Web designer and coder in one bottle

Question

Project management

As far as I know, a web designer in the States is not the same as a web designer in Russia. In the States, this is a person who is both a designer and typesetter and has a good understanding of UI.

With us, a web designer in the classical sense is a person who draws a site in photoshop.

Now the development process in our team is quite linear and consists of:
Idea -> Design (from a week to a month) -> Layout (at least another week) -> Programming -> We understand that the design is not fully suitable -> Iterations to improve the design -> Release.

I don’t really like it, I think it’s much better to exclude the design in Photoshop, doing the layout right away (especially since there is an example as 37signals that do this), especially considering that there are a bunch of frameworks like Bootstrap that you can use for this . I want to do everything faster.
Further, already how the section works, we understand what elements should be and where on the page what should be located, we can improve the design, add little things and cats.

Is there anyone who reads, who works according to such a scheme? Share your experience :)

Answer 1

When I arrived in the states, I had a confusion. In the states there is such a term graphic designer, which means that a person can draw, but cannot typeset and does not understand anything in the UI. For ui / ux, this is a separate profession.
The problem is different. It is desirable for the employer to find one person who can do everything. But this is hard to find. Even in Russia. A designer in Russia writes that he knows Photoshop and css, but during the interview it turns out that he has never even heard of Bootstrap. As if a person should be in the subject. And he begins to do a test task with the construction of his own bicycle, bypassing the Bootstrap documentation.
That is, the division of professions is more connected with thinking. A person draws well in Photoshop, but it is difficult for him to understand css, because it reminds him of programming.

Answer 2

For myself, I decided a long time ago. Photoshop - just to see the concept. I make a sketch, put the interface elements in their places, look... I think... And I start to typeset in static. If some idea comes, I (printscreen) what I have laid out, insert a photoshop, draw a new element, move, look, typeset.
For yourself or for small projects, this speeds up development. If you need to show the customer, then it’s faster - draw well, so that there are no questions - “why is it crooked here ?, where is the background?” etc.

Answer 3

Not everyone can afford to make a site right away in the code editor. If it's not your own project, then the people working with you on the team need to see what the site will look like before actually starting to create it. If the site uses different graphics, then it makes sense to depict it in the same layout (in a final version), and after this stage, the same design is already obtained in Photoshop.
I make my own sites without photoshop, but the situation is different when another person does the layout and programming.

Answer 4

Photoshop is a must. To show and agree.
No extra time will go away, tk. everything you need for layout.

Answer 5

All UI elements (in all variations) are best drawn graphically in Photoshop. Although it’s much more convenient for me, as a layout designer, to work when the necessary pages are rendered - this way I can immediately see the scope of work, common elements and blocks, and I can optimize the layout. When there are no pages, it can turn out that different styles appear for visually identical blocks, or vice versa.
Naturally, all this is subject to a unique design, and not a ready-made bootstrap-type framework.