Alright, I'm not pointing anyone out here on DIC, I haven't seen it much at all here and it's nothing one can't fix or relearn (if one is willing). Who I'm talking about is these alleged "graphics veterans" out there that are making websites for clients who may need a little help with good design practice (which is why they are hiring a "proffesional").

"Designers", get your shading right. You heard me. I said it. If there are sooooo many "professionals" out there getting paid to provide their clients with quality designs on web or in print, they should at least understand this one concept.

This is not good shading:



I'm sure all you DIC members have seen this happen on a site or two before. It's like Powerpoint from 1995 revisited. With these said "Graphic Artists" providing information about themselves that they use the latest version of Photoshop, I do not understand how they can't fix their shading. It's one of the simplest things to do. Heck, Photoshop even sets the default shade to look half-ways decent. It's hard to mess up!!!

Here's some good shading examples I have created for those that want to know what I believe is good:

First of all I want to say that I do agree with you... it doesn't look as nice as your example. However, I wanted to point out two things. One, this is shadowing and not shading. The second is that the first one is correct shadowing given that the letters are suppose to be far off the surface and that the light source is towards the left.

I have seen this effect work out in some situations, but obviously it is not always that great of a look and depends on the font, direction of the light source, and the colors. If you lighten the shadow (which you should since shadows would lighten as you get further away from the surface) and use it with a great font it can be used for some scary (as in boo! type scary) layouts.

And again I agree with your example there, it does cause your eyes to go a bit crossed looking at it sometimes.

This post has been edited by Martyr2: 28 Feb, 2008 - 03:57 PM

Shadowing should only be used in rare instances. It typically doesn't make that great of an effect, IMO.

And some designers tend to over use that effect.

Do you have a reference / link I could see that it's called Shadowing? I've never heard that before. Alls I know is, "double click layer, go to shadow thingy." in photoshop. haha. Today I will learn something new.

Despite the logistics behind whether or not the first one is truely a "correct" shading job or not is not what I'm getting at. What I'm getting at is bottom line, is that example concise?

Not at all!!! The shadow is much too harsh, it is drawn too far from the "floating" object so that it feels like you have double vision. From a genuine design outlook, this will not be suitable. Again, I want to take a step back as there is a "time and place for everthing". But if you want it clear and readable by the viewer, the first example does not cut it.

So really, maybe I am having a readability issue. It's the function (or lack therof) in a design that gets severely overlooked. And when someone makes a header on a website that is supposed to be instantly recognisable and concise to the viewer and fails, well... that's when I get sad and a little confusing to follow.

I think you answered your own question