I’ve been poking around a lot of architects’ web sites lately and I’m thoroughly surprised at how bad they are. It seems almost without fail that they are either blowing my browser window up full size, asking me to read light grey 9px text, overflowing with obfuscatory flashterbation, teasing me with custom designed scrollbars that don’t behave as you’d expect, or asking me to evaluate their work based on postage stamp sized photographs. It really feels like 1998. I see I’m not alone in this observation.
Architects have so much to gain from the web. Big huge photographs of their work, clear statements of who they are and what they believe in, easily linkable and sharable portfolio pages, daily links of interest.
As it stands today, if you want to show someone an interesting piece of work you usually have to give them a step-by-step guide on how to get there: First go to the home page, wait for the countdown timer to expire, then hover over the logo, then grab a magnifying glass, then squint, then click the 4th tiny icon on the left (I can’t really tell what it is), then use that custom scrollbar that looks like an elevator, then take a screenshot, then pull that screenshot into Photoshop, then zoom in about 8 times so it’s all nice and big on your screen, then take about 10 steps back from your computer, then look.
I’m only half kidding.
Come on, architects, get with it! Anyone got any links to a great architect’s site that bucks this trend?
Christopher J
on 26 Aug 08It’s funny, because I immediately thought of Calatrava’s web site … so I went there and despite (eventually) having very large images of his work, it takes a minimum of 5 clicks to get to anything of substance. Splash > Skip Intro > Projects > Recent Projects > Item. Beautiful but cumbersome.
Christopher J
on 26 Aug 08Oh—and link:
http://www.calatrava.com
Jamie
on 26 Aug 08Jason,
http://www.owpp.com/ http://www.perkinswill.com/
Decent sites for really great Chicago firms.
J
on 26 Aug 08...and it’s all flash so you can’t link to a specific project.
Manny
on 26 Aug 08We have submitted proposals to design 3 or 4 different arch. firm sites, and lost every time …. EACH TIME they moved forward with a friend or family member of an owner or employee and ended up with EXACTLY the same problems you mention. I think 2 have yet to do anything with the site at all and they were from 2 years ago …
JF
on 26 Aug 08Jamie: This is Perkins Design Solutions (portfolio?) section. 30+ tiny squares you have to hover over to get to any work. They aren’t even labeled until you hover over them one by one. And the labels are just text so you have no idea what’s behind the link.
They do have a pulldown menu down below (if you notice it), but again, it’s just a list of project names. How about thumbnails so I can browse visually? Isn’t that what this is all about?
Kegan G.
on 26 Aug 08This is a nice one, http://www.llarchitect.com.my ?
DM
on 26 Aug 08They still suffer from small gray type on a white screen, but at least you can see their work.
http://www.shoparc.com
Juan Jose
on 26 Aug 08www.martagonzalez.com,
Spanish Architect from Madrid. Only photographs a bit small for me… The rest seems clear and with style.
Anonymous Coward
on 26 Aug 08Oops, here’s the link: http://www.shoparc.com
Keith
on 26 Aug 08I totally agree about this!
With the tools available now for digital content creation I want to have a 3D journey into those buildings with certain views annotated by the architectural team behind it.
I want to witness the work not just see it from some sales photo or pre-rendered garbage!
Adam
on 26 Aug 08http://www.aja-architects.com is one a designer here just finished. html isn’t great but the design is good.
Mike
on 26 Aug 08http://www.nbbj.com is my favorite architecture firm site.
Mike
on 26 Aug 08@keith: The architecture community is somewhat split about this. While some agree with you that creating a 3d version of a space for walkthroughs and that kind of thing is good, others think that more abstracted renderings and drawings are better for representing a building. A space will never have the same feeling as a rendering tries to convey, and the problem with “photorealistic” 3d renderings is that it creates unrealistic expectations in the client that the finished space will be exactly as it looks in the renderings.
Lar
on 26 Aug 08http://www.treyjordan.com/work.html is a nice simple one
Jarred
on 26 Aug 08http://www.klein-dytham.com
simple and classic.
