[Ian Andrew]

What do you want to find when you go to a golf course architect’s web site?

Is the main attraction the photographs of the work?

Do you covet examples of plans combined with images that tell a more complete story?

Do you ever read any of their philosophy or approach if they are available?

When made available, have you ever read the articles or essays they have written?

Do you ever find yourself returning to a web site more than once a year and what is it that brings you back?

If there was one thing that you wish was part of a golf architect’s site – what would it be?

[Eric Franzen]

What do you want to find when you go to a golf course architect’s web site?

Information about the architect and his work

Is the main attraction the photographs of the work?

No, I am usually looking for factual information. But pictures are also important, of course. Especially when it comes to illustrating before/after phases of restoration work.

Do you covet examples of plans combined with images that tell a more complete story?

Yes.

Do you ever read any of their philosophy or approach if they are available?

When made available, have you ever read the articles or essays they have written?

Yes on both questions

Do you ever find yourself returning to a web site more than once a year and what is it that brings you back?

Yes, mainly frequent updates about new projects.

If there was one thing that you wish was part of a golf architect’s site – what would it be?

Your blog.

[Chip Gaskins]

Ian-  I go to your website daily because you are always updating it with relevant info about your courses or architecture in general.  However you are one of the only architects that constantly post.  

Photos are always great additions to do comparisions.  

Features are also great to do like your "Top 25 Architects" feature as well your recent "Design Features I Dislike" are both fantastic.  

Keep them coming.

Chip

[Paul Payne]

Ian,

I am a sucker for good photographs. I also do like to read their design philosiphy however many times it seems to be about as informative as a typical coporate mission statement.

I would like to see them describe specific design challenges or features they employed along with the photos. I would really like to see them explain from their point of view what made that particular hole or photo interesting or challenging. A little like Ran's reviews but actually from the architects point of view.

Maybe that is asking a lot however. This may make them feel like they are opening themselves up a little too much. It is a little like an artist expaining his work vs allowing the critic to embelish it with flowering descriptives.

[Patrick Kiser]

Ditto.


Ian,

If you're speaking to your own site, I think you're doing well directionally.  I seriously want to check out Canada now.  If anything, I sometimes wish you would give a little more "meat" to some of the decisions being made during your site work.  Could be background, could be client input.  Whatever might help to create a more complete picture.  I think what I'm trying to say is you have the "what" and the "how".  Let's maybe see more of the "why".

I like your series on the top 25 architects and why.  High level of course, but concise nonetheless.

I also like your latest top 10 things you dislike and why.  Makes one think more about things.  Same thing goes for the types of holes series.  The examples helped to complete the picture.

So more of these kinds of themed series would be welcome I think.  Some that come to mind perhaps: kinds of features to a hole like blindness, the classic holes (Redan, Sahara, Cape, etc.) and courses with the better examples of those holes (NGLA, etc.), how to play certain kinds of holes (runup vs. bump and run vs. aerial).  The latter gets a little more into the design intent for how to play the hole.  Could show some examples where there's now a complete departure from the design intent these days...  I'm sure the list goes on and on.

Combining pics, plans / sketches, essays (like Jeff Mingay's olf site), your philosophy and why (I think it's clear on your position about "the recovery shot") ... all helps to broaden the readers perspective I think.

Something I'd like to see as well are lessons learned from your own work.  For instance what did you learn that you otherwise would not have known from not having performed the work.  Or if you had to do it again ... what would you have done differently (if at all) and why.

For the agronomists ... maybe get into the turfs, methods of seeding, etc.

That's it for now.  Keep up the good work.

Ian-  I go to your website daily because you are always updating it with relevant info about your courses or architecture in general.  However you are one of the only architects that constantly post.  

Photos are always great additions to do comparisions.  

Features are also great to do like your "Top 25 Architects" feature as well your recent "Design Features I Dislike" are both fantastic.  

Keep them coming.

Chip

[Ian Andrew]

I appreciate the comments on the blog.

I'm looking to redo my web site from scratch. Much of my recent playing around on my blog has a lot to do with testing ideas.

I think some web sights I like to visit are far more interesting than my own. I like Tom Doak's for the content and in particular his essays. I always check to see if he's written anything new when I have spare time.

I enjoyed Kyle Phillips for the before and afters on Kingsbarns - he certainly uses "flash" imagery well in these examples. The photos and format of Nicklaus's site are impressive and very professional. Too bad they don't list some of the exceptional associates.

