AIGA/LA websites were Flash disasters. Impossible to navigate, impossible to update. Ugly. Embarrassing. I, personally, thought the chapter was a joke - even hostile to new media designers. So I got involved in the Online Committee. And that committee experience was interesting. A group of people with widely varying abilities who had never worked together. Donating their time. It took us a while to find our groove, and work together well. And to agree on a design brief. But, in the end, we ended up having a lot of fun together.

The resulting/current design was done trying to accommodate our current members. A group which hasn't had a very active chapter. A largely print-dominated group. People who are surprisingly computer-phobic. (I've spoken to members who don't want to upgrade their browser because they're scared it'll "break their network.") I mean, look how few comments have been posted on the site so far -- it's going to take a while to get people to feel comfortable with the idea of an online community (something that's radically new to many of them).

But our other goal in the site is to attract web/motion/new media designers and get them to want to be involved in the chapter - and help drag it into the modern age.

I think that there was fairly little ego in coming up the basic structure for the site. We wanted an HTML site that would be quick and efficient for visitors, something which would also help develop community, and something which we could update and expand easily. We're hoping to let the egos go nuts with the skins -- a chance for our members to participate. And much of the discussion here has been, I think about the Ed Fella skin, as opposed to the site's basic structure. [Side note: It is possible to change the CSS files for a skin, but we don't think many of our members are that technically inclined. For example, many of them don't know how to use Photoshop's "Save for Web." Plus, helping people debug their CSS files isn't something we're too eager to do.]] But getting the members involved is going to take a lot of effort... we haven't had many people express an interest in designing a skin yet.

In terms of unifying the different chapters - we are hoping to include links to feature stories on other chapter sites (as we currently do to the National site). I'm not sure how far this will develop - but the idea of getting the different chapters to link together and build a national design community is something we're trying to encourage.

Lastly - we have tried to put much of our development discussions online in our WebDev section. Feel free to post suggestions and ideas to improve the site. I'm particularly interested in Armin's comment that we're not using Movable Type to its full potential - and to hear suggestions for doing more. (Technically, we're stretching it to death, with all sorts of crazy php stuff going on in the entries.) We intend to keep developing and tweaking the site, adding new features, and hopefully making it easier for people to use.

Thanks for listening.

Oh fine. Let me get in on this, too. I've only recently retired from the AIGA / LA board after five years. So I've been there longer than David and have a slightly different perspective.

Needless to say I take exception that he would characterize us as "A group which hasn't had a very active chapter." That's not true. What is true is that the activity was almost exclusively focused on the CMYK sector. As programming chair, I've tried -- in collaboration with others, of course -- to start a series of RGB events. But it's a chicken / egg problem.

Through years of print-only chauvinism our support in the RGB community has atrophied to the point that we now often get rejected when we reach out.

It's my hope that the new site will help us get past that point into a new era of harmony and cooperation. For a better America! For a better tomorrow! God bless us everyone!

One more (peripheral) issue: Past and present AIGA websites are -- as was pointed out above -- the work of volunteers who strike compromises between their aesthetic desires, the needs of the project and between each other.

As with fashion, it's easy to criticize past or current incarnations of our site. But know that they were always done with the best of intentions and maximum effort by the people involved. All have had their fans and detractors. That's what makes them good in my book: They keep the discussion going and motivate others to step up and make their voice heard.

Neither. They should serve the needs of the paying members.

and potential members!

The sites should not all look the same. They all work (mostly) within the AIGA branding guidelines, but each chapter has its own flavor, strengths, etc.

As programming chair, I've tried -- in collaboration with others, of course -- to start a series of RGB events.

Now that this is an AIGA thread ;o) ...I can say that this has happened in MN as well.

There is a group within the AIGA that really wants to believe in an org that has visual designers and other designers from outside the CMYK world--and really tries to make it happen--but that's been happening for 5 years or so, and I haven't seen any real progress.

That's not necessarily a bad thing. I think it's fine that AIGA is what it is and isn't something else. There's plenty of organizations to go around. ;o)

New York's site is a great example of usability and good design.

I agree.

Want to see something horrible though? Check out Chicago’s. I think Tanagram did it, who also did the national site.