Mike Arauz
on 26 Aug 08this site was intended to marry the aesthetic capabilities of flash with a blog content management system. what do you think?
http://www.pompeiad.com
Thijs van der Vossen
on 26 Aug 08We at Fingertips designed and build http://www.rvrbv.nl and http://hendriksschulten.nl a few years ago.
If I were to update these design I would probably use bigger images but I’m still very happy with the result.
Andrew N
on 26 Aug 08I like this site: http://www.wilkinsonking.com/
A glance at the mark-up tells you that the site is getting old but it doesn’t look it thanks to the very simple grid.
A thumbnail for each project, a linkable page for each site, large images and no flash navigation flying about the place to get in the way of the work.
Carl-Johan Kihlbom
on 26 Aug 08One from DHH’s home country of Denmark: http://www.ltarkitekter.dk/
Thijs van der Vossen
on 26 Aug 08Now with links you can actually click:
Rijnboutt Van der Vossen Rijnboutt
Hendriks Schulten architecten
marcus
on 26 Aug 08Can we self nominate? We are a small archirecture practice in Sydney and use our website to point people to all sorts of things that interest us, including other local architects (architects are notoriously paranoid that someone may find out that there are other architects out there competing with them…) and of course our own work.
Our site: Super Colossal
RS
on 26 Aug 08I love how Shim-Sutcliffe Architects focused completely on full-screen photos for their site, save a single PDF for contact info, background, awards and publications.
Drew Raines
on 26 Aug 08From my friends at cabedge:
D9 Development
bepJordan
on 26 Aug 08http://dlrgroup.com/
John Hoysa
on 26 Aug 08A site I worked on a few years back for a local Austin firm – www.webberstudio.com
bepJordan
on 26 Aug 08Woops! How about a clickable link:
DLR Group
A nifty flash website we did.
justin
on 26 Aug 08No flash anywhere, big photos, but it does have the small text. I kicked and I screamed, but the client wanted it…
Coen+Partners
Maybe it’s because they’re landscape architects.
larry
on 26 Aug 08Try http://www.precadd.com. This is an architect firm that gets it.
Jason Z
on 26 Aug 08I totally agree with this.
Had a client a couple of years ago who was an architecture firm. They started out as a dream client. They knew who their audience was, had great photography of great work, and we had this mutual respect – they worked with clients on designerly things just like we did; they knew how things went. Everything was great through the comp presentation until they had “just a few tweaks”.
Next thing you know they are sending us CorelDraw files and the site ended up horrible. Also because they thought their skills translated to the web, I guess.
Daintree
on 26 Aug 08I’m not seeing it the same way – ok, most of the Guardian examples are accurate, but there are plenty of medium to larger firms doing ok (although they are all adicted to flash, are they not) such as http://www.mcdowellbenedetti.com/ and the daddy of them all http://www.conranandpartners.com/index.php/work/architecture and even smaller places are putting some usable, navagble content up (http://assemblage.co.uk/). The Guardian critices AHMM (http://www.ahmm.co.uk) but its perhaps the clearest and quickest of the ones I looked at.
Agreed, though, the flasharama is dreadful.
Mike
on 26 Aug 08http://www.shealink.com/
Maybe not an architect proper, but an architect among other things. And perhaps not free from all the problems you mention, but a pretty nice site.
Riddle
on 26 Aug 08Marcus, I love your site. The only thing it needs (IMO) is specifying height for all images so they don’t push down accompanying text.
Appwerks.
on 26 Aug 08The website of a Chicago-based architectural firm:
http://www.froelichkim.com/
I would prefer larger text and more obvious way to navigate the project images. The site was made to mimic, as much as possible, their other branding assets (collateral, business cards, client presentations system, etc.)
The print optimization, especially of the project pages, is a nice touch.
Appwerks.
on 26 Aug 08A proper link would have been nice:
Froelich Kim | Architecture
Sorry for inconvenience.
sean
on 26 Aug 08http://dpz.com/
Jeff Whitfield
on 26 Aug 08Yeah, had a company I used to work for that ended up with a horrid “all Flash” site from hell (http://www.lauckgroup.com/). They didn’t listen to me. Another company I used to work for did and their site ended up much, much better (http://www.omniplan.com). Not perfect but much better than an all Flash one. Really had to work hard to make sure they understood that Flash does not equal a good, standards-based, accessible site. Plus, they wanted to manage the content themselves, which is something that a snazzy, useless Flash site won’t give you.
