Live data from Hacker News

Designers read this and developers will love you

photoshopetiquette.com

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#31

I love this manifesto. BUT. This reminds me of a problem I've pondered for a long time now, without coming up with an answer. Why are web pages designed with Photoshop in the first place? Photoshop was never meant to be used for web design, any more than Visio was meant to make wireframes. It's simply the best tool available for the job, and requires a lot of workarounds and good behavior on the part of the designer.…

I would love for this hypothetical tool to exist, but the problem doesn't lie with the tool, but that you're talking about essentially different workflows. Designers tend to use the tools that they're most familiar with, that give them what they need. Usually that means Illustrator + Photoshop (or sometimes, Fireworks).

I've given thought in the past to a hypothetical tool that I'd love to see that does a lot of what Photoshop does. It would use a nested plaintext file structure, letting it work with a version control tool (imagine being able to diff two PSDs and know that all that changed was a label value, or a single layer being removed, rather than it being a completely opaque binary change?). It would effectively provide direct access to the advanced features of CSS, only with a nicer UI. It could be built to allow testing responsive layouts all within a single document. All this and more. It'd be great.

But designers wouldn't want to use it. It wouldn't be grounded in their essentially visual workflow. Sure, you could have intermediaries translate documents between the visual and the quasi-layout-based, but that's even more work than just having designers adopt better practices. What's more, these practices don't just benefit developers: it'll make life easier for designers too! That's what makes it such a no-brainer. Sure, some lazy or precious designers might object to being told how to do their job (nobody appreciates being told they're doing things wrong), but if you introduce these practices gently I'm sure they'll pay off.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#32

A quick win: Instead of Photoshop, which is overkill for web graphics, use Fireworks or Pixelmator.

Absolutely agree. Initiative should be software agnostic. Currently it looks like "Use separate css file instead of inline styles to control you table layout and developers will love you". Also, who gives developers PSD files anyway?

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#33
These are basically the same things that make good code.

• Organising files = project structure

• Resource & layer naming = variable naming

• Using templates & sharing common elements = DRY

• Keeping vectors when rasterising = keeping source code when compiling

• Minimising filters, blending modes, colour overlays, etc. = KISS

• Grid = idioms and “design patterns”

• Understanding licensing = understanding licensing

• Proofreading = code review

• Browser compatibility = platform compatibility

• Conservation of file sizes = consideration of performance

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#34
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think a lot of people are still slicing up photoshop mockups? At least I hope not as the need for it should be fairly limited with CSS3.

Sorry, I'm not very proficient with CSS3 yet – you can create drop shadows along the free form outline of png images?

Well you can't create PNG images with free form outline I'm afraid (if I'm understanding you correctly, you're talking about ignoring the transparant parts of a png right?) so that won't be possible, the drop shadow would just wrap around the actual outlines. Although it is possible to apply a border radius to your png and add a drop shadow to those, so rounded corners or circle pictures should work.

But yes, if you have actual free form outlines you would want to shade you'll have to resort to adding them to the PNG, but for most elements we can use CSS.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#35
post #24

I know this isn't the gospel and there is no right/wrong way to hand the files to the developers, but I was wondering if anyone else slice up all the images and organize them before handing it off to their developers? Especially when drop shadows for images/png are involved, I tend to slice it all myself for pixel perfection and organize into appropriately file names for the developers.

I don't think a lot of people are still slicing up photoshop mockups? At least I hope not as the need for it should be fairly limited with CSS3.

In practice much of those go away with -- we need to support ie7 (or even ie8).

Sadly.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#37

I love this manifesto. BUT. This reminds me of a problem I've pondered for a long time now, without coming up with an answer. Why are web pages designed with Photoshop in the first place? Photoshop was never meant to be used for web design, any more than Visio was meant to make wireframes. It's simply the best tool available for the job, and requires a lot of workarounds and good behavior on the part of the designer.…

I'll take a stab at this.

