468 karma · joined February 19, 2016
- Affinity Designer (one-time <$60usd) (replaced Illustrator)
- Affinity Photo (one-time <$60usd) (replaced Photoshop)
- Affinity Publisher (one-time <$60usd) (replaced InDesign)
- Photo Mechanic Plus (one0time >$100) (replaced Lightroom and Apple Photos)
- DaVinci Resolve (free and I love this software) (replaced Premiere)
There might be some smaller supplemental softwares I have accumulated over time to add more to my tools, but I don't think they're necessary.
It's so nice to not have CC, the subscription, the bloatware etc. Truly, I advocate against Adobe products to anyone I know who can actually perform professionally with the above substitutes. This is from someone who used to publish tutorials for Adobe's software in the many years past.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/em
On a more technical note, this was a bit surprising to read: "'No one looks at [Electro-Magnetic Interference] until the end.' The FCC rules for wireless charging devices like AirPower are quite strict, and limit exposure at 20 cm (8 in) above the device to 50 mW/cm^2."
Depending at which point was "the end" of the AirPower development cycle, Apple either spent many many months attempting to remedy the problem with small enough breakthroughs to keep the marketing parade going, or Apple discovered something severe last minute. The issues discussed in this article, I would think, were well enough known for some time--still making this a perplexing story.
The conclusion is fairly misleading because it's missing the glaringly obvious answer: designers could learn HTML and CSS. I fought it forever thinking that there will always be a WYSIWYG and they'll eventually get so good they'll spit out the code for me.
The reality is much more frustrating. Adobe Muse was promising as it helped with responsive design and the free form creativity this article talks about, BUT it had a ton of issues. Relying on it for projects with clients was risky as one update would kill your production, as it often did. Reverting back a version was a solution so you could finish the project, but the features added to the update were crucial, and as a designer I wanted those too.
Then it became a game of learn the software de jure, and hope it's A) good enough B) will have support for a long time C) isn't cheap, and D) doesn't take forever to learn.
Eventually, I discovered grid and flex box and have been teaching myself HTML, CSS, and JS. Code isn't going away. Software does.
Also, I don't trust any WYSIWYG editor to produce clean and concise code. I'm afraid it'll spit out a bunch of divs and be extremely inefficient. Not to mention accessibility and semantics. Even if designing to a grid and carefully watching my proportions and where items sit on or next to each other, I still fear the program will spit out some ugly code.
Mainly, when using a WYSIWYG, it ends up taking just as long as it would to code, especially if you want it to look really good.
So now, my goal is design like the Web 3.0 described in this article, but with the good old tools with which I have full control. It's like a carpenter in his wood shop, as opposed to using a combination of legos and Ikea. No matter what, to have ultimate control is the best, and it remains to be seen if Nicepage or any design tool will ever be as good as the most fundamental of tools (code).
I suppose the reality is there's a huge spectrum of designers. There's the developer oriented ones, which resources are aplenty. Then on the other end of the spectrum are artists, who need a blank canvas to fill out their ideas. One is quick and good enough, the other long and the end result likely janky behind the curtain. Nicepage seems to want to appeal to the the artist.
With enough time, a true designer can understand the full spectrum and see that fully custom coded websites, even if they take a long time, are still likely to be the most unique and longest lasting.
If there are other means, which is usually the case, to get such information, then those should be pursued before pressuring a reporter for that information.
Some insights I picked up along the way:
- community college have great professors
- community college treats you like the adult you are
- community college is underrated
- university treats you like a child
- university professors are more selfish and self-serving
- university is busy dealing with so much extra-curricular stuff that most adults don't care about, it makes you question your decision
- Different "schools" within the university do things differently
- as an adult, it sucks to work in groups with young students
- I picked up way more knowledge in the "real world" than I realized as a lot of what is being taught is redundant
- there should be 4 semesters a year, not 2, people should graduate in 2 years, not 4+
At the onset of this journey, I was enthusiastic to learn, but along the way I've been beat down to just wanting to get "the piece of paper" and be done. It's been a long three years and each day forward is increasingly difficult to stomach since I realized I can learn all of what is being taught to me faster on my own.
I don't think anyone needs a degree anymore to get to where they're going. However, it does make it easier depending on one's path.
I predict the future of branding will be comprised mainly of symbols (logos). Names will all be in a similar, device friendly, typeface as we see here.
edit: last sentence
[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1996a
Edit: wrong subject
[0] http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/crime_prevention/... [1] https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4452844/IBM-SVS-A...
> Of the surfaces tested, plastic security screening trays appeared to pose the highest potential risk, and handling these is almost inevitable for all embarking passengers.
This is still my argument for in-person lectures. Online classes are okay, but the insights gained from the unexplainable passion presented through oration provides unparalleled value to one's motivation and internal framework.
[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/#1d054af5bf6f [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Rensi
Too bad there isn’t a new internet, separate from the old, to explore and rebuild freely.
Stamps are such that one must have one to mail something, so why not pick one with a pleasing aesthetic?
I'm working on a side project centered around graphic art containing varying subject matter aimed to be used in a similarly nuanced way as mail art.
I believe this idea is even more applicable in the digital world as graphics are more readily available than artistic stamps.
"There have been some theories on this phenomenon, with the most prevalent being the tendency for Wikipedia pages to move up a "classification chain." According to this theory, the Wikipedia Manual of Style guidelines on how to write the lead section of an article recommend that the article should start by defining the topic of the article, so that the first link of each page will naturally take the reader into a broader subject, eventually ending in wide-reaching pages such as Mathematics, Science, Language, and of course, Philosophy, nicknamed the "mother of all sciences"."
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Getting_to_Philosoph...