LTL-RC
on 26 Aug 08Having known a good deal of architects, the linked article points the reason why – architects think they are at the top of the design pyramid. The fact that they took a graphic design class for a semester in university makes them think they know all there is to know.
That and I have yet to meet one who wasn’t an arrogant fuck.
It’s not just websites, either. A good deal of them seem to have strange ideas for almost anything and everything else – most certainly including fashion and interior design. Most of them dress like straight up Eurotrash, the Italian kind. And when you go to their offices for a meeting you find out that you inadvertently sat on their “table” and put your laptop on their “chair”.
If there ever was a person who warranted the “eyeroll” emoticon, it would be an architect.
Terry Sutton
on 26 Aug 08I hear you.
I also LOVE LOVE LOVE going to wedding photographer’s websites and having my browser resized.
I think 37s should have a browser resize when we get to your site. It really makes me want to stay on a website and poke around.
Mike Hagstrom
on 26 Aug 08http://www.mospromstroy.com/ here is a construction company that has a really nice website.
Artie Kuhn
on 26 Aug 08K4places.com is pretty nice. A little bloated, but still nice.
Anonymous
on 26 Aug 08Not from 1998: http://www.jeffersonsheard.com
Duarte
on 26 Aug 08Very large photos, keyboard navigation (use the right / left arrow keys), and short project descriptions are the main features ofCarrilho da Graça’s wesbite, see for instance the German School of Lisbon’s project page (recommended).
You can get to any page on the site with 2 clicks, and the pages focus on one thing, showing you the work. Not the website, not a fantastic flashy effect, but just the work.
karl
on 26 Aug 08http://www.gensler.com – launched march this eary.
Mike
on 26 Aug 08@LTL-RC: It’s funny, you seem to only know the most extremely stereotypical architects. I’ve also known quite a lot of architects and none of them are remotely like what you describe.
Robert Einspruch
on 26 Aug 08This is so true – architects seem to have a serious Flash addiction! Time for an intervention. :-)
Cameron Westland
on 26 Aug 08We just launched the Hariri Pontarini Architects website:
http://hariripontarini.com/
I lost the battle for automatic full screen, and I don’t like that you can’t download the images, let me know what you guys think…
Michael
on 26 Aug 08We released this small architects studio website: http://www.rigapartners.com
Not a lot of content, so we worked on the pictures. That’s what people would look at first when coming on an architect website. The website has to be clean and easy.
No Flash, only AJAX and it works with JS disabled.
David Andersen
on 26 Aug 08Sarah Nettleton has a good one.
Ryan Pratt
on 26 Aug 08Just a good site..
http://www.jeremylevine.com/
ep
on 26 Aug 08How about these Swiss guys: http://www.favre-guth.ch/
Adam
on 26 Aug 08@Cameron: Too much flashterbation. That is a great term Jason! I couldn’t help but re-use it. The Intro takes way too long to load and the navigation is really confusing. The images are beautiful though!
MikeInAZ
on 26 Aug 08Not exactly an architect’s site, but I love how they put the user first, not their ego:
Real estate site that specializes in more modern styles:
http://azarchitecture.com/
No flash, big photos for each house, and good information.
http://azarchitecture.com/property_photos.cfm?auto_id=401
David Watson
on 26 Aug 08http://www.susanka.com/
Jamie
on 26 Aug 08JF, true that Flash is unwieldy. But they do have a landing page that is way more scannable. Albeit the thumbnails could be bigger: http://www.perkinswill.com/expertise/markets/corpcom.aspx
Cameron, that Hariri Pontarini Architects site is pimp!
Tracey
on 26 Aug 08Of course, I am biased since our company Fastspot did this project for Purple Cherry Architects in Annapolis, but it was refreshing to have a client who wanted to get away from all the overblown Flash whiz bang. It helps that this architecture firm focuses on “Purpose Driven” design, working with individuals with disabilities. http://www.purplecherry.com
Blake Elshire
on 26 Aug 08I worked on the Rees Architects website. We were able to talk them out of a big flashy type site. It didn’t meet up to our vision because of problems with the project, but overall it’s an alright site I think.
