“Draw me some design options so I can choose ...”
I was led to the thought of this post by viewing a mountain of spam located in our corporate box. The letter of interest read - “Operational printing. Printing business cards in 1 hour. Designing business cards - 2 options for 500 rubles. " The idea was not yet completely ripe when our regular customer really surprised me by writing a letter asking for a couple more design options for his new site. And then I thought.
Often, customers at the stage of assessing the cost and terms of work are interested in - “how many design options will you give us?” And this applies to both sites and corporate identity. Of course, one could answer - we will provide 2-3 options, to which the customer satisfactorily nodded and signed the contract. Everyone would be happy. In fact, there are no problems. It is often difficult for studios to make 2-3 options, because there is a full-time designer on a salary, and it’s nice for the customer to give him the opportunity to choose what he needs. But no ... Some answer that they are developing a concept, an idea, and in the end a sketchy project - how to make the site both beautiful and convenient, and also to profitably and attractively present the products and services of the customer. But if you really think it through, you create such a sketchy project, what there can be 2-3-10 options? This is absurd. With this workflow, there is only one, but the most optimal option is one that, in the professional opinion of the developers, solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one. solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one. solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one.
Another important point - often one thoughtful layout at a cost is equal to several "to choose". Time labor costs in both cases are the same or differ slightly.
Customer opinion - at the same price I will get more and I can choose.
As a result of all this, clients often go to other studios, where they will draw a trial layout, and 2 more in addition - so that there is freedom of choice. But what are these layouts? What does it mean - several different layouts for a certain amount, and the rest for extra money? What is meant by “different” layouts?
But this is precisely the catch. The widespread phrase “different layouts” gives the developer enormous freedom of action - to provide several layouts that differ in the location of the logo, fonts and clipart picture. And the customer, who later realized the state of affairs, but has already given money for his “mountain” of layouts, has to choose the lesser of evils - the best layout. And to do something else - fundamentally different - costs money, and most likely, exactly 2 times higher than already given. Therefore, he agrees to what is. Disappointed on the site already in advance and tries not to think about wasted money.
Another option. The studio draws well, with average quality. Layouts are neat and tidy. Or, suppose, in the studio there are several designers and each, on the basis of a concept developed by the manager (or together with the manager) draw one layout each. They turn out different - after all, people are different, therefore their vision of the same things can be different. As a result, the studio provides the customer with several different options. From this possibility of choice, the customer's eyes run wide and instead of choosing one of the options and proceeding to the programming stage, the customer asks to refine one or the other option. After that, he doesn’t like anything, he is upset and asks to draw him more and more. And so on to infinity. Usually then the studio gets tired of the infinity of the process, tells the customer, that the following improvements for additional money. And he has to accept some kind of layout, which, perhaps, he does not like at all.
These are the sides of this wide choice.
Then, after all the trials of the first and second cases, the customer lives for a while with what he was painted, then he nevertheless remakes it with another studio and achieves the ideal result for him. And it happens that you need to go through more than one studio in order to achieve this most ideal result. And at the same time you have to overpay for a decision made earlier in favor of an illusory choice.
Therefore, it is necessary to clearly design the site before the layout is drawn. To draw a layout not according to the lengthy terms of reference - “so that it is beautiful, forms a positive image ... etc.”, but according to well-designed schemes, at least in Word. Page layouts and the concept of a site would be better developed by the manager together with the designer, one knows the needs of the customer for sure, the second knows how to visualize them profitably and “tasty”. It is advisable to approve all the sketches, intermediate ideas, and of course the main final scheme-project of the site from the customer. And after that, having a clear-cut project - to draw one, but normal and, most importantly, the customer’s version of the site, which then will bring him customers and profit. After which he will say “thank you”. Otherwise, for the possibility of a wide selection of "mean" will always be "pays twice."
Often, customers at the stage of assessing the cost and terms of work are interested in - “how many design options will you give us?” And this applies to both sites and corporate identity. Of course, one could answer - we will provide 2-3 options, to which the customer satisfactorily nodded and signed the contract. Everyone would be happy. In fact, there are no problems. It is often difficult for studios to make 2-3 options, because there is a full-time designer on a salary, and it’s nice for the customer to give him the opportunity to choose what he needs. But no ... Some answer that they are developing a concept, an idea, and in the end a sketchy project - how to make the site both beautiful and convenient, and also to profitably and attractively present the products and services of the customer. But if you really think it through, you create such a sketchy project, what there can be 2-3-10 options? This is absurd. With this workflow, there is only one, but the most optimal option is one that, in the professional opinion of the developers, solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one. solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one. solves all the tasks of representing the company on the network. There simply cannot be many such options ideologically. It is impossible for several months to develop a stream of ideas for one project - it is not profitable for the studio (huge labor costs for scanty money), for the customer (often it is limited in time). Even if the project budget is enormous - the studio will be engaged in only one site for half a year - then the “ideal idea” will still be one (most likely the initial one) - and the rest of the layouts are variations of this worked out one.
Another important point - often one thoughtful layout at a cost is equal to several "to choose". Time labor costs in both cases are the same or differ slightly.
Customer opinion - at the same price I will get more and I can choose.
As a result of all this, clients often go to other studios, where they will draw a trial layout, and 2 more in addition - so that there is freedom of choice. But what are these layouts? What does it mean - several different layouts for a certain amount, and the rest for extra money? What is meant by “different” layouts?
But this is precisely the catch. The widespread phrase “different layouts” gives the developer enormous freedom of action - to provide several layouts that differ in the location of the logo, fonts and clipart picture. And the customer, who later realized the state of affairs, but has already given money for his “mountain” of layouts, has to choose the lesser of evils - the best layout. And to do something else - fundamentally different - costs money, and most likely, exactly 2 times higher than already given. Therefore, he agrees to what is. Disappointed on the site already in advance and tries not to think about wasted money.
Another option. The studio draws well, with average quality. Layouts are neat and tidy. Or, suppose, in the studio there are several designers and each, on the basis of a concept developed by the manager (or together with the manager) draw one layout each. They turn out different - after all, people are different, therefore their vision of the same things can be different. As a result, the studio provides the customer with several different options. From this possibility of choice, the customer's eyes run wide and instead of choosing one of the options and proceeding to the programming stage, the customer asks to refine one or the other option. After that, he doesn’t like anything, he is upset and asks to draw him more and more. And so on to infinity. Usually then the studio gets tired of the infinity of the process, tells the customer, that the following improvements for additional money. And he has to accept some kind of layout, which, perhaps, he does not like at all.
These are the sides of this wide choice.
Then, after all the trials of the first and second cases, the customer lives for a while with what he was painted, then he nevertheless remakes it with another studio and achieves the ideal result for him. And it happens that you need to go through more than one studio in order to achieve this most ideal result. And at the same time you have to overpay for a decision made earlier in favor of an illusory choice.
Therefore, it is necessary to clearly design the site before the layout is drawn. To draw a layout not according to the lengthy terms of reference - “so that it is beautiful, forms a positive image ... etc.”, but according to well-designed schemes, at least in Word. Page layouts and the concept of a site would be better developed by the manager together with the designer, one knows the needs of the customer for sure, the second knows how to visualize them profitably and “tasty”. It is advisable to approve all the sketches, intermediate ideas, and of course the main final scheme-project of the site from the customer. And after that, having a clear-cut project - to draw one, but normal and, most importantly, the customer’s version of the site, which then will bring him customers and profit. After which he will say “thank you”. Otherwise, for the possibility of a wide selection of "mean" will always be "pays twice."