Web Buliding Software

[Rafton]

I am just curious as to whether Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator or Image Ready can be used to make homepages. Up to now I have been directly inputting codes onto my site but the more professional I want it looking the harder it gets. I am profficient with PS and Illus but new to Image ready( I just learnt how to use it to mark image maps). I make really good pages using the graphics programs but can't get the same looking page up on the web as a .htm including links. What is the best option.

I really don't want to buy anymore software.

Jason:D

[ronaldb66]

Those programs you mentioned are graphics editors and therefore unsuitable for creating web pages.
Depending on your abilities there's a range of programs anywhere from simple text editors via assisted HTML-editors all the way up to WYSIWYG authoring tools like Dreamweaver. Many of the simpler editors can be downloaded for free.

If you give an idea of your skills on HTML, CSS, etc. I'm sure people can suggest suitable tools.

[Rafton]

I am fine with HTML but JS is a new thing for me. I am studying and learning but the thing I hate doing is messing around with <TD> sizes and positions. I want something I can create graphic layouts on a page then turn it into a html including links and images that can be rolled over if wished.

Any reccomendations.

Jason

[ronaldb66]

[list=1]
Don't regard a web page purely from a visual perspective, but start from its structure and contents;
Consider visual adornment of the content as an added bonus, not as a purpose in itself;
Don't use tables for layout; start using CSS as soon as possible.
[/list=1]

[zoobie]

I remember some doofy drag and drop editor I used long ago that did this...but forget the name. Most end up adding tons of code bloat to your pages slowing loading. At this point in time, there are probably free javascript editors out there. I do remember, though, that FirstPage seemed a complete editor...but also forget if it was text-only. Do some research below.

Some free d/l sites are:

www.webattack.com/
www.download.com/
www.nonags.com/

Many members here are "high" in the new css display...but, personally, I don't think it's quite there yet and bloats the code, too. Although I'm learning it, I really don't think I'll implement it for 18 months or so...At this point, it's just something else to learn.

Tell 'em da zoob sent ya. :cool:

[MotherNatrsSon]

I create my homepage in Photoshop 7 and Image Ready. Completely by using layer based slices and saving them as css layers. I then import it into Dreamweaver to upload it to my site. It is possible to create a homepage in them but it has taken me some time learning the programs(PS7, ImageReady). It puts out the css div images and code. It work great for me....

MNS

[Rafton]

Could you tell me the address of the page you built like that so i could see whether or not it would be useful to me to do it like that.

TY
Jason

[ronaldb66]

Zoob,

it's not so much the code bloat I'm worried about, but a purely graphical approach usually leads to page concocted out of absolutely positioned divs filled with tons of images, even for text blocks (so they can use that Zoobie New Roman font... :D ); this approach makes for rigid, non-flowing, hard to change pages which indeed are slow-loading. Even I prefer tables for layout over that... :o

[MotherNatrsSon]

I do the graphics part in PS 7. The usual html coding etc. gets done in Dreamweaver in layers too. My personal feeling is that you don't really know how to use the PS program well. The whole page loads in 7 seconds which isn't bad for as graphically intense as it is........at 56k...and it works in NS4x and IE 5.1.5 for MAC.....:thumbsup:

MNS

[ronaldb66]

Dreamweaver is a very suitable tool for creating a web page, provided you do it the right way (which holds for almost any tool invented by man...), just as Photo Shop is a great tool for creating graphics. My resistance is against painting a web page like it is a colorful folder and using a tool that somehow wrenches a web page from that; this usually leads to horrible code full of sub-optimal solutions, to say the very least.
And no, I don't know the first thing about Photo Shop, nor do I need to in order to create web pages. I am familiar with Dreamweaver, though, and I've worked with Paint Shop Pro, but I've never even been tempted to "use" that for creating web pages; just for pretty pictures.

[MotherNatrsSon]

Yes the PS and ImageReady will put out the code necessary to place the graphics on the page where they are supposed to be. ImageReady does mouseovers and also puts out the code for them as well. If you did want to do the text in PS, you could and actually do the complete page in the two programs. I also use a couple of PS plug-ins to create the background of a nice evening red sunset with a crecent moon on the rise, and stars in the sky. But then again, I am learning from someone that approaches web design from the artistic side and not the tech side. It has taken me quite a long time to learn and to get everything just right on the page, but I have seen few pages, imho, that are as graphically intense and load as quickly. I am not good enough with coding to do the page by just making the images and hand coding it out. It does the css for me and I haven't got a clue how to write a stylesheet or any of the rest of the code for that. And the great thing is that it works well and loads fast. The only page on my site that is done this way is the homepage......

[whackaxe]

gimp rocks my world for graphices editing. a bit. PS is better for some things if you can get it but i only have v6 and it takes ages to start up:( PS has the very usefull slice function which generates tabluar layouts with your images but these need to be readjusted for a proper layout

[bradyj]

Actually, quite a few of us designers use imageready (maybe not to build a webpage, even though you can, but to optimize and slice images atleast) -- because we do make sites that are graphic intense, and do use the web as an advertisement rather than book.

As for painting a web page, ronaldb66, that's what I pretty much do everyday. I'm a designer, not a coder -- people pay me to make their work look much better than a loaded text page. I agree with MothernatrsSon in the fact that I am an artist -- and it's purely just a different way of thinking.

I've created layouts for people that you couldn't even read the text. I did it because I cared how it looked, not what it said... it's the old philosophy arguement for image or content; and, as a designer, I choose image. there are ways of balancing information and design -- and I've done them -- but in the end I choose the look.

However, all my pages (though they may not be perfect) do not have bloated coding errors. And though I design my work on a piece of paper -- build the basics in Illustrator, bring it over into photoshop, seperate the images in Imagready, Pop open DreamWeaver and make a quick page... I finish it off in BBEdit, and make it nice.

I remember when you talked with me about one of my first posts here a while back and got me to scale down my graphic usage a bit:D ...but I still use the web to make unique and fundamentaly different layouts for design. It is just a different media than the print world.

[MotherNatrsSon]

Wow! That is what I am in the process of learning. I use Freehand, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, and BBEdit 6......makes some nice looking pages. I am not very good atit yet, only been a litle over a year, but hopefully within another year I might actually get good enough to be considered productive too.:D

[ronaldb66]

You can step off the soap box now, bradyj... :D
Just goes to show that designers and coders are two completely different animals, and though a few are good at both, they are rare.
You're obviously a designer, which I admire and envy because I stink at design; I on the other hand definitely am a coder: I make a living building COBOL applications... :o
Let me finish with saying that any approach which results in well-structured, well-layed-out, rich, usable, accessible web pages is fine; my only reservations were against the notion that if a design looks nice in a graphics editor you can simply extract a web page from it by hitting some or another button.
OK, soap box is free again... :D

[whackaxe]

i am just about equal in coding than design although i prefer desgin, i like knowing how a web page works as well as how nice it works. basicly im a complete control freak :D

*break dances off the soap box in massivly phat style*

who next on the soap box then?