Hello all, I am hoping someone can critique my site www.jqdesign.com.
I'm a new graphic Designer B.Des and need a job, any advice on my
online portfolio is appreciated! Thanku kindly, Jacquie
www.jqdesign.com jpotvin77@hotmail.com

Jacquie wrote:

> Hello all, I am hoping someone can critique my site www.jqdesign.com.
> I'm a new graphic Designer B.Des and need a job, any advice on my
> online portfolio is appreciated! Thanku kindly, Jacquie
> www.jqdesign.com jpotvin77@hotmail.com

<sigh/> I am getting tired of all this "graphic design" rubbish.

Why does graphic design always imply *stupidly* small font sizes, specified
in pixels (10 of them in this case) and so unresizable for the vast majority
of viewers?

Why does graphic design also imply that the stupidly small text be in
stupidly unreadable colours like light grey on white.? Don't you want me to
read that text? If you don't then you are doing a very good job.

Why does graphic design further imply that the layout must be so pixel
perfect that if I ignore[1] your stupidly small font size and make my te
xt
larger, so I can read it, it flows all over the other "graphic design"
elements on the page?

As to the portfolio: I have no bloody idea. I can't read it.

[1] There are two ways of ignoring font size. Use the accessibility opti
ons
of IE. Use another browsers, like Mozilla. I will wager a bottle of
Chardonnay that this site was never tested with Mozilla. I know my
Chardonnay is safe because the big blue image is broken with Mozilla. A
"graphic designer" would never allow that :-)

--
Cheers
Richard.

jpotvin77@hotmail.com (Jacquie) wrote:

> www.jqdesign.com

* It does not validate.
* the small text is REALLY small on my screen
* lacks contrast (the light grey is a litle too light)

Beyond that, I have a soft spot for traditional art skills.

:)

Good luck.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:28:47 +0100, Deryck wrote:

> Richard is absolutely right.
>
> You can download lynx here:
> http://lynx.browser.org/
>
> Or you can access a lynx emulator/viewer here:
> http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.html

Actually, you can kill two stones with one bird by downloading Opera.
Opera has some nice personalization features such as turning off CSS,
text-browser emulation, and more.

http://www.opera.com

--
Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffreyPANTS@jhu.edu **
Website | http://www.newtnotes.com

(** Drop "pants" to reply by email)

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 12:16:26 -0700, Jacquie wrote:

> Hello - thank u all so much for your time and comments!! I am still
> learning and I have to give credit to computer programmers, this is
> hard stuff. Yes I do have a B.des and I really want to learn more
> about the coding side of things. I made a few changes to my text and
> images so hopefully nothing will overlap or break apart any more. I
> have yet to redo the flash. But have taken advice and also softened my
> logo. I chose size 2 font, it looks fine on my computer but is there
> something someone could recommend to change? Any advice is good
> advice, hard or not. I'm well aware I am a print designer but really
> want to learn and am open to comments and suggestions. Would I be
> better off entirely to do my website using flash?? so it doesn't break
> apart?? Thank u again, Jacquie

Why are you even using Flash? Other than to show, "wow, Jacquie knows how
to make a Flash movie"?

Get rid of it.  It does nothing useful to your site.  Put Flash movies
that you have done in a Flash section of your portfolio.

Also, I don't know if anyone else has noticed this or mentioned, but
the photo of you when you click on "Who is Jacquie?" is resized in the
browser using width and height tags.  This is both a personal pet peeve
and something you Really Shouldn't Do(TM).  Use image editing software
(e.g. Photoshop) to bring the image down to the size you need. DO NOT
resize images in your browser using width and height tags!!! That is NOT
what width and height tags are for.

(Image width and height are to tell the browser what the size of an image
is so the browser can lay out the page before it downloads the entire
image).

I notice you also do this with several images in your Design Portfolio.

Also, and I should have mentioned this earlier -- why are you embedding
your site in a full-page frame that points back to your NSCAD web page?
Why not just move all the stuff to your jqdesigns.com web space?  Frames
used in this manner break the flow of the web (actually, frames do that
anyways). Unless you have some real technical reason, id say move all that
stuff to your jqdesigns.com web server.

A side note...
A few interesting parallels between you and me: My mother is from Nova
Scotia; my cousin lives there now. My baby is named "JQ".  Well, that's
about all, I guess.

--
Jeffrey D. Silverman | jeffreyPANTS@jhu.edu **
Website | http://www.newtnotes.com

(** Drop "pants" to reply by email)

rf wrote:
>
> <sigh/> I am getting tired of all this "graphic design" rubbish.
>
> Why does graphic design always imply *stupidly* small font sizes, specifie
d
> in pixels (10 of them in this case) and so unresizable for the vast majori
ty
> of viewers?
>
> Why does graphic design also imply that the stupidly small text be in
> stupidly unreadable colours like light grey on white.? Don't you want me t
o
> read that text? If you don't then you are doing a very good job.
>
> Why does graphic design further imply that the layout must be so pixel
> perfect that if I ignore[1] your stupidly small font size and make my 
text
> larger, so I can read it, it flows all over the other "graphic design"
> elements on the page?

My sentiments exactly. It's as if some graphic designers cannot escape
the mindset of printed design, trying their hardest to ignore the
dynamic nature of the internet.

--
Ben M.

Jacquie wrote:

> Hello all, I am hoping someone can critique my site www.jqdesign.com.
> I'm a new graphic Designer B.Des and need a job, any advice on my
> online portfolio is appreciated! Thanku kindly, Jacquie
> www.jqdesign.com jpotvin77@hotmail.com

There is no good reason to have this site in frames.

