I Paid My Viewers To Fix My Terrible Website

Why did you decide to hold a design contest?

The primary motivation behind holding a design contest was to address the shortcomings of the existing website. Initially, the website's design was both dull and unappealing, critiqued widely for its awkward layout and generic icons. Coming from a backend background, the original designer felt out of his depth and recognized the need for a more compelling and visually appealing design.

Instead of outsourcing to a professional firm, leveraging the community’s talent seemed like a more innovative approach. The community had already provided invaluable feedback and showed remarkable potential. By organizing a design contest, it created an opportunity to tap into this diverse pool of talent while fostering engagement and promoting a sense of collaboration.

Furthermore, the contest was also an open-ended experiment to see how creative and high-quality the submissions could get. The goal wasn't just about fixing a website but also about celebrating and compensating the talent within the community. The overwhelming response and the quality of the submissions exceeded all expectations, reaffirming that this community-driven approach was the right choice.

What were the rules and rewards of the contest?

• Submission Guidelines:

  • Participants were required to submit designs for the new Upload Thing homepage.
  • Designs focused particularly on the banner, though many went further.
  • Submissions could be static or animated.

• Original Reward:

  • Initially, the contest promised $500 to the winning designer.
  • An additional $500 was designated for a charity chosen by the winner.

• Final Decision:

  • Due to the exceptional quality of submissions, additional compensation was provided.
  • Multiple designers were compensated, with some semifinalists receiving $200 each.
  • The grand prize winner received $1,000, thanks to a matching contribution from Rive.

• Evaluation Criteria:

  • Designs were judged based on creativity, usability, and how well they conveyed the service's value.
  • Clear communication of what users can upload and how the service works was crucial.
  • Aesthetics and technical execution were also important factors in the evaluation.

This approach ensured fair recognition and compensation for the array of impressive submissions that exceeded expectations.

How did you gather and evaluate the submissions?

Collecting design submissions involved an open call to the community via a tweet. Participants were encouraged to submit designs, focusing primarily on the homepage banner but with freedom to extend further. Both static and animated versions were accepted, broadening the scope of creativity.

Evaluation criteria were set to ensure fair and comprehensive assessment. Creativity, usability, and the effectiveness of conveying the service's value were primary factors. Submissions needed to clearly communicate what users can upload and how the service operates. Additionally, aesthetics and technical execution played significant roles in the judging process.

The unexpected quality and quantity of entries were astounding. Anticipating a range of responses, the diversity and high level of talent far surpassed expectations. The community’s enthusiasm and skill shone through, making the selection process both exciting and challenging.

What were some of the standout submissions?

Several submissions stood out for their uniqueness and creativity:

• Adam's Animation: Beautifully showcased different upload types like files and images. However, the varying speeds in the animation parts were a bit off.

• Enigma Studio: Stunning 3D visuals with reflective surfaces. Despite being a late submission, its intricate design elements were impressive.

• Draken's Hero Design: Offered both light and dark modes. The detailed icons and smooth aesthetic made it a top contender.

• Patrick Restore's Animation: Featured computers uploading to the cloud. Its subtle animation was mesmerizing, though it slightly lacked in showcasing diverse file types.

• Namer’s Revisions: Presented an innovative thumbnail-inclusive design. Although complex, it almost perfectly executed the idea of different file types.

• UB Patrick’s Work: Highlighted for its elegance. Although it didn't fully illustrate the user experience, it was visually captivating.

Each design brought something unique to the table, contributing to the overall high quality of the contest.

Who were the finalists and winners?

The design contest yielded many standout entries, making it difficult to choose just one winner. The finalists and winners displayed exceptional creativity and technical prowess, setting them apart from their peers.

Finalists

Tom Van Marienburg took the spotlight for his comprehensive website redesign. His work was so impressive that it is already being integrated into the new site. The sophisticated floating file animation and the smooth, user-friendly interface made his design a clear standout.

As Tom expressed,

"I got carried away this weekend and ended up redesigning the whole page."

Tom’s design prowess speaks for itself, making him an easy hire for future projects.

Grand Prize Winner

Kayla emerged as the grand prize winner with her incredible use of Rive for animations. Her design effectively demonstrated the various file upload capabilities, accomplishing this through a seamless, minimalist animation that was both beautiful and highly functional.

"The smoothness and clarity of the animation showcase all parts of our service better than I could have imagined," Theo commented.

Kayla’s work earned her the top spot and a well-deserved reward, significantly enhancing the website's appeal.

These finalists and winners exemplify the extraordinary talent within the community, turning a simple contest into a showcase of world-class design skills.

What tools and techniques did the winning designers use?

• Rive: Kayla utilized Rive to create a smooth, minimalist animation. This tool was particularly effective due to its high performance and minimal file size, which ensured the final product was both beautiful and efficient.

• Figma: Tom employed Figma for his comprehensive website redesign. Figma allowed collaborative work and streamlined the design process, making real-time feedback possible.

• 3D Techniques: Multiple designers like Enigma Studio and Jack used advanced 3D techniques. These added depth and visual appeal, making their designs stand out.

• Tailwind UI & Hero Icons: Some participants leveraged resources like Tailwind UI and Hero Icons to expedite the design process. These tools provided a robust base, allowing more focus on customization and aesthetics.

These tools and techniques brought unrivaled creativity and functionality to the submissions, enhancing both usability and visual appeal.

How has the website improved after the redesign?

The redesign brought significant improvements to the website. Enhanced user experience is evident through smoother navigation and a more intuitive layout. Users can now easily understand the upload features and transition seamlessly between sections.

Aesthetic changes have drastically increased visual appeal. The new design integrates a cleaner, more modern look with vibrant animations and polished graphics. This not only makes the site more engaging but also professional and trustworthy.

Overall functionality has also seen an upgrade. The site’s performance is optimized with lightweight animations and effective use of resources like Rive and Figma. This ensures faster loading times and a more responsive interface.

In essence, the website's transformation has resulted in a blend of beauty and efficiency, making it a delight to use.

What are the key takeaways from this design contest?

1. Community Engagement is Powerful: Leveraging the community's talent not only yielded amazing designs but also fostered a sense of collaboration and involvement. This approach highlighted the potential that exists within a dedicated user base.

2. Diverse Perspectives Enhance Creativity: The variety of design submissions showcased different approaches and ideas. Each designer's unique perspective contributed to enriched design solutions that a single designer or team might not have achieved.

3. Fair Compensation is Crucial: Recognizing and compensating participants fairly ensured the integrity and success of the contest. When the quality of submissions exceeded expectations, additional compensation acknowledged their hard work and talent.

4. Effective Tools Matter: Tools like Rive and Figma were instrumental in creating high-quality, functional designs. Utilizing the right tools can significantly enhance both the creative process and the final output.

5. Clear Criteria Guide Better Outcomes: Setting clear evaluation criteria for creativity, usability, and technical execution helped in systematically assessing the submissions. This approach ensured a fair and objective selection of winners.

6. Broad Participation is Beneficial: Accepting a wide range of submissions, from static to animated, and even from different design backgrounds, increased the pool of talent and the richness of designs. Encouraging broad participation enriched the contest's overall outcome.