Yes, always if it's a web app/site. I go straight from paper sketches to code. For many reasons:
I don't do wireframes. I find them pointless and disruptive. If the client insists on wireframes it's time for a discussion about why we need wireframes, and if yes = figure out if the value of a wireframe is justified by the (often large) extra cost.
I do basically the same thing in Photoshop/Sketch that I do in code, so no reason repeating myself. It actually takes longer for me in most cases to do the same thing in Photoshop/Sketch as I do in browser.
The limitations of Photoshop/Sketch...when I design in-browser I can immediately check different resolutions, and I'm not guessing at what would work, or how I would implement. Also, repeating elements isn't really great in PS/S.
When the design is done, it's ready for approval and subsequently handover to the devs. There is no implementation phase - it was baked into the design phase.
Some clients annoyingly want to sit next to you for some parts of the design phase, and I find the 'quick fix in the inspector' route to be way quicker than juggling tools in PS/S to try the things the client wants.
Being able to cut time (cost) for the client by skipping one step is a good way of selling your services.
For me, the way to look at it isn't that PS/S is one thing and the code is another. They are both tools to achieve the same goal. But by using PS/S you are adding an unnecessary step to the process.
Yes, always if it's a web app/site. I go straight from paper sketches to code. For many reasons:
I don't do wireframes. I find them pointless and disruptive. If the client insists on wireframes it's time for a discussion about why we need wireframes, and if yes = figure out if the value of a wireframe is justified by the (often large) extra cost.
I do basically the same thing in Photoshop/Sketch that I do in code, so no reason repeating myself. It actually takes longer for me in most cases to do the same thing in Photoshop/Sketch as I do in browser.
The limitations of Photoshop/Sketch...when I design in-browser I can immediately check different resolutions, and I'm not guessing at what would work, or how I would implement. Also, repeating elements isn't really great in PS/S.
When the design is done, it's ready for approval and subsequently handover to the devs. There is no implementation phase - it was baked into the design phase.
Some clients annoyingly want to sit next to you for some parts of the design phase, and I find the 'quick fix in the inspector' route to be way quicker than juggling tools in PS/S to try the things the client wants.
Being able to cut time (cost) for the client by skipping one step is a good way of selling your services.
For me, the way to look at it isn't that PS/S is one thing and the code is another. They are both tools to achieve the same goal. But by using PS/S you are adding an unnecessary step to the process.