God i hate this style.
Is this what they call Brutalism?
It's not for me, but I can't argue that it has personality.
To offer a more transparent/interactive rationale along these lines, I find that interfaces done in this style distract from the content rather than elevate it. The “quirkiness” is the main event. Having scrolled through it quickly, I find that my impression has nothing to do with what kind of work the designer does, but instead the fact that he likes weirdness for its own sake. An observation I’ve made over my career is that designers who do this kind of thing are often not very good at designing things that accomplish their purpose, because they’re too busy prioritizing novel distractions from the content.
All the feedback here shows me is that everyone on this site is super bitter, and not very open to new styles unless it's by a "pioneer"
So many people on this website could use a short course in graphic design to see that none of this is new, that just by labeling everything that doesn't look like your favorite website "brutalism" and "against "traditional" design (what the hell is this? We've seen design change so much in the last decade alone) makes you look like someone who would be a terrible designer to work under or have as a mentor because you think aesthetics have a right and wrong answer, as opposed to being a case by case basis, meant to fit the audience.
not very open to new styles
So many people on this website could use a short course in graphic design to see that none of this is new
Are you okay?
Different, new same shit, new for this site, as everything that even gets posted that slightly resembles this, gets foamy mouthed posters riled up.
Also traditional graphic design and this sort of design aren't technically the same thing.
But nice pull quote there.
Especially when my main point kinda was how is anyone to grow from feedback that's 90% "Ugh I hate blue, I don't like this style"
As a traditional graphic designer, this is is the main reason why I cant really mess with DN anymore. I have noticed theres a trend with the "SV/product design" scene and the general consensus of what is deemed "good" and it is so narrow. Everyone hails websites like Stripe etc but god forbid, if a portfolio doesn't look like a product designer landing we have seen 10000 times before, it's "bad" or "brutalist"...wtf.
This is leaning towards a brutalist aesthetic, but that doesn't mean it is bad.
Brutalist referred to architecture and feels a lot like a knee jerk reaction for the product design community to label more exploratory design like David Carons under a rigid label.
While architecture is a type of design, I don't think calling something more closely related to graphic design brutalist works.
Very little about this work even has much in common with brutalist architecture.
Wow everyone's a jerk. This is nice mate, i like the layout a lot.
Yeah, what's up with saying 'i hate this style' but not providing any feedback whatsoever? Why even make a comment like that..? You might not like it, but that's a matter of taste. Who here cares about your taste anyway? I like the layout as well. Curious to see the cases. Not sure why you would add these labels when there aren't any cases though. I'd just send them over to the website as you're doing now, but remove stuff like that. It confused me and some others here.
Because brutalism is basically a FU to traditional design principles.
How can anyone provide feedback to that?
- The font is too large: Brutalism
- The layout follows no grid: Brutalism
- I can't tell what's clickable: Brutalism
- The colours vibrate: Brutalism
The website of Bobby Giangeruso might have a trendy/contemporary design, but that doesn't make it so that can you categorise — and with that trivialize — the functional or visual aspect of it. Put bluntly, you're ridiculing the design based of a term which is popular. That doesn't give someone a free pass to bash someones work in an unconstructive way — or at least, that wouldn't be a way I want to work in a design team or in an online community of fellow designers.
-Something that doesn't determine whether a design is good or not (as wildly famous designs break the grid)
-Wow I can't instantly know everything about it, it must be bad
Yikes, you either have had a really bad day, or know nothing outside of webdesign and really really need to explore more and understand the roots and inspirations that inspired web deisign.
I'm pretty sure your mind would explode if you ever saw David Caron's work. Who made famous MAGAZINE LAYOUTS THAT DIDN'T FOLLOW A GRID.
There's more to design than websites, you guys should be applauding other applications of traditional graphic design being expressed on the web instead of being so damn sterile.
Well put, and I agree to some extent. My issue is - objectively, how do you critique or share your opinion on something that serves a purpose when brutalist techniques are applied?
A portfolio serves a function (this is who I am and I want you to work with me). Brutalism IMO hinders that . It's a double negative. I do believe a portfolio can also be art, only if it improves the overall design. Because based on the logic of brutalism what defines a good or a bad brutalistic portfolio? Surely they all can't be good?
And with magazines - I agree but that's because I see beauty in it. So I kinda want to say - Yea you're right, each to their own. But if Bobby doesn't land any clients is it really an effective portfolio?
when brutalist techniques are applied...
But if Bobby doesn't land any clients is it really an effective portfolio?
Cringe. Maybe Bobby isn't looking for clients. Maybe he is seeking the attention of recruiters at cool agencies that will in return pass it over to a creative director looking for a new designer on their team who "gets it".