The best tool, that I am aware of, that is along the lines of what you describe is Fireworks. But Photoshop is more common simply because for the longest time it was far easier to obtain Photoshop than Fireworks in a suite from Adobe. For instance, right now there are five different Creative Suites and a version of Photoshop is in every one. Fireworks is in three. Therefore, in a big enough company with various people with various production needs you could assume that everyone has Photoshop. Thus, trading files in PSD is the norm. Also, I'm willing to bet most schools have a course in Photoshop but not in Fireworks.

Plus Fireworks didn't come into it's own as a HTML and prototyping tool until recently, I don't remember the version. These days it's a wonderful tool to design graphics for just about any device and I highly recommend it. But if you've been using Photoshop expect a slight learning curve since it is different.

Do I use Fireworks? Nope, much for the reasons stated above.

Does Fireworks address the developer part you mentioned? Possibly not, it just depends. Mainly because you don't really "code" in Fireworks. I'm not aware of any tool that allows a designer to create graphics and a developer to code for the same project. Usually that's broken up between software packages with different expectations, feature sets, and goals.

Now, a software tool that allowed designers to design and coders to code in the same file that outputted valid HTML (maybe even some server-side code) would be interesting. But I think it would just generate new issues to work out as opposed to solving current workflow problems.

I think it would be better for designers to learn HTML and CSS, the basics at least. Of course in my experience the same could be said of server-side developers. As a front-end developer I'm constantly amazed at the oddities I see being stuck in the middle of the design/front-end/server-side dynamic. But sometimes it makes things fun.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#38
post #35
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think a lot of people are still slicing up photoshop mockups? At least I hope not as the need for it should be fairly limited with CSS3.

In practice much of those go away with -- we need to support ie7 (or even ie8). Sadly.

css3pie[0] fixes most of that!

[0]http://css3pie.com/

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#39
post #29
post #3

I'm a frontend developer and I think some of these expectations make little sense. Giving a name to every layer is a lot of work and I don't care about it that much. I'll do my work with layers like "Layer 0 copy copy" as long as they're grouped. Having designer rename all the layers is a lot of work that would be better spent creatively. (Does your boss want to pay the designer for it?) Another example: "#34 Be fami…

I'll do my work with layers like "Layer 0 copy copy" as long as they're grouped. That's shocking. That's like me as a developer naming my variables var1, var2, var3 etc. I'll get shot if I did that and would rightly do the same to anyone else that did that. I do some Photoshop work, mainly for personal purposes and naming those layers makes it easier for me when I need to revisit those files. Stop thinking here and n…

It's different than code. First of all, if the designer gets the job done without renaming layers, then it's his business. (In my experience, a lot of them don't need to name layers). Unless he hands over the design to someone else. I'm not sure how often it happens. Code is very often handed to different people. I doubt graphics need the same level of maintainability.

But anyway, that's a thing between designers, and we're talking about designer vs. developers.

The other difference is that in Photoshop you can easily find layer by using Move tool and CMD+clicking on the picture. And you can find text layers with Text tool.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#40
post #5
post #3

I'm a frontend developer and I think some of these expectations make little sense. Giving a name to every layer is a lot of work and I don't care about it that much. I'll do my work with layers like "Layer 0 copy copy" as long as they're grouped. Having designer rename all the layers is a lot of work that would be better spent creatively. (Does your boss want to pay the designer for it?) Another example: "#34 Be fami…

"this is just your, developer's job" Shockingly, it's not. Most places I know of are moving away from a the designer and frontend developer positions. It's a big cost savings, not just in salary but in cycle time as well. Our designer sends us his designs in HTML. There is no bickering over fonts, no pixel perfection, no stupid photoshop-isms -filters, drop shadows, embossing, etc. I'm pretty sure he doesn't even hav…

"If you're a web designer and you can't do this, it's time to learn. You're a theoretical web designer drawing pictures of websites."

I couldn't agree more. At this point, if you're still designing the same way you would for print (and honestly, most designers I've worked with still do), you are going to be replaced.

Post reply on HN