Another site I worked on has recently launched. ACM is the world’s largest scientific computing association with an international membership of over 90,000 professionals from the fields of computing and information technology. Communications of the ACM, the organization’s flagship monthly magazine, had recently undergone a significant change in its editorial model and print design. They were looking to redesign their website to reflect the brand and editorial content of their print magazine. The goal of the redesign was to deliver a range of high quality technology news, information, and resources, while providing new ways for current and prospective members to engage with the magazine and the association community.

This was a really fun design project. Working with the interactive agency, Digital Pulp, I designed the overall look and feel of the site. My contributions included, global design templates, navigation design, translating the print magazine identity to an online space as well as article page design and various site features.

As with any project, this design evolved over time. For example the navigation bar changed pretty dramatically from my initial designs. This is fairly common in the world of interactive design. Production design often takes on a life of its own. Maybe it’s a case of not enough room in the nav bar to accommodate growing site sections, or the client has chosen a different color scheme, or the marketing department needs additional promotional areas etc. I wonder what other designers have to say about this process. At what point do you decide that the design no longer reflects your vision? Compare my original mockup below with a screen shot of the live site. I would love to hear what others have to say about this.

Design mockup

Screenshot from live site

Tags: linkedin