I agree with most that this site is not the best featured here but also I can see the worth in the idea so well done on one part Oliver but just not with this site. Your personal site is quite nice though!
I’m sure this comment won’t make it through, but if you really want quality inspiration, this is not the place to get it.
I’ve been really liking http://siteinspire.net lately. Great sites being featured, along with some really well done interviews with different designers and agencies.
Thank you for linking that gallery Pat. That’s become one of the daily bookmarks as well. A gallery with good taste, finally.
And since the topic of abduzeedo has been brought up, in my own personal opinion, abduzeedo has become quite overrated (not his doing, but by the masses).
The man’s an excellent instructor, and has an eerie ability to disassemble a lot of photoshop magic, but he’s not a top level web designer, and I would take his recommendations with a generous amount of skepticism.
I will probably be lynched for saying this, but appearing (or not appearing) on BWG isn’t anything to shout about. Appearing on a good gallery such as site inspire is a better way of measuring your design ability.
I agree and disagree. I feel this is definitely one of the more respectable gallery sites, I don’t think you could go as far as to say being featured here is pretty much worthless. But lately, I really haven’t been impressed with Nicks choices. I even almost feel that some of the sites that have made it recently made it just because of their content, more than the actual design of the site. (that’s strictly an opinion)
Also, I do greatly agree that site inspire is an amazing gallery. Bookmark the hell out of that.
It would be trivial getting into an argument about a design inspiration gallery, because its all based on subjective opinions.
I personally love nearly every site that’s posted on here. They all are pushing boundaries one way or another, in that they are unusual and creative. They aren’t the usual format we are used to on the web. That said, few of them are genuinely “good” sites. They generally are too much show and too little delivery.
While this site is far from the worst we see on the web on a daily basis, it stands out on BWG like a sore thumb. It is simply a regular site we’ve all seen a million times. Aside from being regularly designed, it uses silly javascript and sIFR effects that complicate the design unnecessarily. Additionally, it has a hideous color palette.
But lets stick to discussion aesthetics and not get side tracked by the site’s concept. That’s not a valid rationale for posting it on a design inspiration site.
Because if they did, it would affect traffic. If you don’t want to hear both sides of the discussion, then don’t allow comments. SImple.
@Zach:
I would have said I agreed with you a few months ago, but because of recent good galleries gaining more mainstream appeal, appearing here isn’t much of a stretch from other css galleries anymore. Far better ones have cropped up and have tore down a lot of misinformation about what good design is, and who can actually pull it off.
To put it in perspective: if somebody applied for work, and I would be screening, if they said they appeared on BWG, I would respond to the tune of “cool, that’s nice to know, can I see which of your sites appeared?”, but I would be half-expecting to see an inappropriately textured or overtly web 2.0-ish site.
I think the word “cliché” would be an appropriate one to be honest.
Well, I don’t fully agree yet. But I’m pulling more and more in that direction lately. There does seem to be some favoritism for the 2.0-ish look, but I don’t mind the more textured look…to an extent.
Talk to me in a few months, and I’ll probably be more in agreement.
35 Comments
Ok, so THIS ^^ site is here for what? And why mine isn’t here?
I really don’t understand it. That’s a 10 minute design. And eh, these stock icons …
shod4n
post the link to your site here…………
amaze us!
What is quite amusing is the way BWG starts trends on the web – this site is now featured as part of Abduzeedo’s sites of the week too!
http://abduzeedo.com/sites-week-57
Follow the link! See for yourself!
I agree with most that this site is not the best featured here but also I can see the worth in the idea so well done on one part Oliver but just not with this site. Your personal site is quite nice though!
@Carl Rosekilly: Don’t ask for a site, unless you have your own listed.
i like the concept and the design is appropriate to its target audience and purpose, just not up to the general standard of BWG.
@oliver ker
your work is quite nice, i did notice the site you made for Edie Lush is full of absolute URLs! not cool!
I’m sure this comment won’t make it through, but if you really want quality inspiration, this is not the place to get it.
I’ve been really liking http://siteinspire.net lately. Great sites being featured, along with some really well done interviews with different designers and agencies.
Thank you for linking that gallery Pat. That’s become one of the daily bookmarks as well. A gallery with good taste, finally.
And since the topic of abduzeedo has been brought up, in my own personal opinion, abduzeedo has become quite overrated (not his doing, but by the masses).
The man’s an excellent instructor, and has an eerie ability to disassemble a lot of photoshop magic, but he’s not a top level web designer, and I would take his recommendations with a generous amount of skepticism.
I will probably be lynched for saying this, but appearing (or not appearing) on BWG isn’t anything to shout about. Appearing on a good gallery such as site inspire is a better way of measuring your design ability.
@DDD
I agree and disagree. I feel this is definitely one of the more respectable gallery sites, I don’t think you could go as far as to say being featured here is pretty much worthless. But lately, I really haven’t been impressed with Nicks choices. I even almost feel that some of the sites that have made it recently made it just because of their content, more than the actual design of the site. (that’s strictly an opinion)
Also, I do greatly agree that site inspire is an amazing gallery. Bookmark the hell out of that.
this is great hosting list compare prize and more
It would be trivial getting into an argument about a design inspiration gallery, because its all based on subjective opinions.
I personally love nearly every site that’s posted on here. They all are pushing boundaries one way or another, in that they are unusual and creative. They aren’t the usual format we are used to on the web. That said, few of them are genuinely “good” sites. They generally are too much show and too little delivery.
While this site is far from the worst we see on the web on a daily basis, it stands out on BWG like a sore thumb. It is simply a regular site we’ve all seen a million times. Aside from being regularly designed, it uses silly javascript and sIFR effects that complicate the design unnecessarily. Additionally, it has a hideous color palette.
But lets stick to discussion aesthetics and not get side tracked by the site’s concept. That’s not a valid rationale for posting it on a design inspiration site.
This was simply a mistake to post here…
(:
why doesn’t bestwebgallery admin write anything about all these comments?
@NM:
Because if they did, it would affect traffic. If you don’t want to hear both sides of the discussion, then don’t allow comments. SImple.
@Zach:
I would have said I agreed with you a few months ago, but because of recent good galleries gaining more mainstream appeal, appearing here isn’t much of a stretch from other css galleries anymore. Far better ones have cropped up and have tore down a lot of misinformation about what good design is, and who can actually pull it off.
To put it in perspective: if somebody applied for work, and I would be screening, if they said they appeared on BWG, I would respond to the tune of “cool, that’s nice to know, can I see which of your sites appeared?”, but I would be half-expecting to see an inappropriately textured or overtly web 2.0-ish site.
I think the word “cliché” would be an appropriate one to be honest.
@DDD
Well, I don’t fully agree yet. But I’m pulling more and more in that direction lately. There does seem to be some favoritism for the 2.0-ish look, but I don’t mind the more textured look…to an extent.
Talk to me in a few months, and I’ll probably be more in agreement.
You guys are fucking scam artiest… Making illegal transactions in people’s bank accounts!!!!