First up - I think this is a great site to have created and released, in terms of concept and content. It is great to see an organisational body pushing for discussion, and an understanding of the wider issues related to architecture. The range of articles and events is really great, and I would highly recommend taking a look.

Now, on to the design. The site was put together by Digital Eskimo and they have done a fantastic job.
The whole site is set on a lovely simple grid, giving it a clean and clear look. In fact the whole aesthetic is quite clean and simple, but in a way that is elegant rather than underdone.

The headings, set in Georgia, give the site an authoritative feel without feeling too overbearing or outdated. Greys are predominantly used, which allow black to be used as a highlighting colour, along with a crimson red. Great care has been taken with the typography, resulting in pages that are pleasant and easy to read. The whole site has a quite sophisticated feel due to the refined typography.

Large images are used throughout to punctuate events and articles. A single large image tends to be relied on rather than a number of smaller images. This allows for greater impact, and keeps the layout clean.

I love this design, it has to be said. This is an example of an aesthetic that works really well for architecture related sites. They stay mostly out of the way, and let the content and work speak for themselves. I think it would be great if more practices took this approach to their site rather than crazy flash behemoths that are hard to find your way around. This is the way it SHOULD be.

I must confess I was a little concerned when I first saw the new site for The Canadian Centre for Architecture. It is impressive to behold - with fullscreen images illustrating the scrolling feature items. The 5 features are rotated automatically and can also be selected from semi-transparent boxes near the top of the page. Navigation is relegated to a small strip on the right hand side of the page, allowing the images to have maximum impact.

My immediate reaction was that it looked impressive, but the fact that it is entirely based in flash would be a major downfall. Flash would have been essential in pulling off the impressive elements on the homepage like full page images, and smooth fades and effects - however it falls down in usability and searchability as you delve further into the site.

This is where the CCA site has made a fantastically encouraging decision. Click through any of the links on the homepage and you are led to a nicely marked up, slightly more traditional, site. The design, look and feel remains, but the content is easier to navigate and find your way around.

A simple and organised layout has the left and right columns (features and navigation respectively) remaining static while the variable content in the centre column scrolls. Simple black and white with highlights of green keep the look simple and consistent.

My sense of concern had left entirely by this stage, and I was in love. THIS was how architecture sites should be put together. A beautiful combination of form and function, simplicity and life, presentation and practicality.

The Architectural League of New York's new site takes a different approach. The layout is a lot more traditional, almost blog-like, with a chronological cascade of content.

It is perhaps plainer, but the dark colour scheme with white and blue knocked out gives it a modern relevance.

The site adheres to a strict grid which keeps things nicely ordered and organised. The design relies on clean simple typography, and large bold images to tell the story. Truth be told, this is exactly the sort of design and layout that I am drawn to - effective in it's simplicity.

Similarly to the CCA site, things change a little when you move to the internal pages. The layout remains but the colour scheme has reverted to a more traditional black on white. The grid becomes more obvious here, as the content is neatly laid out.

Both sites are a welcome change to what architecture sites can often be like. They are simple and easy to use and navigate, but don't sacrifice the impact, or interactivity of the experience in doing that. A lot could be learned from a deeper look at the site.

When you first arrive you are met by a loading graphic that builds together some text into a block while keeping you updated of the loading status. In the scheme of things, this is actually one of the nicer loading screens I have seen. The typography is neat and tidy, and laid out in a manner just interesting enough to not be plain. As a whole it is kept pretty simple which I see as a bonus.

When the site itself first loads, it is a little confusing, not only functionally, but also visually. A construction site of some description floats in the middle of the page, with words overlaid in perspective on the ground. A quick investigation reveals that the words are actually the menu - merely taking a mouseover to move and make it clear. While it is a little questionable to start in an unclear fashion, it only takes a little bit of exploration to figure out what is going on. You could certainly argue that this engages the user in the site a little, and is therefore a good thing.

Once a link is clicked the content slides out from the top of the page, overlaying the image (but not the navigation). The effect is smooth, and is an elegant way of having multiple content areas on the one page, however the type is a little small, and uses a custom scrollbar in the Flash, which is pretty hard to notice, and use.

My only other criticism would be of the text in the menu. The perspective when it is laying on the ground seems alright, but once it sits upright, it just looks a little wrong. It is certainly a far cry from the nice typography from the loading screen, and to me, it actually tears at the credibility of the design itself.

Sadly, this site starts of in good territory, and starts to lose it's way a little bit. It is by no means awful, but there a number of little things, that if improved would make for a much nicer experience.

This site is, in my opinion, a perfect example of what architecture firms and projects should be doing with their websites. From a technical standpoint it is a good combination of plain html and css along with flash for some of the more interactive components. This draws on the advantages of both technical aspects. The plain html and css makes for a more accessible, usable and search engine friendly, while the flash components provide a slicker interface, and a bit of "wow" factor.

From a design perspective, the site has a very modern feel - quite fitting for the art/arch/design target market the project would be looking to get in touch with. The site carries a dark theme throughout with headings and text pulled out in white and hot pink. Pink contrast so beautifully against the dark background, and combines nicely with the b/w photo on the homepage especially.

From a layout perspective the site follows a nice grid and is split neatly into either 2 or 4 even columns. Nice and organised, simple and easy to read. This provides consistency in appearance to the pages, whether they be an introduction, a table of locations, or biographies.

The By George! logo is a typeface composed of arranged circles, reminiscent of city lights. The circles are a theme carried throughout the site, in other icons and headings. This a great example of a simple theme/technique that provides consistency and continuity through the whole site.

By George! looks set to be an extremely interesting project, and this is a great site. Many firms could learn a lot about the right approach to a website by taking a look through. The right combination of technologies, a memorable and simple design, and just enough pizazz add up to a fantastic final product.