This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Site Ratings & Reviews > December 2003 > a test for you!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
|
|
|
"West" <not@this.one> wrote in message
news:WDYzb.3320$nm6.18253@news.indigo.ie...quote:
> for challenged moments, a source for inspiration!
> http://www.oyster-web.co.uk/
Font size specified in pixels (I assume). Non resizable in IE.
When the font size *is* changed from the stupidly small size suggested by
the author the "table" falls apart totally.
Your point, except for exhibiting a very badly designed site?
Cheers
Richard.
| |
|
|
"rf" <making.it.up@the.time> wrote in message
news:0wZzb.40575$aT.6157@news-server.bigpond.net.au...quote:
>
> "West" <not@this.one> wrote in message
> news:WDYzb.3320$nm6.18253@news.indigo.ie...
>
> Font size specified in pixels (I assume). Non resizable in IE.
>
> When the font size *is* changed from the stupidly small size suggested by
> the author the "table" falls apart totally.
>
> Your point, except for exhibiting a very badly designed site?
Hush child!
--
W
quote:
>
> Cheers
> Richard.
>
>
| |
| kchayka 2003-12-06, 4:56 pm |
| rf wrote:
quote:
> "West" <not@this.one> wrote in message
> news:WDYzb.3320$nm6.18253@news.indigo.ie...
>
> Your point, except for exhibiting a very badly designed site?
I don't see what the point was, either.
FWIW, it's far from perfect but not as badly designed as a lot of other
sites that get posted here. At least it's not fixed-width. :) Font
sizes *are* stupidly small, though, and they don't know how to properly
layout tabular data. Color contrast in the sidebar is poor, too.
--
To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
"kchayka" <kcha-un-yka@sihope.com> wrote in message
news:3fd08a04$0$40211$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...quote:
> rf wrote:
>
>
> I don't see what the point was, either.
What was the point? -- a clue for you --
You and your down-under mate are 'creatively disabled' not 'creatively
challenged' so never have 'challenging' moments.
(I make that comment based on 'works' posted here from both of you ...in
your case the site you cobbled for some painter guy!)
If you ever enjoyed challenging moments you would appreciate that it is nice
to turn somewhere when inspiration is not flowing for a new layout. One such
place could be the URL I posted. You could even correct its 'mistakes' and
impose your own ideas along the way, if you had any.
Maybe you would like to post a URL which you might find 'creatively
inspirational'??
(I realise you will find this difficult to do, but what the heck, I will
continue to enjoy laughing at my net toys)
--
W
quote:
>
> FWIW, it's far from perfect but not as badly designed as a lot of other
> sites that get posted here. At least it's not fixed-width. :) Font
> sizes *are* stupidly small, though, and they don't know how to properly
> layout tabular data. Color contrast in the sidebar is poor, too.
>
> --
> To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
> address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
| |
| Nico Schuyt 2003-12-06, 4:56 pm |
| West wrote:quote:
> for challenged moments, a source for inspiration!
> http://www.oyster-web.co.uk/
Very nice layout and color scheme! I'm always jealous when I see such a
ranking in the Google toolbar (6 out of 10)
Inspirational indeed (except for the technique of course :-)
Nico
| |
|
|
|
|
| kchayka 2003-12-06, 4:56 pm |
| West wrote:
quote:
> "kchayka" <kcha-un-yka@sihope.com> wrote in message
> news:3fd08a04$0$40211$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
>
> What was the point? -- a clue for you --
> You and your down-under mate are 'creatively disabled' not 'creatively
> challenged' so never have 'challenging' moments.
> (I make that comment based on 'works' posted here from both of you ...in
> your case the site you cobbled for some painter guy!)
I assume you are referring to <URL:http://www.tedbeardsley.com/>
At one time I might have been interested in why you think something is
good or bad, but now your opinions have no value at all, mostly because
of your abusive nature. If you ever decide to act like an adult then I
might start listening to you.
BTW, I like what I did with Ted's site. I got some very nice feedback
on it. So there. :-P
quote:
> If you ever enjoyed challenging moments you would appreciate that it is nice
> to turn somewhere when inspiration is not flowing for a new layout. One such
> place could be the URL I posted.
