{"rowid": 270, "title": "From Side Project to Not So Side Project", "contents": "In the last article I wrote for 24 ways, back in 2009, I enthused about the benefits of having a pet project, suggesting that we should all have at least one so that we could collaborate with our friends, escape our day jobs, fulfil our own needs, help others out, raise our profiles, make money, and \u2014 most importantly \u2014 have fun. I don\u2019t think I need to offer any further persuasions: it seems that designers and developers are launching their own pet projects left, right and centre. This makes me very happy.\n\nHowever, there still seems to be something of a disconnect between having a side project and turning it into something that is moderately successful; in particular, the challenge of making enough money to sustain the project and perhaps even elevating it from the sidelines so that it becomes something not so on the side at all.\n\nBefore we even begin this, let\u2019s spend a moment talking about money, also known as\u2026\n\nEvil, nasty, filthy money\n\nOver the last couple of years, I\u2019ve started referring to myself as an accidental businessman. I say accidental because my view of the typical businessman is someone who is driven by money, and I usually can\u2019t stand such people. Those who are motivated by profit, obsessed with growth, and take an active interest in the world\u2019s financial systems don\u2019t tend to be folks with whom I share a beer, unless it\u2019s to pour it over them. Especially if they\u2019re wearing pinstriped suits.\n\nThat said, we all want to make money, don\u2019t we? And most of us want to make a relatively decent amount, too. I don\u2019t think there\u2019s any harm in admitting that, is there? Hello, I\u2019m Elliot and I\u2019m a capitalist.\n\nThe key is making money from doing what we love. For most people I know in our community, we\u2019ve already achieved that \u2014 I\u2019m hard-pressed to think of anyone who isn\u2019t extremely passionate about working in our industry and I think it\u2019s one of the most positive, unifying benefits we enjoy as a group of like-minded people \u2014 but side projects usually arise from another kind of passion: a passion for something other than what we do as our day jobs. Perhaps it\u2019s because your clients are driving you mental and you need a break; perhaps it\u2019s because you want to create something that is truly your own; perhaps it\u2019s because you\u2019re sick of seeing your online work disappear so fast and you want to try your hand at print in order to make a more permanent mark.\n\nThe three factors I listed there led me to create 8 Faces, a printed magazine about typography that started as a side project and is now a very significant part of my yearly output and income.\n\nLike many things that prove fruitful, 8 Faces\u2019 success was something of an accident, too. For a start, the magazine was never meant to be profitable; its only purpose at all was to scratch my own itch. Then, after the first issue took off and I realized how much time I needed to spend in order to make the next one decent, it became clear that I would have to cover more than just the production costs: I\u2019d have to take time out from client work as well. Doing this meant I\u2019d have to earn some money. Probably not enough to equate to the exact amount of time lost when I could be doing client work (not that you could ever describe time as being lost when you work on something you love), but enough to survive; for me to feel that I was getting paid while doing all of the work that 8 Faces entailed. The answer was to raise money through partnerships with some cool companies who were happy to be associated with my little project.\n\nA sustainable business model\n\nBusiness model! I can\u2019t believe I just wrote those words! But a business model is really just a loose plan for how not to screw up. And all that stuff I wrote in the paragraph above about partnering with companies so I could get some money in while I put the magazine together? Well, that\u2019s my business model. \n\nIf you\u2019re making any product that has some sort of production cost, whether that\u2019s physical print run expenses or up-front dev work to get an app built, covering those costs before you even release your product means that you\u2019ll be in profit from the first copy you sell. This is no small point: production expenses are pretty much the only cost you\u2019ll ever need to recoup, so having them covered before you launch anything is pretty much the best possible position in which you could place yourself. Happy days, as Jamie Oliver would say.\n\nObtaining these initial funds through partnerships has another benefit. Sure, it\u2019s a form of advertising but, done right, your partners can potentially provide you with great content, too. In the case of 8 Faces, the ads look as nice as the rest of the magazine, and a couple of our partners also provide proper articles: genuinely meaningful, relevant, reader-pleasing articles at that. You\u2019d be amazed at how many companies are willing to become partners and, as the old adage goes, if you don\u2019t ask, you don\u2019t get.