There are more architects with bad sites than with good ones.

I'm trying to figure out how to make mine better and see if there are any ideas that I've completely overlooked.

[Peter Pallotta]

Ian
I stop in quite often to your site. Thanks for the good and interesting work you do there. I think I'd like to see more essays from you. Like you, I've read and enjoyed Tom D's essay on his site -- I think at the end of the day, they are the best way to trasmit ideas/philosophies. If yours should include plans and images, all the better. But, as has been mentioned, one of the good things about your site is the constantly new/updated material...but man, that seems like a lot of work.
Thanks again
Peter  

[Michael Blake]

I haven't seen many better than this one:

http://www.mnuzzo.com/main.html


Straight forward
Very informative
Easily navigable
Pleasing to the eye/Not too busy
Professional looking
You get the feeling that he is presenting himself to you, the viewer, directly.  Not just a blanket of information provided to the masses.  Seems more personalized.


Just my opinion.

[wsmorrison]

Ian,

Your business website is outstanding as is your blog.  They are informative and entertaining.  Your philosophy, expertise and experience all are well-represented.  I don't think they need significant changes.  Are you in hibernation mode up north already and looking for stuff to do?    

I like Doak's website and the content quite a bit.  However, there's something a bit more appealing about the look of yours.  Could it be that handsome caddie?  Nah.

I hope you'll revisit one of these days.  Happy holidays.

[Tom_Doak]

Ian:

Thanks for your comments about our web site.  I just sat through two days of intra-company meetings and we discussed it a lot, so it was nice to hear positive outside feedback.

By far the most popular part of the web site with potential clients has been some of my essays.  In fact I'm amazed at some of the things they pick out from those and how deep they have dug to even find them.  But, clients want to see more than pretty pictures.

David Kidd does an excellent job of detailing all his new projects succinctly but well and up to date.  We'll try to do a better job of that, I'd hate for him to be better than us at anything.    He shouldn't go too far about projects that haven't started though, or people will think he's spreading himself thin.

The other most successful part of our site has been the small list of "Where We'd Like to Work".  When I first posted that, several friends told me it wasn't a good idea, because people from other places would be turned off.  Perhaps some have -- but we've attracted enquiries about work in most of the places I listed, and we've worked in more than half of them already.  As long as you're not just trying to generate a lot of work anywhere you can, I think saying where you want to work (and even why) is a good thing.

I am also planning to do much more in-depth features on my associates and their backgrounds, because they're a big reason my company is different than Jack Nicklaus' or Kyle Phillips'.

[Patrick Kiser]

Just don't get rid of the content.  Maybe archive it.  I think I would definitely revisit to review from time to time as a refresher.

Just my two cents.

Good luck.

I appreciate the comments on the blog.

I'm looking to redo my web site from scratch. Much of my recent playing around on my blog has a lot to do with testing ideas.

I think some web sights I like to visit are far more interesting than my own. I like Tom Doak's for the content and in particular his essays. I always check to see if he's written anything new when I have spare time.

I enjoyed Kyle Phillips for the before and afters on Kingsbarns - he certainly uses "flash" imagery well in these examples. The photos and format of Nicklaus's site are impressive and very professional. Too bad they don't list some of the exceptional associates.

There are more architects with bad sites than with good ones.

I'm trying to figure out how to make mine better and see if there are any ideas that I've completely overlooked.

[Bill Brightly]

I am a big fan of "before and after" photos, so it would be awesome to see side-by-side pictures of a finished hole next to the land before work started, or a restored hole picture next to the old look.

[cary lichtenstein]

I am a big fan of "before and after" photos, so it would be awesome to see side-by-side pictures of a finished hole next to the land before work started, or a restored hole picture next to the old look.

I'm in Bill's category. In fact, I like to see 3 photo's, before during and after.

I'm not much for essays, I think the pictures tell the story.

[Ian Andrew]

Wayne,

I'm still going strong - which is late for up here - but I avoided adding new work to give myself an intentional "winter break" this year.
 
My "design book" of sketches is the priority but I did want to update the web site too.

I want to take before to after photos through "flash" if I can.

[Mark Smolens]

The thing I like most about your writings (blog or website), or those of Mr. Doak, is your respective willingness to discuss the work of others.  Seems to me that people are too sensitive about criticism.  When I write a motion or a brief, I'm happy to have other lawyers view it critically.  There's nothing that I've written that was typed in stone -- another eye, another viewpoint, can't help but create a more polished and therefore better project.  In my work, and yours as well.