The flash is not as intrusive as some, but still does
nothing for the site.  At least remove the portrait head,
which doesn't fit with the other things that display in the
flash movie.  Movie also overlaps the 'refreshing' image.

None of the links do anything on hover.  Makes for a flat
navigation experience.

Nice sense of color, but stop trying to design like
a magazine page.  Let things rearrange themselves more.
--
mbstevens
http://www.mbstevens.com

Jacquie wrote:
> Hello all, I am hoping someone can critique my site www.jqdesign.com.
> I'm a new graphic Designer B.Des and need a job, any advice on my
> online portfolio is appreciated! Thanku kindly, Jacquie
> www.jqdesign.com jpotvin77@hotmail.com
Jacquie,

I like the look of your portfolio. Refreshingly clean and uncluttered. I
like the use of color, especially on the Home page.

BUT, as you have already heard from others, there is a vast difference
between designing for the web and designing for print media. In the Web
environment, you have much less control of the communication and the
recipient has (sometimes unknowingly) much more.

Have you ever been in an old train station? The track announcer speaks
as clearly as possible; his voice is transmitted throughout the room by
numerous loudspeakers. Yet when you stand in some parts of the room, you
can hear the voice clearly, while in others it is rendered
unintelligible by reflections and echoes.

On a web page, you can control the content of the most of the
information and can SUGGEST how it is to be presented, but the user has
a significant ability to modify your suggestion:
- The user can alter the text font face and font size.
- The user can alter link colors and decoration, i.e. the underscore
normally used.
- The user controls the size of the viewing window.
- The user controls the number of colors available.
- The user controls whether add-ons like JavaScript, cookies, and even
CSS are processed or ignored.
- The user, by selecting a browser, controls whether the content is
presented visually (and whether that includes images or not) or aurally.
And, alas, thus also selects which 'standard' functions won't work quite
right, due to defects in the selected browser.

In addition to all of the challenges faced by traditional graphic media,
the web designer is expected to come up with HTML 'suggestions' for
presentation which work in most permutations of the variables that the
user has control over. That's a very large number. That's why standards
become important; IF browsers follow the standard AND if designers code
to the standard, then MOST web sites should work in MOST browsers.

Of course the standards will let you do things that don't adapt to the
user. I viewed your site in a full-screen browser window on a 600 X 800
pixel screen. Had I used 640 X 480, 1024 X 768, or some other window
size, I would have had a very different perception of it....and that's Bad.

I like the print samples you show. I think you have two choices:
- Stay away from web design. Hire somebody to create a portfolio site
for you that emphasizes your considerable strengths. Enjoy life.
- Become a web designer. Resolve to study what is involved from the
ground up, knowing that it will take considerable time to become
proficient and also knowing that the target is rapidly moving, so that
your learning will be continuous. Practice. Read (look at other posts in
this newsgroup and others with names that include 'HTML' 'stylesheets',
etc.) Accept that whatever you create will never be 'perfect', but will
break in some browser, annoy or confuse some users, and result in lots
of sleepless nights, yet will provide a challenge to your brain unlike
any other.

Best of luck. If you decide to take the second path, you might learn
from the earlier post "How to get a good critique" in this newsgroup.

Regards,
Chris Beall

jpotvin77@hotmail.com (Jacquie) wrote in
news:64d10947.0409091445.18ea10a8@posting.google.com:

> Hello all, I am hoping someone can critique my site www.jqdesign.com.

You shouldn't be multiposting - you asked the same question
in alt.design.graphics today, twice.
What is the accepted way to share a message across multiple newsgroups?
http://smjg.port5.com/faqs/usenet/xpost.html

> I'm a new graphic Designer B.Des and need a job, any advice on my
> online portfolio is appreciated! Thanku kindly, Jacquie
> www.jqdesign.com jpotvin77@hotmail.com

There is nothing wrong with learning, and asking for help,
but when you asked a question about your website in c.i.w.a.html
on July 26th:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?thr....1364ac8e%40pos
ting.google.com>
you were given advice that you haven't followed, such as producing
valid HTML.

In my response on July 26th, I said "Once you have dealt with those
sorts of issues, you could ask in alt.html.critique for a review of
your site". Don't be surprised to hear the same sort of feedback
as you got in July - just because you did a "redesign" doesn't
mean you know(yet) how to author pages for the world wide web.

Amongst other things, in July I criticised your "Web design" link:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?sel...oddirectcaold%4
024.71.223.159>
Now it leads to a page with a bunch of broken links.

I'd suggest that, as hard as it may be, put aside all your graphic
design skills for now, and produce a website that says everything
you want to convey, but use only plain text and valid HTML.
Then ask for a critique.
Then add some CSS.
Then ask for a critique.
Then add some graphics.
Then ask for a critique.
Then "go wild" with your design skils.
Then ask for a critique.

--
Dave Patton
Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
http://www.confluence.org/
My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 01:37:47 GMT, Ben Measures
<saint_abroadremove@removehotmail.com> wrote:

> rf wrote: 
> My sentiments exactly. It's as if some graphic designers cannot escape
> the mindset of printed design, trying their hardest to ignore the
> dynamic nature of the internet.

... which ends up ruining their hard work in the end because they haven't
accounted for that.

My goodness, graphic folks, I love a smart look as much as anyone. But
nobody wants it at the cost of not being usable or breaking in an
environment substantially different than the one on your computer.