\n\nWith profit comes responsibility\n\nDon\u2019t forget about the responsibility you have to your audience if you engage in a relationship with a partner or any type of advertiser: although I may have freely admitted my capitalist leanings, I\u2019m still essentially a hairy hippy, and I feel that any partnership should be good for me as a publisher, good for the partner and \u2014 most importantly \u2014 good for the reader. Really, the key word here is relevance, and that\u2019s where 99.9% of advertising fails abysmally. \n\n(99.9% is not a scientific figure, but you know what I\u2019m on about.)\n\nThe main grey area when a side project becomes profitable is how you share that profit, partly because \u2014 in my opinion, at least \u2014 the transition from non-profitable side project to relatively successful source of income can be a little blurred. Asking for help for nothing when there\u2019s no money to be had is pretty normal, but sometimes it\u2019s easy to get used to that free help even once you start making money. I believe the best approach is to ask for help with the promise that it will always be rewarded as soon as there\u2019s money available. (Oh, god: this sounds like one of those nightmarish client proposals. It\u2019s not, honest.) If you\u2019re making something cool, people won\u2019t mind helping out while you find your feet.\n\nEvents often think that they\u2019re exempt from sharing profit. Perhaps that\u2019s because many event organizers think they\u2019re doing the speakers a favour rather than the other way around (that\u2019s a whole separate article), but it\u2019s shocking to see how many people seem to think they can profit from content-makers \u2014 speakers, for example \u2014 and yet not pay for that content. It was for this reason that Keir and I paid all of our speakers for our Insites: The Tour side project, which we ran back in July. We probably could\u2019ve got away without paying them, especially as the gig was so informal, but it was the right thing to do.\n\nIn conclusion: money as a by-product\n\nLet\u2019s conclude by returning to the slightly problematic nature of money, because it\u2019s the pivot on which your side project\u2019s success can swing, regardless of whether you measure success by monetary gain. I would argue that success has nothing to do with profit \u2014 it\u2019s about you being able to spend the time you want on the project. Unfortunately, that is almost always linked to money: money to pay yourself while you work on your dream idea; money to pay for more servers when your web app hits the big time; money to pay for efforts to get the word out there. The key, then, is to judge success on your own terms, and seek to generate as much money as you see fit, whether it\u2019s purely to cover your running costs, or enough to buy a small country. There\u2019s nothing wrong with profit, as long as you\u2019re ethical about it. (Pro tip: if you\u2019ve earned enough to buy a small country, you\u2019ve probably been unethical along the way.)\n\nThe point at which individuals and companies fail \u2014 in the moral sense, for sure, but often in the competitive sense, too \u2014 is when money is the primary motivation. It should never be the primary motivation. If you\u2019re not passionate enough about something to do it as an unprofitable side project, you shouldn\u2019t be doing it all. \n\nEarning money should be a by-product of doing what you love. And who doesn\u2019t want to spend their life doing what they love?", "year": "2011", "author": "Elliot Jay Stocks", "author_slug": "elliotjaystocks", "published": "2011-12-22T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/from-side-project-to-not-so-side-project/", "topic": "business"} {"rowid": 265, "title": "Designing for Perfection", "contents": "Hello, 24 ways readers. I hope you\u2019re having a nice run up to Christmas. This holiday season I thought I\u2019d share a few things with you that have been particularly meaningful in my work over the last year or so. They may not make you wet your santa pants with new-idea-excitement, but in the context of 24 ways I think they may serve as a nice lesson and a useful seasonal reminder going into the New Year. Enjoy!\n\nStory\n\nDespite being a largely scruffy individual for most of my life, I had some interesting experiences regarding kitchen tidiness during my third year at university. \n\nAs a kid, my room had always been pretty tidy, and as a teenager I used to enjoy reordering my CDs regularly (by artist, label, colour of spine \u2013 you get the picture); but by the time I was twenty I\u2019d left most of these traits behind me, mainly due to a fear that I was turning into my mother. The one remaining anally retentive part of me that remained however, lived in the kitchen. For some reason, I couldn\u2019t let all the pots and crockery be strewn across the surfaces after cooking. I didn\u2019t care if they were washed up or not, I just needed them tidied. The surfaces needed to be continually free of grated cheese, breadcrumbs and ketchup spills. Also, the sink always needed to be clear. Always. Even a lone teabag, discarded casually into the sink hours previously, would give me what I used to refer to as \u201ckitchen rage\u201d.