It's OK, but I doubt I'd call it inspirational.
quote:
> Maybe you would like to post a URL which you might find 'creatively
> inspirational'??
> (I realise you will find this difficult to do, but what the heck, I will
> continue to enjoy laughing at my net toys)
<URL:http://csszengarden.com/> but with a caveat...
While I can appreciate the graphical aspects of many of these layouts,
most are also not great examples of good web design for the usual
reasons - fixed width layouts, microfonts, etc.
What I find most inspirational about this site is the total separation
of content from style. It is a pretty good example of some of the
possiblities of CSS - proof that CSS layouts don't have to be plain,
boring text.
--
To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
| |
| Chris Beall 2003-12-06, 4:56 pm |
| West wrote:quote:
> for challenged moments, a source for inspiration!
> http://www.oyster-web.co.uk/
From the site's privacy page:
"We request information from the user on our contact form. Here a user
must provide contact information (like name and email address). This
contact information is only ever used to get in touch with the user and
is nevwe shared with any third party."
Ignoring the typo, this doesn't tell me if they will get in touch with
me only when I request it, or several times a day to tell me what
wonderful new product they have for me to buy.
Of course, that's content, not HTML, so I guess it's Off Topic.
Chris Beall
| |
|
|
"kchayka" <kcha-un-yka@sihope.com> wrote in message
news:3fd11a03$0$43849$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...quote:
> West wrote:
>
>
> I assume you are referring to <URL:http://www.tedbeardsley.com/>
IMO It looks much better since the November update.
Some things I like about it:
1. Though dull, the colour scheme is pleasing and uses complimentary colours
2. Each page fits nicely on my screen with minimal scrolling (1024x768
maximised)
Some things I don't like about it:
1. All CSS sites seem so similar to each other ...I wonder why?
2. The imbalance of thumbnails sizes. Could you choose a different way to
group them?
3. Missing pixel space at the top of navigation links on the hover state
4. Your own name is too large
quote:
>
> At one time I might have been interested in why you think something is
> good or bad, but now your opinions have no value at all, mostly because
> of your abusive nature. If you ever decide to act like an adult then I
> might start listening to you.
Listen or not is your choice. I don't share your agenda in this space.
quote:
>
> BTW, I like what I did with Ted's site. I got some very nice feedback
> on it. So there. :-P
>
nice[QUOTE][color=darkred]
such[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> It's OK, but I doubt I'd call it inspirational.
Yeah, it is ok, and if you look deeper through the site you will find a lot
of good info and some pretty good layout ideas.
I wasn't holding this site up as a *glowing example* of everything right
....just another good stopping off point now and again!
Do you not think it is helpful to post URLs of sites which have merit?
quote:
>
>
> <URL:http://csszengarden.com/>
Not my 'cup of tea'
:-)
but with a caveat...quote:
> While I can appreciate the graphical aspects of many of these layouts,
> most are also not great examples of good web design for the usual
> reasons - fixed width layouts, microfonts, etc.
>
> What I find most inspirational about this site is the total separation
> of content from style. It is a pretty good example of some of the
> possiblities of CSS - proof that CSS layouts don't have to be plain,
> boring text.
>
> --
> To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
> address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
| |
| kchayka 2003-12-06, 4:56 pm |
| West wrote:
quote:
> "kchayka" <kcha-un-yka@sihope.com> wrote in message
> news:3fd11a03$0$43849$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...
>
> IMO It looks much better since the November update.
Believe it or not, west, I took your negative comments about it to heart
and changed the layout several months ago. I just didn't bother
mentioning it. November was merely the last time the paintings were
updated.
quote:
> Some things I like about it:
> 1. Though dull, the colour scheme is pleasing and uses complimentary colours
Reasons for it: the point is that the art is the focus, not the layout.
That means the background and wrapping should be mostly ignored, thus I
wanted muted colors. I'm sick of blue color schemes. Green is my
favorite color, but I've done it too much already. Red or purple would
be inappropriate, a bolder color would detract from the art anyway.