Orestes Chouchoulas
on 26 Aug 08http://www.snoarc.no/
Snøhetta Architects. Flash that actually makes sense, ability to deep-link, ability to download images and PDFs, and a useful resource overall.
Eric J. Gruber
on 26 Aug 08http://pentagram.com
Michael Long
on 26 Aug 08It seems that many fashion designers and large clothing companies suffer from similar problems with their websites; so many of them have mood music playing before you can even click a link.
Régis Kuckaertz
on 26 Aug 08Architecture isn’t the only profession where websites would deserve Botox injections: have you ever visited DENTISTS’? It’s amazing! If there’s something they should avoid above all it’s precisely huge photographs of their work… aaargh.
By the way, I found London architect Denna Jones’ website a beautiful example of a bold design with an extreme care to typography. It has also a very unique peculiarity in that it’s a big mashup of all the webapps Denna Jones uses to promote her work—the site itself has no content.
Chadwick Wood
on 26 Aug 08I re-made the website for Austin-based architecture firm Workpod 9 about a year ago, doing away with the flash but still keeping a lot of the interactivity, now using javascript. I think it bucks the trend you’re talking about.
Anonymous Coward
on 26 Aug 08can’t believe no one’s put down wes jones’ site: http://www.jonespartners.com/
john h
on 26 Aug 08sound’s like somebodies building a custom home!
Marc Hedlund
on 26 Aug 08I’m biased since I know both the architect and the site designer, but I like http://www.minday.com/.
Solo500
on 26 Aug 08If I make a tshirt with the phrase “obfuscatory flashterbation” on it, I will make sure to credit you. SKIP INTRO, maaan.
This sort of thing plagues websites for all of the arts. Not that a decent Flash slideshow isn’t the way to go in some contexts, but having that slideshow embedded in a standards based, easily searchable site with clear navigation and NO soundtrack would be nice.
bpm
on 26 Aug 08Ha, this is one of my favorite things to rant about. Another arena for very bad web design is the fashion design world. Specifically, websites for individual labels. Most are completely unusable.
Rudolph
on 26 Aug 08It’s AMAZING to me how many of these sites people have submitted SUCK for almost exactly the reasons listed in the post.
Quit self-promoting, people … you are highlighting your limitations.
alps
on 26 Aug 08http://www.hellermanus.com/
GeeIWonder
on 26 Aug 08@JF: I see your point, but maybe having a website for architecture is like having a website for perfume. In which case, the worst thing you can do is really try and suggest the website encompasses the feel. Maybe it’s almost done on purpose, like a negative space thing. I can see some merit to that school of thought, though I guess it’s hard to approve of poor usability and flow, even for contrast or slow down purposes.
But can you even hire an e.g. Renzo Piano via his website though? Or is it just for groupies?
pique
on 26 Aug 08Not beautiful like their designs but a very functional site nonetheless:
http://www.loeuf.com/en/index.php
Thijs Weenk
on 26 Aug 08I designed and built this for a friend of mine: www.1meter98.com. Big pictures, client testimonials, keywords for projects and nice URL’s. We’re still working on some little things to perfect it, like clickable images and cutting the amount of text on each projectsheet in half :) (them architects want to tell way to much details)
Mark
on 26 Aug 08Agreed.
http://www.c77studios.com/post/opportunities_missed_a_call_to_architectural_firms/
Benjy
on 26 Aug 08I couldn’t agree more! I’ve always loved architecture, but every time I see some shelter or design blog link to an architect’s site I detest the unwieldy navigation and gratuitous Flash.
Jason, are you looking to hire an architect? You should offer to trade his services for a 37Signals designed website! Or is the next 37S product going to be a portfolio tool for creatives & design pros to showcase their work… Arts&Crafts?
Dan
on 26 Aug 08I think Foster + Partners have done a good job; the pics start off nice and big, but if you go full screen they resize up to go with you. Designed with widescreen displays in mind, too… welcome to the 21st century! Alas, if only they could design buildings that lived up to the promise: I’ve just moved out of one of their apartment blocks that I found appalling to live in, but that’s another story…
mahalie
on 26 Aug 08I’ve worked in the AEC industry my entire adult life and as both freelancer and inhouse designer have some real horror stories…this post was so cathartic for me.
