From my own experience, I guess you can categorise the web site design process into two sections: the style process that doesn't use a mockup tools
, and also the one which does. Being previously on both sides with this fence, We've an awareness of how those two processes work and even though designing without having a wireframe really does work, I'd personally ought to vote in preference of them.
Wireframing, the development of a "visual blueprint", doesn't need to be overly complicated. At the most elementary, I have seen wireframes which can be are simply compilation of post-it notes with all the user interface (UI) elements utilized them. They are then placed onto a small note to demonstrate the structural layout. Match it up with to wireframes produced through design software and you may view a better refined wireframe over the latter, but no matter how you would like to you could make your structural model, it's wise always exactly the same. The bottomline is, it shows yourself, the consumer or any other party where things will likely be on the page.
This is sometimes a realtime saver if you are making a website for the client. Rediscovering the reassurance of my days of due to being on "side A" from the fence, when to become a website for any client I never used to execute any wireframing process in the past. The full process contained: gathering requirements, spec'ing out the website, creating the graphical UI then building the site when the design had been agreed. The most important flaw I discovered within this process is the possibility of the consumer wanting to change the main layout quite considerably. I'd have no problem if they only want to tweak things every now and then e.g. colours, make text larger, start being active . more images in some places, increase the risk for video somewhat bigger (the usual stuff); but it was a ton more painful when they then desire to move unique about around the page that directly affected the "page template". Jumping onto "side B" in the fence and producing the wired layout for that site ensures that layout can be agreed beforehand in the knowledge that when the UI design is presented, you could possibly then only need to update the standard stuff.
Being forced to Spell it out for Clients
Even if presenting a wireframe with a client though, I have had occasions where they'd be hesitant to sign this part off because who's looks very "blocky" and "plain". "Yes it does" could be my immediate solution to this as these blocks will determine where we will put things on your lovely page to ensure that when you return to me afterwards once you have reviewed the graphical design, you can not then notify me why is the navigation up here and never over there? Keep in mind that, I have had clients this way before so even though producing a wireframe, there might be occasions when you continue to must spell it out that this is purely to get the layout correct first of all, then we'll make use of the pretty little bit to it afterwards.
A collection of Design Software
You don't need to necessarily know your way around Adobe software to be able to produce some decent wireframes. I use an online tool, Cacoo, to create mine. This online software lets you drag and drop pre-created elements onto your page. This may save lots of time along the way.?
As with everything web related, everyone may have their very own opinion on this topic, but my very own preference is to apply a wireframe each time I'm designing a website. Whether or not it's for the client or my own, personal site, regardless of because it ensures that the UI design is increased because you're effectively working coming from a template.
If you find yourself focusing on a project for a client, then aiming to have Joe Bloggs sign from the wires before you begin for the UI is a part of this design method that I'd personally call important making sure that you maintain good budget and personal time management on the project.