Brown is an earth tone, suitable for the content. Slugs picked a blue
complimentary color, but not the exact one I ended up with. I just
experimented a little with slightly different shades of brown and blue
until I found ones I personally liked, went well with the paintings, and
had sufficient contrast for readability.
quote:
> 2. Each page fits nicely on my screen with minimal scrolling (1024x768
> maximised)
That's what happens with a fluid design - window size doesn't matter. ;)
BTW, the site is accessible even on a phone display. :-)
quote:
> Some things I don't like about it:
> 1. All CSS sites seem so similar to each other ...I wonder why?
Hmm, this layout was actually inspired by another artist's site. The
main difference is that one was a fixed-width table layout that used
graphics in place of text. BTW, before I redesigned it I spent several
hours browsing other artist galleries, painters in particular. A big
chunk of them are truly ugly. :-) Lots have black backgrounds, which I
hate. I don't think they show off the art any better, either.
quote:
> 2. The imbalance of thumbnails sizes. Could you choose a different way to
> group them?
Ted only sends me enormous full-size images that I have to make suitable
for the web. The paintings are all different shapes and even though
they are all landscapes, the focal point is rather different in each,
including how it is actually presented (more/less abstract, whatever).
I once experimented with thumbs all the same size using just a portion
of the original painting in the thumb, but it was a lot of work to
figure out what part of each painting to show that would still
sufficiently portray that piece. The results were less than satisfying.
Arranging them by shape looked a little hokey.
The current order, though it may appear random, is actually not. I take
subject, color and shape into consideration. When Ted sends a new pic,
I usually have to rearrange everything, but I have a script that
generates the html so that takes no time at all. I do have another idea
for the thumbs page, I just haven't had time to work on it. I won't
know if it will look any better until I try it.
quote:
> 3. Missing pixel space at the top of navigation links on the hover state
I hadn't noticed this before, thanks for pointing it out. It's
(probably mostly) fixed now. IE's broken CSS always takes more work
than I want to put into it. I will only accomodate it just so far, so
there may still be a display oddity in some version of it but not enough
to worry about.
quote:
> 4. Your own name is too large
It is not intentionally large, it's just the smallest font size I use
anywhere is 88%. I made a concious decision not to use anything smaller
than that. It's tucked down at the bottom of the page where hardly
anybody notices anyway. It's only on the home page, too, so it's not
getting more attention than it should.
quote:
>
> Listen or not is your choice.
I listened this time because you were nice about it. We should do this
more often. :)
quote:
> I don't share your agenda in this space.
The only agenda I have is for the web to be a less sucky place than it
is now. A big piece of that is improving site accessibility and
usability. Old design practices are a hinderance to the goal.
Why would a better web be a bad thing?
quote:
>
> Yeah, it is ok, and if you look deeper through the site you will find a lot
> of good info and some pretty good layout ideas.
You should have mentioned in your original post that it was intended as
a reference site, not one up for a critique. I didn't really get much
past the home page the first time for that reason.
They don't say much about SEO that I didn't already know. The layouts
in their portfolio are alright, some of them look like stuff I might
find at monstertemplates or whatever it's called. They're pleasant
enough to look at, but not all that original. There are many different
things can you do with 2 columns and a masthead, but it's still 2
columns with a masthead.
quote:
> Do you not think it is helpful to post URLs of sites which have merit?
Yes, I do, but next time you might want to be more specific about why
you're posting a URL. This ng is for critiques, after all. Posting a
reference site needs a different set of eyes.
--
To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
| |
|
|
"kchayka" <kcha-un-yka@sihope.com> wrote in message
news:3fd21c7d$0$40211$39cecf19@news.twtelecom.net...quote:
> West wrote:
>
>
> Believe it or not, west, I took your negative comments about it to heart
> and changed the layout several months ago. I just didn't bother
> mentioning it. November was merely the last time the paintings were
> updated.
>
colours[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> Reasons for it: the point is that the art is the focus, not the layout.
> That means the background and wrapping should be mostly ignored, thus I
> wanted muted colors. I'm sick of blue color schemes. Green is my
> favorite color, but I've done it too much already. Red or purple would
> be inappropriate, a bolder color would detract from the art anyway.