\n\nWhilst this behaviour didn\u2019t cause any direct conflicts, it did often create weirdness. We would be happily enjoying a few pre-night out beverages (Jack Daniels and Red Bull \u2013 nice) when I\u2019d notice the state of the kitchen following our round of customized 49p Tesco pizzas. Kitchen rage would ensue, and I\u2019d have to blitz the kitchen, which usually resulted in me having to catch everyone up at the bar afterwards.\n\nOne evening as we were just about to go out, I was stood there, in front of the shithole that was our kitchen with the intention of cleaning it all up, when a realization popped into my head. In hindsight, it was a pretty obvious one, but it went along the lines of \u201cWhat the fuck are you doing? Sort your life out\u201d. I sodded the washing up, rolled out with my friends, and had a badass evening of partying.\n\nAfter this point, whenever I got the urge to clean the kitchen, I repeated that same realization in my head. My tidy kitchen obsession strived for a level of perfection that my housemates just didn\u2019t share, so it was ultimately pointless. It didn\u2019t make me feel that good, either; it was like having a cigarette after months of restraint \u2013 initially joyous but soon slightly shameful.\n\nLesson\n\nNow, around seven years later, I\u2019m a designer on the web and my life is chaotic. It features no planning for significant events, no day-to-day routine or structure, no thought about anything remotely long-term, and I like to think I do precisely what I want. It seems my days at striving for something ordered and tidy, in most parts of my life, are long gone.\n\nFor much of my time as a designer, though, it\u2019s been a different story. I relished industry-standard terms such as \u2018pixel perfection\u2019 and \u2018polished PSDs\u2019, taking them into my stride as I strove to design everything that was put on my plate perfectly. Even down to grids and guidelines, all design elements would be painstakingly aligned to a five-pixel grid. There were no seven-pixel margins or gutters to be found in my design work, that\u2019s for sure. I put too much pride and, inadvertently, too much ego into my work. Things took too long to create, and because of the amount of effort put into the work, significant changes, based on client feedback for example, were more difficult to stomach.\n\nOver the last eighteen months I\u2019ve made a conscious effort to change the way I approach designing for the web. Working on applications has probably helped with this; they seem to have a more organic development than rigid content-based websites. Mostly though, a realization similar to my kitchen rage one came about when I had to make significant changes to a painstakingly crafted Photoshop document I had created. The changes shouldn\u2019t have been difficult or time-consuming to implement, but they were turning out to be. One day, frustrated with how long it was taking, the refrain \u201cWhat the fuck are you doing? Sort your life out\u201d again entered my head. I blazed the rest of the work, not rushing or doing scruffy work, but just not adhering to the insane levels of perfection I had previously set for myself. When the changes were presented, everything went down swimmingly. The client in this case (and I\u2019d argue most cases) cared more about the ideas than the perfect way in which they had been implemented. I had taken myself and my ego out of the creative side of the work, and it had been easier to succeed.\n\nArgument\n\nI know many other designers who work on the web share such aspirations to perfection. I think it\u2019s a common part of the designer DNA, but I\u2019m not sure it really has a place when designing for the web.\n\nFirst, there\u2019s the environment. The landscape in which we work is continually shifting and evolving. The inherent imperfection of the medium itself makes attempts to create perfect work for it redundant. Whether you consider it a positive or negative point, the products we make are never complete. They\u2019re always scaling and changing. \n\nLike many aspects of web design, this striving for perfection in our design work is a way of thinking borrowed from other design industries where it\u2019s more suited. A physical product cannot be as easily altered or developed after it has been manufactured, so the need to achieve perfection when designing is more apt.