I also agree there. I think that was originally done in 1998 and has changed hands and lost something when that happened. It is a painful experience.

I nominate you, armin, to re-design the chicago aiga site.

>I nominate you, armin, to re-design the chicago aiga site.

Hear that Connie?

Not to divulge anything, but I was late to the redesign party. Don't fret, the new version might have a lil' Arminness added to it... hehehe...

Now that this is an AIGA thread ;o) ...I can say that this has happened in MN as well.

There is a group within the AIGA that really wants to believe in an org that has visual designers and other designers from outside the CMYK world--and really tries to make it happen--but that's been happening for 5 years or so, and I haven't seen any real progress.

I think that they try to have events that can include everyone. Design Camp includes everyone, Portfolio One-On-One has web-only reviewers. There could be more, but they also need to recoup costs on the events/workshops/speakers etc. I would tend to avoid something I viewed as narrowly web-oriented, not because I don't like (or do) web work. I think design is design, and specialization is for ants (or idiots) and if someone was ONLY speaking about the web I might get bored. I know there would be some web-centric events I would dig though. Moving a brand to the web, strategies for web portfolios, I dont know.

No wait... I didn't say anything. This isn't an AIGA thread!

Brook:

I don't disagree with anything you said. That's kind of my point, I guess. There just isn't a compelling reason for many (if not most) pixel people to have a strong interest in the AIGA.

I don't understand what all you webmonkeys are complaining about. AIGA/Experience Design (I've already grown weary of that name) is a group specically geared to RGB interests. On the national board, there's Clement and Terry Swack to uphold the web effort, and most chapters have a chair or board member dedicated to this mission.

Print and brand designers tend to be more socially adept, so they are more involved. But if you web guy with your pasty white skin and your ".NET" tshirts want to involve yourself -- than there's nothing stopping you.

Just put down the Hot Pocket and the Mountain Dew, and raise your hand.

Print and brand designers tend to be more socially adept, so they are more involved.

Wow, Tan. What an asshole of a comment. (But maybe you were joking? If so, then kindly disregard the asshole comment.)

Perhaps *that* is the reason RGB folks are content leaving the CMYK to themselves...

Seriously. That's the kind of attitude many feel the AIGA has. 'We're graphic designers...we're above all other forms of design.'

Clement Mok is a great guy/designer. I'm sure he's sincere in his quest to bring RGB folk into the AIGA. Him being there really has no bearing on drawing an RGB crowd to the AIGA though.

The experience design group is poorly implemented, IMHO. It's an attempt to put 'RGB design' into the AIGA as a subset of 'graphic design' which makes little sense.

Of course I'm joking here -- web designers aren't social misfits.

But seriously though, I think it's accurate generalization to say that the print community does tend to be a little more receptive to networking and more socially-oriented design events. The web community is more introspective, and attracted to narrower, technologically-focused issues.

The irony is that you feel that AIGA is elitist and snobby. While I actually think it's the other way around.

> There just isn't a compelling reason for many (if not most) pixel people to have a strong interest in the AIGA.

and >...no bearing on drawing an RGB crowd...The experience design group is poorly implemented

If you listen at your characterizations from an unbiased viewpoint -- what you're saying is that AIGA doesn't understand the RGB audience and doesn't know what it's doing, therefore, it's not worth your interest and participation. Now to me, that's YOU who's elitist here.

I think web designers are just as guilty of feeling that "CMYK people just don't understand the complexity and issues of RGB." Come'on -- admit it. You think print designers are stylish, vacous, web idiots.

If you want to talk about technology and web issues then great -- but don't criticize AIGA because it's design-centric. And don't be so quick to judge.

Of course I'm joking here -- web designers aren't social misfits.

Oh, good. Glad I put the disclaimer in there. ;o)

The irony is that you feel that AIGA is elitist and snobby.

That wasn't necessarily my POV. I certainly don't see most of the members being elitist or snotty, but the organization is sometimes seen that way.

The web community is more introspective, and attracted to narrower, technologically-focused issues.

