From my very own experience, I assume you might categorise the site design process into two sections: the style method that doesn't utilize a prototyping tool, along with the the one which does. Being previously for both sides with this fence, We have an awareness of methods these two processes work and although designing without a wireframe really does work, I'd personally ought to vote in preference of them.
Wireframing, the roll-out of a "visual blueprint", needn't be overly complicated. At the most basic level, I've seen wireframes which might be are simply group of post-it notes with all the interface (UI) elements drawn on them. These are then placed onto a small note to indicate the structural layout. Match it up with to wireframes produced through design software and you might visit a slightly more refined wireframe through the latter, but it doesn't matter how you want to build your structural model, it's wise always the same. To put it simply, it shows yourself, the consumer or another party where things will be found on the page.
This is sometimes a real-time saver if you are to become a website to get a client. Rediscovering the reassurance of my times of being on "side A" in the fence, when making a website for any client I never employed to perform any wireframing process back then. The full process was comprised of: gathering requirements, spec'ing the website, creating the graphical UI and after that building the site once the design had been agreed. The most important flaw I came across in this process could be the prospect of the customer wanting to customize the main layout quite considerably. I'd don't have any problem if they simply want to tweak things every now and then e.g. colours, make text larger, then add more images occasionally, increase the risk for video a little bigger (the usual stuff); nevertheless it would be a whole lot more painful whenever they then wish to move a number of things about about the page that directly affected the "page template". Jumping to "side B" of the fence and producing the wired layout for your site implies that layout might be agreed beforehand knowing once the UI design is presented, you could possibly then only have to update the usual stuff.
The need to Spell it for Clients
Even when presenting a wireframe with a client though, I have had occasions where they will be reluctant to sign this part off on the basis which it looks very "blocky" and "plain". "Yes it does" could be my immediate solution to this because these blocks will determine where we are going to put things in your lovely page to ensure whenever you come back to me down the road once you've reviewed the graphical design, you simply can't then tell me why's the navigation up here rather than over there? Keep in mind that, I have had clients this way previously so regardless if creating a wireframe, there may be occasions when you'll still should spell it that this is only to obtain the layout correct for starters, then we'll use the pretty little bit with it afterwards.
An Arsenal of Design Software
There's no need to necessarily know your way around Adobe software so that you can produce some decent wireframes. I use an internet tool, Cacoo, to produce mine. This online software permits you to drag and drop pre-created elements on your page. This will save considerable time along the route.?
Just like everything web related, everyone can have their very own opinion for this topic, but my very own preference is to apply a wireframe each time I'm designing a web site. Whether it's to get a client or for my own, personal site, it doesn't matter because it ensures that the UI design is increased because you're effectively working coming from a template.
When you are implementing a project to get a client, then aiming to have Joe Bloggs sign off of the wires before starting around the UI is part of this design process that I might call fundamental to making certain you maintain good budget and time management techniques on the project.