As the previous commenter noticed most of the links posted were examples of what the article complains about…full screen flash takovers, tiny thumbnails, circa 1998 design. Yipes! I compiled a few that stood out to me:
Omniplan.com jlcg.pt
rees.com particularly delivers wow factor with big photos and trasitions without crazy or slow loading flash although I finding projects was a little hard. Excellent job!
dennajones.com seems to just use a blog and flickr for her site to great effect. Nice low maintenance solution for a single consultant.
1meter98.com was so refreshing, what these other sites should be. Even though it’s not in English it was easy to find projects and delivered big clear images.
My addition: OSKAarchitects.com hasn’t been mentioned yet and is one of the few architecture firms in my area to ditch flash (they used to have the ‘cool’ screen takover flash site…apparently they are stying ahead of the curve). They allow you to enlargen images, which launches a modal slideshow.
I’m in the middle of a redesign project at my firm, which shall remain unnamed for the moment as our Y2K all flash design is still up. Fortunately we have some great leadership at the firm and as the inhouse web developer I’ve been advocating web standards for a couple of years. I even made them sit through a meeting once where we visited a whole bunch of flash sites and made sure they weren’t in my cache. Our CEO cried out “No more flash!!!”...ah yes.
Another tip for you web standards folks…architects are very aware of designing for accessibility in their buildings and this makes an obvious translation to the web – I start there and continue on about SEO. Then mention they don’t want “gimmicks” getting in the way of the important stuff – their buildings.
So, our new site will launch in October…we hired BlueFlavor! I’m so thrilled. Large images, no splash pages, flash only for video…I promise :)
Ken
on 26 Aug 08We have the flash opening, but don’t takeover the screen and the viewer is only two clicks away from the portfolio. The image load times could be better, but you are always balancing load time versus quality of the image. It’s not uncommon for clients or other interested parties to clip the image from the website and use in presentations, so it’s always a compromise.
I agree that most architect websites are poorly designed. Then again, as an urban planner in addition to being a licensed architect, I think most of their buildings are poorly designed, as well. One thing that web designers know that architects have trouble with is user friendliness. Top web designers obsess over the UI whereas architects obsess over the form.
The reason being is that the architects that come up with something fresh and new will get published, hopefully gain notoriety, and then get the best commissions. That is the preferred career path of many a young Roark in training. Don’t believe me? Check out Architecture School at hulu.com. Listen to what the client wants and what the people on the street want then contrast that with what the professors ask of the students and what they design. There’s a complete disconnect.
This not only pervades the built environment but everything they touch, including their websites.
Nick
on 26 Aug 08http://www.simpers.com/
Jonathan
on 26 Aug 08We actually did the OSKAarchitects site, check out another one we’ve done: Kendall Heaton
Nathan
on 26 Aug 08Ironically, just finished an architectural firm’s site: http://urbanvision.cc
Weird thing is that it’s always a pain to get photos or images of the architect’s work…
Phillip
on 26 Aug 08We did work for an architectural firm in our building once.
http://www.3dgllc.com/
Lee Semel
on 26 Aug 08Just because you work in some other area of design doesn’t mean you can design a website. I’ve noticed other creative professionals (painters, illustrators, animators, to name a few) can’t design websites either.
Kevin Deneault
on 26 Aug 08This one is not bad: http://www.nathangoodarchitect.com/index.htm
Tommaso
on 26 Aug 08This is an italian architecture website: europaconcorsi.com
Chris Peak
on 26 Aug 08http://www.rebeccalow.co.uk/aglow.html
I cant find the actual site, but here is the designers page for the project. I love the simplistic site.
Loic
on 26 Aug 08A favourite of mine www.hassell.com.au
jeff white
on 26 Aug 08We work with a well known modernist Canadian architect on a site that they designed in-house. There wasn’t any convincing them that Flash wasn’t the best choice for their site. So, we built it for them, in Flash, but used content replacement techniques to allow for direct linking to individual pages, readable content and search engine indexable text. I’m pleased with how well the site works, and the client has received a great deal of positive feedback on it, and it’s not a bad looking/functioning site in the end. They were big fans of the Shim Sutcliffe site someone else had posted.
Architects have this great way of looking at things, and I generally admire their perspective and drive when it comes to rationalizing their vision. Many designers could learn a great deal from architects.
As a sidenote, we are also having a house designed by another architect, and I’ve put together a quick blog to chronicle the process. Hopefully you’ll enjoy it and may it provide some insight into your own process, Jason.
BuildingTheWhiteHouse.com
jeti
on 26 Aug 08cool!
John
on 26 Aug 08Local architecture firm we share our studio with:
Herbert + Mason www.herbertmason.com
Tomasz (Tomek) Zemla
on 26 Aug 08I built this site for a friend, architect: www.cleinge.com, the idea was to just showcase the work in the simplest way possible and forget the rest…
Zach
on 27 Aug 08Its still fantastically easy to make a site like this in comparison to other fields. You’ve got very little copy to collect, and mostly you let the pictures speak.
If they fail as an architect (I wouldn’t want to work for Art Vandalay… if he actually WERE an architect), then you’ve got a whole different problem.
Todd Webb
on 27 Aug 08http://www.mkd-arc.com/
Todd Webb
on 27 Aug 08Free Green http://www.freegreen.com
Michelle Kaufmann http://www.mkd-arc.com/
Slackmaster K
on 27 Aug 08Not to toot my own horn, but I’m a software architect… clicky
Tim Jahn
on 27 Aug 08I wonder if all the architects are pissed at people who have houses/buildings that look like they were built long ago. They should be. There’s some ugly houses out there.
Seems architects as a whole don’t understand and/or underestimate the value of a website regarding the promotion of their work.
Ben Richardson
on 27 Aug 08The guys who designed our office have a semi-decent site: http://www.watersheddesign.com.au/
Michel Ferreira
on 27 Aug 08I had the chance while working for my present employer to work on a couple of architecture and construction websites as an art director/ web designer.
You can check our work out at: BDI Development and RM Dalton.
On each of these we had completely different approaches, where one is a flash based website, that changes around to better show the portfolio and the images inside it’s different shaped bounding box, and the other is a xhtml/css site using lightboxes to better explore showing the images in the bigger size possible inside the page.
Adrien Husson
on 27 Aug 08I did Catherine Furet’s website a year and a half ago. Some of the aforementioned criticisms apply to it (small text in the sidebar) and I guess lightbox wasn’t the best option out there but overall, I hope it’s clear and usable enough.
http://catherine-furet-architecte.com/ [fr]
rafalski
on 27 Aug 08This is a good topic. I know quite a few architects, I did webdesign/development for some.
The thing with architects is that they are the experts on anything art/design/technology related.
If it has to do with computers – they’re your people. Who knows IT better than people who use software as advanced as CAD? If it’s engineering – they know it all. Painting? They could give Picasso a few tips. Abstract art – do you want a theory lecture or a hands on tutorial?. Music – you know what Pink Floyd majored in, right? Web usability? They do that to relax, while sharpening pencils for serious work.
When contracting a website, an architect made sure I understood they could’ve cracked it themselves and were about to, they just didn’t have the time.
They know everything about everything. Just deal with it.
Renda
on 27 Aug 08Try Interloop Architecture
Jordan
on 27 Aug 08I wouldn’t necessarily hold it up as a perfect example, and it’s not even an architecture firm’s site, but I really love what Wallpaper* magazine are doing with interactive floor plans in the architecture area of their site: New residence – Larisa, Greece.
They’re engaging, packed with information and begin to move in the kind of directions I’d love to see architects go on a regular basis. 3D plans without the flashiness of 3D interfaces.
Olli
on 27 Aug 08No Flash for London’s Metropolitan Workshop!
http://www.metwork.co.uk/
Erik
on 27 Aug 08LTL-RC
“Having known a good deal of architects, the linked article points the reason why – architects think they are at the top of the design pyramid. The fact that they took a graphic design class for a semester in university makes them think they know all there is to know.”
Just like web designers thinking that 3d technology is the best way to represent a project (which I have heard in several meetings from several firms). Just because you look at architecture and like or dislike it, doesn’t mean you understand it or how to represent it. I actually think this is the biggest problem. Two sets of designers that have overlapping designs…..not a good mix.
Architect: “OOOOHHH….flash looks awesome, let’s use it.”
Web Designer: ” OOOOHHH….3D models look awesome, let’s use it.”
Neither thought is universal, but it shows the disconnection. And believe it or not, architects aren’t the only ones with egos.
Besides, it doesn’t sound like you actually know too many architects. Just throwing out stereotypes.
Matt Braun
on 27 Aug 08A colleague of mine did this site for his father’s architecture firm in Toledo. There’s some (in my opinion) tasteful Flash, great photography, and the site degrades well. Worth a look: http://www.duketporter.com/
Prescher
on 27 Aug 08We recently did some work for an architecture firm with these problems exactly…everything in Flash, impossibly small thumbnails, nav that was constantly moving around, unreadable text that could not be re-sized. We just launched the new site that, we think, addressed the major issues.
Main goals were to clear the visual field in order to feature their work, minimize navigation while keeping it usable and making the entire thing manageable via CMS (they were paying stupid fees for simple text updates to their Flash site).
Lucien Lagrange Architects
David Kaneda
on 27 Aug 08My company, Dyad Communications, creates mostly flash websites for classical architects. I think it’s a great use for Flash, as it demonstrates their attention to detail and provides a luxurious, smooth experience.
David Kaneda
on 27 Aug 08We just finished a site for Peter Pennoyer Architects, in New York: http://www.ppapc.com/
Etienne
on 27 Aug 08Expertise in one field does not mean expertise in other fields whether they are related or not.
They may be thinking that because they can design buildings, they can design Websites. Common bias.
Pelle
on 27 Aug 08I made some functionality for a swedish architect firm that defies what you’re saying: Bergkrantz Arkitekter
Björn
on 27 Aug 08http://www.n59.se
Simon Collins
on 28 Aug 08Marcus Beale Architects – Clean, simple and easy to navigate
Bo P
on 28 Aug 08Our friends from B14 recently completed the site for one of the bigger arch firms here in DK (who also work intl.) How would you rate that: http://www.khr.dk
MS
on 29 Aug 08http://www.hjlyons.com
Mike
on 29 Aug 08check out this website, www.thedavisexperience.com it is actually a finalist for an Emmy award. no joke…maybe these guys should get out of architecture and do site design instead.
David
on 29 Aug 08Great site Mike, thanks for putting it up here. Why just show pics when you can entertain as well – and not one button to click. Kudos to Davis.
Kevin
on 29 Aug 08David I second your comment, and finally a site with sound that doesn’t make me immediately reach for my mute button… cool video and great sound track (sounds like my favorite playlist on my iPod).
Matt
on 29 Aug 08Very timely post Jason. As an architect managing the practice’s current website, we’re actually looking for someone to take us from 1998 (well, 2003 to be precise) into the present and produce a “portfolio dominant” site.
We’re after a web standards compliant, non-Flash (prefer AJAX, javascript), non-Microsoft, non-pop-up, non-browser resize dynamic website by someone who actually understands all the things that 37 Signals are on about. Coen + Partners is not too bad, the project pages of Carrilho da Graça are pretty good and Marcus’ Super Colossal is an interesting example of an architectural hybrid blog/portfolio site.
Appreciate it if anyone reading SvN can help me out or make some suggestions for shortlist?
Marcos Kuhns
on 29 Aug 08Just found Marks Barfield via CommandShift3. That’s a nice one!
Alan Holding
on 29 Aug 08Architects are not the only ones. I’m managing a website for a local literacy project for young people. We have a list of links to authors’ websites. Yipe!
DB
on 30 Aug 08Jason, get off your high horse. Don’t you guys get sick of posting pretentious know it all posts? Your simpleton views on how everyone should live their lives is incredible. Go back to building websites.
tv
on 01 Sep 08Try the danish arcitects; http://www.krydsrum.dk
This discussion is closed.