Behind the New SPD Website
A couple of years ago we launched the BUILD LLC website; it was updated with all of our latest projects, a new format, and a different philosophy of website design. Since then, we’ve had a decent amount of time to watch the site, track the metrics, and determine its effectiveness on our business. This scrutiny has led to some important discoveries on the nature of website design in relation to an architecture practice; here are our top 5 ingredients of a great website for architects:
1. The site shouldn’t be designed for “architecture”; it should be designed for photographs. Maybe the photographs are of architecture, design, furniture or whatever else, but the basic building block of the website is the photograph. As basic as this sounds, it’s a different filter to put on that allows you to understand website design with better clarity.
2. Big, inspiring images are more important than text. Naturally you need to include a bit of explanation with each project, but it’s rarely the text that gets people inspired to pick up the phone and call us, meanwhile the images are almost always praised by new clients. Don’t let the text get in the way of a good photo.
3. A simple, clear interface is essential. We’re always amazed at how often architects try and re-invent website interface design (stick to doing architecture!)
4. Being able to update the website ourselves is key. As architects and builders, having control over the final product is very important to us –we can’t imagine sending a bunch of files to a website tech to manage the updates for us. We like to turn those dials ourselves.
5. It’s got to be cost-effective. Our social media extensions need to reflect our own values with architecture and design.
The BUILD LLC website has been doing quite well, meeting the criteria above and bringing in a ton of new business. So when we looked at recently launching a website for our cabinet and furniture shop, Special Projects Division, it was a no-brainer to go the same route. We called up our friends at liveBooks and they got crackin on a template site for SPD. We’re big fans of website templates because they standardize interface design and allow the architect to make updates without having to learn ridiculously complex code.
The challenge with the new SPD website was to present both the cabinet series as well as all of the furniture pieces we design and build –two very different avenues of the cabinet shop. At the same time the technicalities need to be covered as well as additional categories that handle press, contact info and all that good stuff. The template we chose uses a set of simple rules that remain the same throughout the entire experience; a consistent navigation at the header, wide photos at the top and text blocks on the bottom -simple and straight-forward. Navigation titles that handle a variety of categories have pull downs to keep the basic navigation clean and unencumbered.
Websites should be inspiring, simple to navigate and up to date with current work. All too often we see architects defeated by their own design instinct to either over-design or re-invent website interface -leaving them with clunky websites that rarely get updated.
In our continuing effort to save the world from ugly and be transparent at the same time, we thought we’d get some good resources out there –the resources that have worked well for us. If you’re looking for some solid website guidance, give the hardworking folks over at liveBooks a shout. For sleek, effective branding and logo design look up Bill Reilly Design. And for some serious photography skills, check out our resource list for architectural photographers.
Cheers from team BUILD
11 Comments
Other Links to this Post
-
Build Blog » Behind the New SPD Website | that said… — July 13, 2011 @ 5:46 am
By Mitchell, July 8, 2011 @ 8:32 am
Had several conversations about this very subject lately. I agree on all fronts. There’s nothing worse than an Architecture office’s website that’s overly complicated with flash flying everywhere. Shouldn’t have to duck for cover just to see some work.
Maybe throw in a fancy splash page, but from there I want to go straight to the work and see some nice big images that clearly present the projects with info to follow. After that I like to read about the office, philosophy, experience, people, etc.
Your website works for me as those are presented in the menu in order of importance from left to right with the blog integrated (haven’t figured that one out logistically yet myself) at the end for people to jump in further and follow along in the daily action.
By Richter, July 8, 2011 @ 2:32 pm
It drives me nuts to see architectural websites that clearly haven’t been updated in years. All too often architects think about web design like they would a book -static instead of dynamic. Thanks for sharing your behind the scenes thinking with your tight new site.
By Gus, July 8, 2011 @ 2:34 pm
Congrats on the new site guys. I love the cleanliness and wide images.
By Shawn Busse, July 8, 2011 @ 4:42 pm
I’d echo some of the comments here, as well as Build’s “top 5″ astute observations. It’s incredible the number of bad sites built by architects. I also think many professional service companies underestimate the power of “conversation” – something Build has also mastered.
I was wondering about the decision to go with a Flash-enabled website. It seems that with the ubiquity of the iphone/ipad (no flash support), and the ease of building things like HTML-based front page banners, the new site is leaning pretty heavily on an obsolete technology. Was this ever brought up for debate?
My other question relates around the concept of DIY vs. hiring a professional. I’ve seen Build use professionals in other arenas (photography, for example) but other instances, have gone the “in house” route. As architects, I’m sure they’d argue for the value in hiring a professional who understands buildings…so why not apply that same philosophy to “building” a website?
By Build LLC, July 11, 2011 @ 7:49 am
@Shawn -Thanks for the kudos and great questions.
We gave quite a bit of thought to the flash vs. html format issues. The tipping point for us was that liveBooks mirrors each flash site with an html site that works nicely with the iPhone/iPad/iEverything.
As far as DIY sites -we built our first website in-house and it worked well for us for nearly a decade. But it had limitations and glitches that were beyond our knowledge of the internets, SEO and general html code. With the new site, it’s nice to know that all of those factors are being taken care of by people who know websites as well as we know architecture.
By Shawn Busse, July 11, 2011 @ 8:47 am
I had a chance to check out the mobile version this weekend – great alternative for the iphoners of the world. I’m glad Livebooks answered that question for you guys.
I’ve been mulling my original question of DIY vs pro over the weekend…I think you’ve struck a really nice balance. Total DIY is a big headache, while hiring a web firm to build something from scratch is a big investment for a small business. The “quasi-custom” solution you’re using is a great blend of price, flexibility, and speed. Using a company like LiveBooks enables you to get the site up for a very reasonable price point (I assume) without the headaches of doing it yourself or hiring a web freelancer fresh out of school (I’ve seen that mistake too).
Cheers and keep up the good work!
By Build LLC, July 11, 2011 @ 9:07 am
@Shawn – exactly, we didn’t see the merits of reinventing the wheel in this area of design. The cost-effective templates that liveBooks offers are like buying a streamlined mid-century modern case study home.
By tylerv, July 11, 2011 @ 10:37 am
As a web developer and reader of this blog, I would encourage anyone looking for a new website to go local and find out if any of the work is outsourced. There are many talented companies in every city (esp Seattle), and buying local is a good thing.
Getting a good web firm is alot like finding a good architect, so I encourage you to turn the table.
By tylerv, July 11, 2011 @ 10:49 am
Problem:
For a small business, is it worth the risk of $5-$15k on a new, custom website? What if, in the end, it really isn’t that satisfactory? Is it worth the money?
My case- I am a professional web developer with a decent but limited income and I am on the fence as to hire an architect for some kitchen / master bedroom remodeling at my house. Is it really worth it for me to hire a professional? I’d really like to, I can say that. And of course I want talent, knowledge, and a deal in one. I’m just offering what I consider to be the reverse perspective.
It really takes both parties, as you know, to make something nice come together.
P.S. Any architects in the Eugene area here?
By archaalto, July 11, 2011 @ 1:30 pm
along with the text comment–when there is a text on a arch website, it is easier to read by being slightly larger than “print size”. for me, looking at stunning, large high-res images and then having to lean forward and squint to see the text leads to a kind of “website fatigue” [possibly similar to museum fatigue?]. there is a fine line however, to avoid making the text unnecessarily large…