[Matthew Hunt]

Tom Ds, Mike Ns and yours are the best under my defination(They distract from home-work )

[John Foley]

Ian - I love th blog. I loved the what am I doing this week series and the individual video explanations of why you thought of cetain things on some of your designs.

I love Mike N's blog also and seeing the things that get into the guts of the design of his course in TX.

More of these are great for us, the GCA-freak.

As for the web site and what  brings me back it's defin etly the what are we doing details on this project and what is comming up next.

I love the complete story - Initial topo - followed by before and afters and then as complete as-built plans.

[Mike_Young]

Ian,
I think you have a very good website......
I am also in the process of changing mine and have just come to a complete standstill on it about once a week.....
The person doing mine asked me to define the purpose......we decided it was mainly a sales tool and one that is used after you have made the contact......other than that it was for customer communication.
The lady doing mine said the average time such a site is viewed is less than three minutes.....so I have been told to compress all pertinent info and then have back pages for expanding on such.
I admire your eforts with a blog...that can be a time consuming task...
I am totally confused as to how to progress with my site at this time...best of luck on yours....
Mike

[Ian Andrew]

Mike,

Funny – we view it generally the same. I also looked at it as a storehouse of information that I could send people to. I never looked at the web site as a place to draw in new clients. That said I have learnt from Mike and others that it has more potential than that.

I always looked at the web site as a chance to state what you believe in, what separates you from the next guy and a chance to list your experience. The quality of the presentation is what seperates a two minute visit from a ten minute visit.

[Mike Nuzzo]

What good website doesn't get constantly updated?
I've been noticing quite a few upgraded sites out there -- architectural wise.  

Thanks Mike B. -- I kept it clean so I could keep updating it myself.  I've been working on my next version for a little, and hopefully will have some changes during the winter.  I hope it will be different in some regards.

Ian do you do it yourself?

Mike Y.
I agree that the stats I get from my site show not much time is spent in general, but I don't think I'm going to try to "compress" my writing.  You can always direct someone to a more indepth version.  Tom Doak's experiences show that actual clients do dig deep.

I've got one neat essay in particular that I'm looking forward to putting on the site when the time is right.

[Chris Cupit]

What do you want to find when you go to a golf course architect’s web site?

Is the main attraction the photographs of the work?

Do you covet examples of plans combined with images that tell a more complete story?

Do you ever read any of their philosophy or approach if they are available?

When made available, have you ever read the articles or essays they have written?

Do you ever find yourself returning to a web site more than once a year and what is it that brings you back?

If there was one thing that you wish was part of a golf architect’s site – what would it be?

Ian,

Interesting and here's my perspective.  In 2005 I decided to pretty much blow up my course and start over and I had no clue where to start.

I called and got some info from the ASGCA--a  pamphlet that was a very good beginning as to where to start.

Anyway, I put together a committee of 10 people and we got to work deciding where to start a search for an architect.  From a list of 10 name, we quickly eliminated those we knew/assumed we could not afford and narrowed the list to four people.

I'd played at least one course from all the remaining four and quickly eliminated one guy who had recently re-done a course in my area and had butchered it!

Down to three guys that we interviewed. Only then did I even go looking for website information.

1.  Once I got to the web I must admit that the main reason was for pictures of their work.  When we picked an architect and we trying to get the membership on board, nothing anyone could say "painted the picture" of our vision like pics.
2.  Plans and such are OK but no one plays the plans--I knew I was dealing with professionals and didn't need convincing they could draw a pretty set of plans.
3.  I did know a  lot of people in the business and did call references and speak with anyone I knew that had worked with my choices.
4.  I don't think the guy I finally chose even had a website that was up and running!  The three finalists submitted a portfolio of their work, pics, examples of budgets, plans and letters telling me how wonderful and brilliant they were!
5.  No one, other than maybe a real golf nerd like myself, reads articles or philosophy statements.  Pictures!
6.  I'll go to a website if I hear of a new project being nuilt and I want to see pictures but other than that I just don't search architect websites--I did check a few sites out a little lately after reading this post.
7.  I don't think you have too long to grab someone's attention, many sites are way too "busy" and wordy.  No one really cares about your bio, what your favorite color is or why you think an eden hole is prefereably to a redan.  
8.  I'd suggest simple and nice (professional) pictures that aren't too small.  And if you have a flash intro page, give me a "skip intro" button for the next time I come to the site.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()