As part of an incremental development process and with the help of expert professionals (well, kingandy and berrega) I've been redesigning my website to make it less pretentious and in general a bit "leaner
( Read more... )
Hope this helps, it's all meant to be constructive :)xerodeJune 2 2005, 08:14:47 UTC
I realise that a lot of these "criticisms" can be made to my own site, but that's been redesigned, albeit offline while I work on more important projects.
1. Yes, it keeps the main page from looking too busy, while separating content into clearly defined sections. Definitely cut the number of photos down to a max of the strongest 20 photos for each portfolio section.
2. As long as the images only cycle between the portfolio images (and not archive), then yes.
3/4. Personally I'd drop the white on black and definitely get rid of the monospaced serif text for the body text. Verdana is the nicest cross-browser screen font and failing that, Helvetica or Arial
( ... )
Re: Hope this helps, it's all meant to be constructive :)anatosuchusJune 2 2005, 08:40:59 UTC
Just as a counterpoint, although it's a tad small I like the monospaced font. The trouble with "Verdana being the best font" is that every bugger uses it and before you know it all web sites look the bloody same!
Re: Hope this helps, it's all meant to be constructive :)xerodeJune 2 2005, 09:23:39 UTC
I know what you mean about the "overuse" of Verdana, but I still use it because it's the only standard-compliant font designed for screen use. All the other fonts were designed many years before computers and this is one of the reasons serif fonts look so ugly at such a small size.
Re: Hope this helps, it's all meant to be constructive :)kingandyJune 2 2005, 09:17:33 UTC
"do not use JavaScript to display content"
ITYM "do not use JavaScript as the only way of displaying content". Each of those thumbnail links has a HREF that works fine as a url for accessing the image (eg. http://205.214.80.200/~disturbi/stage/disturbing.php?imager=images/music/nma_london_dec04/CRW_3146.jpg ), which the JS cancels after it's run its image switch thing (return false). if js doesn't work for some reason (eg. you've got it turned off or are a crawler) that link'll fire.
This was instituted because kneeshooter wanted the thumbnail bar to scroll and stay scrolled when you changed the image, so reloading the page with a different image was undesirable, but had to be available in case JS was disabled.
1. Yes, it keeps the main page from looking too busy, while separating content into clearly defined sections. Definitely cut the number of photos down to a max of the strongest 20 photos for each portfolio section.
2. As long as the images only cycle between the portfolio images (and not archive), then yes.
3/4. Personally I'd drop the white on black and definitely get rid of the monospaced serif text for the body text. Verdana is the nicest cross-browser screen font and failing that, Helvetica or Arial ( ... )
Reply
I think it complements they layout.
Reply
Reply
ITYM "do not use JavaScript as the only way of displaying content". Each of those thumbnail links has a HREF that works fine as a url for accessing the image (eg. http://205.214.80.200/~disturbi/stage/disturbing.php?imager=images/music/nma_london_dec04/CRW_3146.jpg ), which the JS cancels after it's run its image switch thing (return false). if js doesn't work for some reason (eg. you've got it turned off or are a crawler) that link'll fire.
This was instituted because kneeshooter wanted the thumbnail bar to scroll and stay scrolled when you changed the image, so reloading the page with a different image was undesirable, but had to be available in case JS was disabled.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment