questions about this site

two honest questions: 1) why is this website so ugly and visually unsophisticated, especially considering the subject matter, and 2) why is the "u" in the word styleforum masthead red while the rest of the letters black—what is the purpose? thanks! don't get me wrong, i find the content interesting for the most part and that's the important thing, but man, it's 2011.

Thanks for the comments. I will message those folks you all mentioned.

To clarify from my last post,

I, too, dislike blue gradients, distracting animations, flash, and eye candy. I am not a fan of "web 2.0" stuff at all. I call that bubble gum design and I'm not into it. I have more a swiss typography, minimalist, modern, clean, kind of eye. When I place something on the page or screen, I try to do so to help tell a story, aid in navigation, aid in understanding, etc. It needs to have a purpose. I typically dislike things that "have the look of meaning" but are really just there filling space as decoration.

(For the record, I am a graphic designer working in San Francisco; maybe I am being hyper sensitive to the visual identity of this site and forum, but I just think things can be stepped up a notch or two.)

And also, I have no problems with the colors. I love shades of grey and burgundy/maroon/brick red. I don't think the site should be "visually enhanced" the way you all are referring to. I just think that the site, as it stands now, is visually clunky, cluttered, outdated, default, unsophisticated. It is in opposition to a lot of the content, style advice, brands, etc that people discuss on the site. I actually think that a lot of the visual "stuff" (lines, boxes, boxes within boxes within boxes) scattered all over the pages can be removed, rethought, etc while not losing any of the content, but aiding in clarity. Reduce the visual clutter.

I don't mean to detract from the great job the admins have done with making sure all goes smoothly here. A lot of hard work goes into this site, I know, so I don't mean to take anything away from those efforts and those individuals. And I know a visual refresh is a lot of work. I do indeed know.

I just think that the way things are presented could be handled a little more deftly. A touch more elegantly. Take a look at Site Inspire, and all of the sites that it features, for example. Different content and information hierarchy, I know, but I really think styleforum can evolve to feel cleaner along these lines. Also check out Dowling Duncan and Mike McQuade. Even Chair Free Chicago.

I would love to see styleforum's 11 primary categories ("buying and selling", "streetwear and denim", etc) be treated in this modular way, where each category gets its own square/block/module on the main page. Perhaps when the visitor rolls over a particular category, the latest post info shows (similar to how it works on the Dowling Duncan site). Then when they click to visit that category, they are presented with a well thought out list of posts and supporting information. Again, no information would be lost. It would just be handled with more nuance, and I think better reflect the taste of many of the forum members.

Anyway, I wanted to write up a slightly longer reply as a way to clarify from my first post. Sorry for being a bit vague with that. And thanks again for the names of the people in charge.

I don't know, does anyone else see where I'm coming from, or does everyone either not care, or really enjoy what's happening right now visually?

Thanks!

Justin

Great, thanks all.