III. Brown + Storey Architects Inc.

III. Brown + Storey Architects Inc.
http://www.brownandstorey.com/

Navigation:
Graphically, the home page of the website is really pleasing; however, it is hard to navigate around. There are 8 different categories. The only sense of hierarchy is the different font sizes and colors. Especially, when the cursor moves across the different tabs, there is no obvious visual difference or switch of finger icon. That is really confusing especially on the info bar; not just the word “info” will link to other page. It is the whole bar, but the images on the bar make people think it actually has several links. The page does not always keep the main tabs up on the top for backtracking. Instead, it only allows two small icons to go back and forth between pages, but I think it should be label at least “home” to clarify the use of the icon.

Architecture:
B+SA’s website does not seem consistent in the page design and the way it is structured and oriented. The architecture behind the site is not that organized. Even it tried to have an underlay of the structure behind the first home page; it does not help in its design and navigation. It has the usual tabs such as projects, publications, competitions and other related tabs; however, each has different color and fonts and size. Graphically, this is really distracting to navigate around the site and it makes the architecture of the site seem over decorated rather than a design discursive application.

Content / Typography:
Different tone of orange color fonts and their font size are the key elements that create the hierarchy in the website. Other than that, nothing is really that prominent. The first glance of the website, it gives a really pleasing impression; however, it does not consist. “Info” tab bring to different kind of design page, which is really different from the home page. That even includes the color scheme of the site. Other tabs on the home page links to total different design pages, which feels like in other website. The only consistent icon throughout the pages is the title of the firm. Although each tab does not direct you to the exact information page, it is not that clear in terms of an obvious switch between a text oriented page and an image oriented page. The content is present, yet not designed to be visually satisfying and navigating. I also realize the “back” tab does not work There is no way to go back to the previous page. Also there is not “home” tab that allow people to go back to navigate other categories..

Grid / Structure:
The structure and the color of the site stay consistent. The consistence of the pages allows people to navigate around the site without any questions. The website to promote an architecture firm; therefore, the focal point of the page always on images that is how people understand the projects, the style of the company, and the ability of the firm.

Iconography / Imagery:
Overall, the entire website stays consistent on two different grid structures, but with many different color scheme. Home and info page have same layout and all other categories follow another layout. Under the two layouts, each page is obviously related to the previous page and it would be read as a whole cohesive website. Architecture is a visually oriented field; therefore, the focus of each page is obviously an image. As other architecture website, there are a lot of images to see and understand projects on this website. In this website, the images are all present on the left banner for people to select. A good thing that I see on this website that I have not seemed on others yet is the “text” function. I like how it is oriented on the side that allows people to click on it when needed not a small pop out box. In general, the website is too scattered and not organized in hierarchy and lacks a focal point. Everything seems to be equally important and weighs similar important value.

Color Palette:
B+SA’ website seems to be pretty consistent with the color use at a first glance. However, different tone of orange color does not continue throughout the whole navigation experience. However, the colors do speak a language of subtle and well-experienced. I think they might try to show the complexities of the firm; however, it fails to represent true design intelligence and innovation through web design. All the additional color of the sub-categories pages does not help with understanding projects. If the point of the color change is to emphasis the difference, maybe it should not be done in contrast color. Maybe that is the style or follows company philosophy, but it is not my style.

Site Focus:
The purpose of the website is obvious introducing the office and its design philosophy as architects. It brings a certain degree of publicity and also tells a story about the office in general. It contains basic information about the firm and the projects. The website supposes to represent the company; however, the site is just not a well-designed, at least from an emergent or contemporary point of view. It speaks experience, yet lacks modernization and ambition and creativity. The unorganized website is hard to attract any potential client and future architects to look for job. People would not buy the product from an unorganized firm. Maybe the website should be update with the newest design with certain level of consistence and organization.