> Brown is an earth tone, suitable for the content. Slugs picked a blue
> complimentary color, but not the exact one I ended up with. I just
> experimented a little with slightly different shades of brown and blue
> until I found ones I personally liked, went well with the paintings, and
> had sufficient contrast for readability.
The colour scheme is fine, and for the reasons you mention.
The only change I would make would be to replace your blue hover colour with
a red, somewhere close to #Cf2b2b
quote:
>
>
> That's what happens with a fluid design - window size doesn't matter. ;)
> BTW, the site is accessible even on a phone display. :-)
>
>
> Hmm, this layout was actually inspired by another artist's site. The
> main difference is that one was a fixed-width table layout that used
> graphics in place of text. BTW, before I redesigned it I spent several
> hours browsing other artist galleries, painters in particular. A big
> chunk of them are truly ugly. :-) Lots have black backgrounds, which I
> hate. I don't think they show off the art any better, either.
>
to[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> Ted only sends me enormous full-size images that I have to make suitable
> for the web. The paintings are all different shapes and even though
> they are all landscapes, the focal point is rather different in each,
> including how it is actually presented (more/less abstract, whatever).
> I once experimented with thumbs all the same size using just a portion
> of the original painting in the thumb, but it was a lot of work to
> figure out what part of each painting to show that would still
> sufficiently portray that piece. The results were less than satisfying.
> Arranging them by shape looked a little hokey.
>
> The current order, though it may appear random, is actually not. I take
> subject, color and shape into consideration. When Ted sends a new pic,
> I usually have to rearrange everything, but I have a script that
> generates the html so that takes no time at all. I do have another idea
> for the thumbs page, I just haven't had time to work on it. I won't
> know if it will look any better until I try it.
I have an idea for you if you're interested.
I'll make up a jpg using your current thumbs if you wish!
Gonna take a few days though -- I'm down with flu and struggling to keep a
workflow moving!
quote:
>
>
> I hadn't noticed this before, thanks for pointing it out. It's
> (probably mostly) fixed now. IE's broken CSS always takes more work
> than I want to put into it. I will only accomodate it just so far, so
> there may still be a display oddity in some version of it but not enough
> to worry about.
Yep, fine on my browser now!
quote:
>
>
> It is not intentionally large, it's just the smallest font size I use
> anywhere is 88%. I made a concious decision not to use anything smaller
> than that. It's tucked down at the bottom of the page where hardly
> anybody notices anyway. It's only on the home page, too, so it's not
> getting more attention than it should.
I would suggest putting it on a line of its own to appear 'off the page' (on
your dark green background)
quote:
>
>
> I listened this time because you were nice about it. We should do this
> more often. :)
Ok by me! Maybe you will lead by example :-)
quote:
>
>
> The only agenda I have is for the web to be a less sucky place than it
> is now. A big piece of that is improving site accessibility and
> usability. Old design practices are a hinderance to the goal.
>
> Why would a better web be a bad thing?
Yes, it is a sucky place, and a better web would be a good thing. I try to
improve a small corner of the web with every job I do!
However, I cannot agree with limiting a web experience to a css only
approach only!
quote:
>
One[QUOTE][color=darkred]
lot[QUOTE][color=darkred]
>
> You should have mentioned in your original post that it was intended as
> a reference site, not one up for a critique. I didn't really get much
> past the home page the first time for that reason.
>
> They don't say much about SEO that I didn't already know.
You may already know, but many do not!!
The layoutsquote:
> in their portfolio are alright, some of them look like stuff I might
> find at monstertemplates or whatever it's called. They're pleasant
> enough to look at, but not all that original. There are many different
> things can you do with 2 columns and a masthead, but it's still 2
> columns with a masthead.
>
>
> Yes, I do, but next time you might want to be more specific about why
> you're posting a URL. This ng is for critiques, after all. Posting a
> reference site needs a different set of eyes.
Yes, this ng is for critiques, but maybe you will agree that :-
1. Mostly sites are critiqued with words only.
2. Many seeking review do not appear to have looked anywhere for inspiration
3. I think where possible a poster seeking review might like to be pointed
to a site which offers good ideas for layout as well as markup
--
W
quote:
>
> --
> To email a reply, remove (dash)un(dash). Mail sent to the un
> address is considered spam and automatically deleted.
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|