From my own experience, I suppose you can categorise the web site design process into two sections: the look process that doesn't use a wireframes, and also the one which does. Having been on both sides of this fence, We've a comprehension of the way both these processes work and even though designing with no wireframe does work, I would have to vote to be replaced by them.
Wireframing, the growth of a "visual blueprint", doesn't need to be overly complicated. At the most elementary, I've seen wireframes that are are simply compilation 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'll visit a slightly more refined wireframe over the latter, but it doesn't matter how you intend to make your structural model, it makes sense always exactly the same. To put it simply, it shows yourself, the consumer or any other party where things is going to be on the page.
This is sometimes a live saver should you be making a website to get a client. Finding comfort my era of being on "side A" of the fence, when producing a website for a client I never accustomed to perform any wireframing process in the past. The full process contains: gathering requirements, spec'ing your website, allowing the graphical UI and then building the website if the design have been agreed. The major flaw I ran across on this process will be the potential for your client attempting to change the main layout quite considerably. I'd have zero problem whenever they simply want to tweak things occasionally e.g. colours, make text larger, then add more images here and there, make video somewhat bigger (the usual stuff); nonetheless it was obviously a whole lot more painful whenever they then desire to move a number of things about for the page that directly affected the "page template". Jumping up to "side B" of the fence and producing the wired layout to the site implies that layout can be agreed beforehand knowing that once the UI design is presented, you may then just need to update the typical stuff.
Having to Spell out for Clients
Even if presenting a wireframe into a client though, I've had occasions where they would be unwilling to sign this part off because that it looks very "blocky" and "plain". "Yes it does" will be my immediate response to this because they blocks determines where we'll put things on your own lovely page to ensure that whenever you come back to me at a later date when you have reviewed the graphical design, you can not then tell me why's the navigation up here rather than over there? Keep in mind that, I have had clients similar to this previously so even when to become a wireframe, there could be instances when you still must spell it out that is solely to get the layout correct for starters, then we'll use the pretty tiny bit for it afterwards.
A collection of Design Software
You don't have to necessarily know your way around Adobe software as a way to produce some decent wireframes. I take advantage of an online tool, Cacoo, to create mine. This online software lets you drag and drop pre-created elements on your page. This can save time and effort along the way.?
As with everything web related, everyone can have their particular opinion about this topic, but my personal preference is to apply a wireframe every time I'm designing a website. Whether or not it's to get a client or my own site, regardless of because it means that the UI design is hasten 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 before you begin 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 planning on the project.