| Pages & images | 3
Barely started | Missing lots of pages & images | Has most of the pages, some placeholder images | All pages exist and are well done with complete imagery |
| Personality & design | 2
Bland, boring, just another graphic designer | Fairly generic, visual design could be pushed more | Quality layouts and unique, personable content & design | Unique and recognizable as you, with engaging, personable content & design |
| Image quality | 3
Only placeholder images | Some portfolio piece images | Lots of images but low quality | High quality portfolio images — and lots of them |
| Accessibility | 2
No considerations | Added some alt attributes, nothing else | Just the basics: alt attributes, roles | Accessibility is well considered and tested |
| Text content | 3
Fake content only | Some real content, some fake | All real content but with lots of errors | Real content, well written, no grammar or spelling errors |
| Responsiveness | 3
Not responsive | Works on some screens | Responsive but with lots of awkwardness | Looks great on all screen sizes |
| Code quality | 2
Barely started | Indentation is barely existent, lots of validation errors, very poor semantics | Decent indentation, just a couple validation errors, decent semantics | Well indented, fully valid, good semantics |
18/21
Rationale:
What did you do well? I was able to replicate the design goal I set for myself quite well. The website looks the way I intended it to from the beginning. The layout is also very simple which prevents things from getting overcomplicated. It works well responsively.
What did you do poorly?
Project examples should be supported by process imagery.
What could be improved?
I believe I could add more projects to my portfolio but it would be very time consuming and deadlines are approaching fast. The website does not have a proper video displaying on the homepage yet. This will be fixed next week in class.
What problems did you run into?
I ran into many problems including issues with netlify hosting videos, choosing videos I believed represented my work appropriately, and some issues adding icons and favicons.
What complications did you overcome?
I encountered many issues over the course of the project. Placeholder images for the "work" page needed to be sized to specific dimensions in Photoshop to keep them all a consistent size. Otherwise they were all over the place. The nav icon also had issues adjusting sizes between screen sizes, but media queries and css width/height properties fixed this.
Does the website communicate the right message?
Yes, I believe it represents my brand well in a simple, effective way. It is professional and concise.
Is the website usable?
The website is usable, except local files are currently invisible (homepage video, resume pdf). This will be fixed next week. For next week I will also need to improve accessibility usability.
I think a B+ would be a good grade. The website is complete aside from adding stronger accessibility features.
@thomasjbradley
Rubric
| Pages & images | 3 Barely started | Missing lots of pages & images | Has most of the pages, some placeholder images | All pages exist and are well done with complete imagery |
| Personality & design | 2 Bland, boring, just another graphic designer | Fairly generic, visual design could be pushed more | Quality layouts and unique, personable content & design | Unique and recognizable as you, with engaging, personable content & design |
| Image quality | 3 Only placeholder images | Some portfolio piece images | Lots of images but low quality | High quality portfolio images — and lots of them |
| Accessibility | 2 No considerations | Added some alt attributes, nothing else | Just the basics: alt attributes, roles | Accessibility is well considered and tested |
| Text content | 3 Fake content only | Some real content, some fake | All real content but with lots of errors | Real content, well written, no grammar or spelling errors |
| Responsiveness | 3 Not responsive | Works on some screens | Responsive but with lots of awkwardness | Looks great on all screen sizes |
| Code quality | 2 Barely started | Indentation is barely existent, lots of validation errors, very poor semantics | Decent indentation, just a couple validation errors, decent semantics | Well indented, fully valid, good semantics |
18/21
Rationale:
What did you do well? I was able to replicate the design goal I set for myself quite well. The website looks the way I intended it to from the beginning. The layout is also very simple which prevents things from getting overcomplicated. It works well responsively.
What did you do poorly? Project examples should be supported by process imagery.
What could be improved? I believe I could add more projects to my portfolio but it would be very time consuming and deadlines are approaching fast. The website does not have a proper video displaying on the homepage yet. This will be fixed next week in class.
What problems did you run into? I ran into many problems including issues with netlify hosting videos, choosing videos I believed represented my work appropriately, and some issues adding icons and favicons.
What complications did you overcome? I encountered many issues over the course of the project. Placeholder images for the "work" page needed to be sized to specific dimensions in Photoshop to keep them all a consistent size. Otherwise they were all over the place. The nav icon also had issues adjusting sizes between screen sizes, but media queries and css width/height properties fixed this.
Does the website communicate the right message? Yes, I believe it represents my brand well in a simple, effective way. It is professional and concise.
Is the website usable? The website is usable, except local files are currently invisible (homepage video, resume pdf). This will be fixed next week. For next week I will also need to improve accessibility usability.
I think a B+ would be a good grade. The website is complete aside from adding stronger accessibility features.