Based on rereading a few posts from Dana, and some in the Discussion groups, I’m opening the debate. There seems to be a lot of discussion about how important styles are when first getting into the C3D learning curve.
Join in the fun, and tell us your thoughts. If you’ve ever read the back page of Fast Company or any number of other magazines, you know the game. And if you want to play Devil’s Advocate, that’s good too!
JW: Styles are a crucial part of the initial training and learning experience. The typical user wants results that LOOK like a product they’re used to producing, whether that came from LDT or Carlson or EaglePoint. By preparing a good set of styles before ever beginning to teach the typical user in your firm, you give them a product that looks familiar with very little work. They recognize a profile that looks like their own, and are instilled with confidence that the product can deliver results for them. When presented with the out-of-the-box styles during the learning process, users are spending more time thinking about the fact that it doesn’t LOOK right instead of thinking about the design process.
Now, this doesn’t mean that the styles have to be built in-house to be effective. It means that the styles have to be built before beginning any sort widespread training effort. Delivering an initial positive experience is at least as important as delivering picks and clicks during the first few tasks, and styles that look familiar are the best first impression.