From my very own experience, I suppose you may categorise the web site design process into two sections: the design process that doesn't utilize a wireframes, along with the one which does. Previously being on both sides on this fence, I've a knowledge of how these two processes work and even though designing without having a wireframe does work, I'd must vote in favour of them.
Wireframing, the development of a "visual blueprint", doesn't need to be overly complicated. At most basic level, I have seen wireframes which can be are simply series of post-it notes with the interface (UI) elements utilized them. They're then placed onto a notepad to indicate the structural layout. Match it up to wireframes produced through design software and you'll go to a slightly more refined wireframe with the latter, but regardless how you want to create your structural model, the result is always exactly the same. In other words, it shows yourself, the buyer or another party where things is going to be on the page.
This can be a real-time saver in case you are making a website to get a client. Finding comfort my era of being on "side A" of the fence, when producing a website for any client I never accustomed to execute any wireframing process in the past. The entire process contained: gathering requirements, spec'ing the website, creating the graphical UI after which building the web site once the design had been agreed. The major flaw I found in this process would be the potential for the client wanting to change the main layout quite considerably. I'd have no problem whenever they simply want to tweak things occasionally e.g. colours, make text larger, start being active . more images occasionally, increase the risk for video somewhat bigger (the standard stuff); nevertheless it was obviously a good deal more painful when they then want to move a number of things about on the page that directly affected the "page template". Jumping onto "side B" in the fence and producing the wired layout to the site ensures that layout might be agreed beforehand knowing that in the event the UI design is presented, you could possibly then only need to update the usual stuff.
The need to Spell against each other for Clients
Regardless if presenting a wireframe into a client though, I've had occasions where they will be unwilling to sign this part off on the grounds which it looks very "blocky" and "plain". "Yes it does" could be my immediate answer to this as these blocks determine where we'll put things on your own lovely page in order that whenever you return to me later on when you've reviewed the graphical design, you simply can't then inform me exactly why is the navigation up here and not over there? Remember that, I've had clients such as this in the past so regardless if making a wireframe, there might be times when you continue to must spell it out until this is solely to obtain the layout correct first of all, then we'll make use of the pretty small bit into it afterwards.
A collection of Design Software
You should not necessarily know your path around Adobe software in order to produce some decent wireframes. I use an internet tool, Cacoo, to produce mine. This online software allows you to drag and drop pre-created elements on to your page. This could save a lot of time along the route.?
Much like everything web related, everyone will have their unique opinion with this topic, but my own preference is with a wireframe each and every time I'm designing an internet site. Whether or not it's for any client or for my own, personal site, it does not matter as it ensures that the UI design is increased because you're effectively working from the template.
If you are taking care of a project to get a client, then planning to have Joe Bloggs sign over wires prior to starting on the UI is part of this design process that I'd personally call fundamental to ensuring that you maintain good budget and time management techniques on the project.