For me, I want to work on lifestyle and fashion brands like Adidas, Nike etc. I wont get the job if my work looks like a bootstrap e-commerce website.
I dunno. I guess i'm just trying to say, it's just not black and white in terms of what design route to take and I think people on this site need to open up more.
Maybe Bobby isn't looking for clients.
You clearly didn't look at the website. Or his Twitter announcement.
My comment was a more general statement regarding knee jerk reactions to designs that are different than whats normaly posted here.
Says 'Hire Me' very big at the bottom and I don't use twitter but, ok cool.
If you think it's different from what's normally posted here, you must have missed the regular interval of postings with designs that look just like this from major companies. What's odd is that several people have non-praise reactions to it. Most likely because it's not from a major company that they worship.
I'm going to give honest critical feedback. This personal site would work better if it weren't attempting to be brutalist. Brutalist design isn't inherently bad. There's been some interesting brutalist work that's done some really interesting things. Your site however, is structured in a very traditional way. You've simply made your name larger and awkwardly placed, force justified your nav and used the trendy straight web blue. Other than that there's nothing brutalist about this. There's no breaking of the grid, overlapping and layering of content, pushing the boundaries of typography. There's no dimensionality at all, it's completely flat. Really you've just produced a traditional full screen section product page and lazily applied brutalist window dressing to appear "edgy".
I'm all for people trying new things, and the only thing I take from brutalism is it's about pushing boundaries and rejecting the formalization of web and product design. So you need to pick a side, are you going to push boundaries and show us something new or just make another flat modernist portfolio?
This is thoughtfully excellent feedback! Very well said.
Bunch of dorks in this post! The site is sick and obviously leans to the types of clients Bobby's aiming for. Not everyone wants to design UI for SaaS companies.
Just a head's up, the outlook.com link in the work section links to rotate.am.
wow nice colours
you mean that one color, cerulean blue? #263FB6?
A E S T H E T I C S
Nailed it. Get people talking, be different.
Love it! Has a strong vibe to it
One recommendation is to make that portrait.gif into a video and stream it. I'm currently on an average internet connection (40 Mbps) and that 6.2 MB gif literally took me a minute to download.
Or, since you're a front-end dev, I'm pretty sure there's way you can "code the glitch" which would be more impressive anyway, e.g., https://codemyui.com/image-glitch-effect-using-opengl-shading-language/
In actual criticism, fix the link to your second case study, make the word case study clickable or don't include them until they're done.
Well, I hate this style. Others love it. I can't tell anything about the execution because the elements that make this style cannot be creative, otherwise the style wouldn't be it. And I cannot see this font anymore. I know it's not Roboto, but it looks like it / it tries to look like it. But that's all subjective. I don't want to come of as having the intention to shame you, because I truly believe that in order to be a successful designer (in the meaning of what most people mean by that), you either have to have a ton of attention on you or you have to do it like everyone else does. And you are trying to fit in, I just hope you are aware of that - you might not even be like that in person, but your brand certainly gives me that vibe. I truly just thought you might wanna know that.
I will say though, that I find it a bit disappointing that you didn't use CSS Grid to solve your navigation. It would have made your markup prettier and a tiny bit more semantic - actually, this would make a perfect example of "solved by CSS grid".
The mobile site ( iPhone 6 ) looks broken. Nothing happens when you tap on the " case study " text or the links . And there are no images displayed. Saw the gif with the desktop version and the difference is huge in terms of how they look .
Looks great, but with some issues on an iPhone SE in Safari.
Just FYI, on ,mobiles the lack of imagery makes for a fairly bland user experience.
Style aside, because it's clearly a fairly objective thing, I think that you should reevaluate the design for small screens :)
I like what you have going on visually, but I'd question the value of how you're currently displaying your work. Take Outlook Mobile for instance. I know what the product itself is, but what I'd want to get out of a portfolio, or even a work history sentence on a resume, is what you contributed to it. Linking to the outlook site doesn't provide me value, or tell me anything about your process, what work you've done, etc...
Dope site bro, lets hop back on Skype sometime haha
it's not a mater of being a pioneer but I like the bottom and don't like the top .
I think it's a little bit too trendy for your everyday client. But sometimes you have to get your ideas out there if you feel strongly about them.
It did give you a lot of attention by being 'controversial', so gg dude.
I've only viewed this on mobile so can't comment how it works elsewhere.
The headline font you're using looks warped, I'm not a fan of it. The blue is very generic, it's used everywhere - what makes this profile (and you as a designer) stand out from the hundreds others that use this style?
Whats the purpose of the flashing play icons? Are these to represent links because none of your case study 'links' go anywhere?
Your outlook.com link goes to rotate.am btw
Looks nice. Reminds me of the style acnestudios.com is using.