\n\nDesigners who can relate to anything I\u2019ve talked about can easily let go of that anal retentiveness if given the right reasons to do so. Striving for perfection isn\u2019t a bad thing, but I simply don\u2019t think it can be achieved in such a fast-moving, unique industry. I think design for the web works better when it begins with quick and simple, followed by iteration and polish over time. \n\nTo let go of ego and to publish something that you\u2019re not completely happy with is perhaps the most difficult part of the job for designers like us, but it\u2019s followed by a satisfaction of knowing your product is alive and breathing, whereas others (possibly even competitors) may still be sitting in Photoshop, agonizing over whether a margin should be twenty or forty pixels.\n\nI keep telling myself to stop sitting on those two hundred ideas that are all half-finished. Publish them, clean them up and iterate over time. I\u2019ve been telling myself this for months and, hopefully, writing this article will give me the kick in the arse I need. Hopefully, it will also give someone else the same kick.", "year": "2011", "author": "Greg Wood", "author_slug": "gregwood", "published": "2011-12-17T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2011/designing-for-perfection/", "topic": "process"} {"rowid": 269, "title": "Adaptive Images for Responsive Designs\u2026 Again", "contents": "When I was asked to write an article for 24 ways I jumped at the chance, as I\u2019d been wanting to write about some fun hacks for responsive images and related parsing behaviours. My heart sank a little when Matt Wilcox beat me to the subject, but it floated back up when I realized I disagreed with his method and still had something to write about.\n\nSo, Matt Wilcox, if that is your real name (and I\u2019m pretty sure it is), I disagree. I see your dirty server-based hack and raise you an even dirtier client-side hack. Evil laugh, etc., etc.\n\nYou guys can stomach yet another article about responsive design, right? Right?\n\nHalf the room gets up to leave\n\nWhoa, whoa\u2026 OK, I\u2019ll cut to the chase\u2026\n\nTL;DR\n\nIn a previous episode, we were introduced to Debbie and her responsive cat poetry page. Well, now she\u2019s added some reviews of cat videos and some images of cats. Check out her new page and have a play around with the browser window. At smaller widths, the images change and the design responds. The benefits of this method are:\n\n\n\tit\u2019s entirely client-side\n\timages are still shown to users without JavaScript\n\tyour media queries stay in your CSS file\n\tno repetition of image URLs\n\tno extra downloads per image\n\tit\u2019s fast enough to work on resize\n\tit\u2019s pure filth\n\n\nWhat\u2019s wrong with the server-side solution?\n\nResponsive design is a client-side issue; involving the server creates a boatload of problems.\n\n\n\tIt sets a cookie at the top of the page which is read in subsequent requests. However, the cookie is not guaranteed to be set in time for requests on the same page, so the server may see an old value or no value at all.\n\tServing images via server scripts is much slower than plain old static hosting.\n\tThe URL can only cache with vary: cookie, so the cache breaks when the cookie changes, even if the change is unrelated. Also, far-future caching is out for devices that can change width.\n\tIt depends on detecting screen width, which is rather messy on mobile devices.\n\tResponding to things other than screen width (such as DPI) means packing more information into the cookie, and a more complicated script at the top of each page.\n\n\nSo, why isn\u2019t this straightforward on the client?\n\nClient-side solutions to the problem involve JavaScript testing user agent properties (such as screen width), looping through some images and setting their URLs accordingly. However, by the time JavaScript has sprung into action, the original image source has already started downloading. If you change the source of an image via JavaScript, you\u2019re setting off yet another request.\n\nImages are downloaded as soon as their DOM node is created. They don\u2019t need to be visible, they don\u2019t need to be in the document.\n\nnew Image().src = url\n\nThe above will start an HTTP request for url. This is a handy trick for quick requests and preloading, but also shows the browser\u2019s eagerness to download images.\n\nHere\u2019s an example of that in action. Check out the network tab in Web Inspector (other non-WebKit development aids are available) to see the image requests.\n\nBecause of this, some client-side solutions look like this:\n\n\n\nwhere t.gif is a 1\u00d71px tiny transparent GIF.\n\nThis results in no images if JavaScript isn\u2019t available. Dealing with the absence of JavaScript is still important, even on mobile. I was recently asked to make a website work on an old Blackberry 9000. I was able to get most of the way there by preventing that OS parsing any JavaScript, and that was only possible because the site didn\u2019t depend on it.\n\nWe need to delay loading images for JavaScript users, but ensure they load for users without JavaScript. How can we conditionally parse markup depending on JavaScript support?\n\nOh yeah!