Ah, see, this is where I totally see the opposite. Most web people I know that would have any interest in the AIGA tend to fucus on design in a much broader sense. More of a generalist attitude than a specific design focus (like the branding group).

what you're saying is that AIGA doesn't understand the RGB audience and doesn't know what it's doing, therefore, it's not worth your interest and participation. Now to me, that's YOU who's elitist here.

Hmm...fair enough. But, then again, that's the way it is. The experience design events we had tended to only attract those still in the AIGA that were on the fringes of the RGB world. This, of course, is a bit of the chicken/egg problem.

At the national level, though, there was talk of the experience design group being an 'add-on' group to the AIGA. You pay your AIGA dues, and then you pay your experience design dues.

That was the approach that I felt was the most crippling to the cause.

The other problem is that you tend to get a predominantly 'visual design' focused group. With lots of hand-raising and the de facto question "did you do that in flash" type of stuff. Again, more chicken and egg than anything intentional, of course.

My idealistic all-powerful idea would be to form a loose design organization (or maybe affiliation) with groups like IDSA, AIA, AIGA, SIGCHI, etc. That makes a lot more sense in terms of 'design hierarchy'. To me, at least.

"CMYK people just don't understand the complexity and issues of RGB." Come'on -- admit it. You think print designers are stylish, vacous, web idiots.

Stylish? I hope so. Vacous? Not at all. Web idiots? No...just not terribly interested in it. Which is fine.

but don't criticize AIGA because it's design-centric.

It's graphic-design centric. That's the issue.

And don't be so quick to judge.

I'm not being quick.

It's graphic-design centric. That's the issue.

I worded that wrong. It's graphic-design centric, hence I don't think it's the best venue for RGB design in terms of overall design/development.

BTW, I *am* a social misfit. But it has little to do with my profession. ;o)

This conversation b/t us would make a great topic for an AIGA event.

Ha!

Yes, it would.

Migraine-inducing rollovers aside, I quite like David Bean's site for the Nashville AIGA.

San Diego's site is nice, but what the hell is up with this trend of everyone having some kind of old school "coat of arms" involving a mirrored animal symbol and using bolded Clarendon?

Migraine-inducing rollovers aside

Migraine? I'm thinking seizure-inducing!

And why is it that a graphic designer would NEVER set body copy on top of a busy background in print, but online, no one thinks twice before doing it?

>what the hell is up with this trend of everyone having some kind of old school "coat of arms" involving a mirrored animal symbol and using bolded Clarendon?

Hey, better jump on it, before it goes out of style. I don't mind the clarendon so much, because clarendon rocks (sad to see it used so badly) but the coat of arms is really idiotic (hey idiocase...idiotic!) almost as annoying as the 3d polygon crap, which I still see very often. So very often...

I like Tom's work. Too many sites are looking like the typical two/three column blog. And I would expect for an AIGA site to break design molds.

This conversation b/t us would make a great topic for an AIGA event.

I agree, as well.

Let's see what we can put on.

Do you have any suggestions? What do you think would be a good format? Roundtable? Panel discussion? Ice cream social?

>What do you think would be a good format? Roundtable? Panel discussion? Ice cream social?

I think a piss-up in a brewery would do. We could kill two birds in one: get a web event and show Graham that designers can organize a piss-up. Pulling a girl into a brothel is optional.

I'll have to admit. The positive and negative criticism is much appreciated. I can't speak for anyone else using the a coat-of-arms symbol. But in this case I felt it a perfect graphic compilation of the two social groups, the north (San Diego) and the direct influence and joint relationship we have with the south (Baja Mexico). Thus, the two swans. Also, the emblem is a direct influence of downtown SD, where the architecture dates back to the early century.

Now on to the font topic. Clarendon takes on the old age feel that downtown reflects. It has nothing to do with being trendy. The other fonts being used are TradeGothic, Helvetica and HouseBroken. This diverse arrangement also reflects on the diversity of the SD community. The concept behind the SD site, was to portray the SD community in a highly creative and contemporary way. Of course we could have just stripped all that personality away and just thrown up a content-dump site with no creativity and local expression.

I do appreciate the constructive criticism, but I sometimes feel so many people never take a moment to think about why and what goes into a concept, if there's one at all? SD AIGA site is moving into Phase 2 and will be updated with a shit load of content. All the hard working individuals helping out are much appreciated.

test