Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Designers read this and developers will love you

photoshopetiquette.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#61

Post by talmand »

kamjam wrote: post #29
_johnny wrote: 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…

I don't find it shocking at all. That's what groups are for. Unless there are dozens of layers then a proper group name is all you really need. It's inefficient to name every layer of a group when there's only a handful of layers. Especially when sometimes the thumbnail of the layer gives an indication of the contents.

Look at it in terms of arrays; sometimes you use an associative array and sometimes you just go with simple index numbering.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#62

Post by twfarland »

feverishaaron wrote: post #46
jaysonelliot wrote: post #21

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.…

Note to interested developers... there is a HUGE market for a disruptive tool in this space. If anyone is interested in working on such a tool, I'm game. This is a constant frustration for web designers. Photoshop allows you to create fantastic visual effects, but the layout tools are abysmal. Fireworks is well... Fireworks – Adobe's "redheaded stepchild" in the tool chain. It's buggy with a slow, horrible UI. While…

Check this first: http://www.pixelmator.com/ - works like a lighter/prettier Fireworks, currently only 30 bucks, and no annoying licensing thingy. Mac-only, but most designers are on mac anyway.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#63

Post by gnaritas »

_johnny wrote: post #54
gnaritas wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Graphics rich designs that don't come with the markup, aren't beautiful. Any designer that can't code his own markup isn't a designer worth having, and certainly isn't a web designer. He's a print designer who doesn't know he's obsolete. If you can't build me a complete cross browser HTML template, a skin, for a website, you aren't a web designer. That means you must know HTML, CSS, browser idiosyncrocies, and possib…

> If you can't build me a complete cross browser HTML template, a skin, for a website, you aren't a web designer. If you've found such people - great. In places I've worked it was different. And designers did exceptionally beautiful things which I really appreciate. I'm proud that I've worked with them, even if they left some mess to be cleaned. There is some knowledge and experience needed in dealing with IE6, havin…

Hate to tell you bub, but none of that is coding. It's all simple markup, and a designer that can't do his own markup just isn't qualified, there are far too many available candidates that can to even bother talking to one who can't.

If all someone knows is making pretty images in photoshop, they simply aren't web designers, they're print designers who dabble in the web, amateurs.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#64

Post by tedmiston »

nmcfarl wrote: post #36

I like the content - but not the tone - it’s just a bit too snarky to send to a designer that you have to work with. Particularly if she’s getting much of it right - and you’ve clashed over this stuff before.

I started to bookmark it because of the idea, but once I started reading the descriptions, I cannot agree more. I would be offended if someone sent this to me.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#65

Post by tedmiston »

kapowaz wrote: post #14
bricestacey wrote: post #13

Can anyone expand on layer comps? Is this something that our designer can use to show different states? E.g. A list with items / a list without items (rather than 2 layer groups)

In a nutshell a layer comp is a saved state for your layers. It can include any/all of: visibility, position and layer style. A combination of these should let you create alternative views for practically any sets of states provided the original layers give you what you need. For example, a navigation interface, complete with hover and selected states can be all done with the same text and icons (say) if you have a v…

That's a good description. Layer comps are one of the most underutilized PS features IMO.

I've used them myself to design alternative navigation styles for a site. For example, since the bulk of the site is the same, I managed a sample horizontal navigation in one layer group and a vertical navigation in a separate layer group. Layer comps allow you to progress on these simultaneously.

I've also used them as "snapshot" states before if I'm trying something experimental. It's a faster way to rollback than a chain of undos, etc.

Re: Designers read this and developers will love you

#66

Post by _johnny »

gnaritas wrote: post #63
_johnny wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't build me a complete cross browser HTML template, a skin, for a website, you aren't a web designer. If you've found such people - great. In places I've worked it was different. And designers did exceptionally beautiful things which I really appreciate. I'm proud that I've worked with them, even if they left some mess to be cleaned. There is some knowledge and experience needed in dealing with IE6, havin…

Hate to tell you bub, but none of that is coding. It's all simple markup, and a designer that can't do his own markup just isn't qualified, there are far too many available candidates that can to even bother talking to one who can't. If all someone knows is making pretty images in photoshop, they simply aren't web designers, they're print designers who dabble in the web, amateurs.

> they're print designers who dabble in the web, amateurs

They're print designers but definitely not amateurs.

In the end, what really matters is that the client receives very high quality work and it is cost effective for the company. I understand that not every company works this way, but I have worked for and know some that do exactly this.

I don't really want to discuss it anymore, I feel we're repeating the same arguments over and over.

Post reply on HN