| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/22/2007 04:28:47 PM · #26 |
Tate! Nice work, good looking website. I wandered through it quickly and will go back for a closer look.
First impressions: I'm with Ursula with the critique on the masking tape. A Graphics Design team would/should design a cool sticky for posting of notes.
Also, unless your clients all have young eyes, you might consider making the point sizes just a tad larger, well, especially your name and address in the lower r/h corner. (Oh, yes, I'm viewing on a 19" flat screen, 1280 x 1024)
Glad to see you're using some of your prize-winners on DPC in your new business. And congratulations and best wishes in that venture, BTW.
Alice
Message edited by author 2007-08-22 16:30:38. |
|
|
|
08/22/2007 04:37:58 PM · #27 |
Works A-OK for me at 1280x1024. White for a background is kinda blah for me... but that's the only nit I'll pick. Nice. Could be that you set it to use whatever backgound the browser selected. I'm not a html nut so I wouldn't know. ;)
|
|
|
|
08/22/2007 06:36:04 PM · #28 |
Tate, back for a few more observations.
On the AOL and IE6 browsers, the type sizes are just fine. Big enough to read without being overpoweringly big, including your address stuff. However, on both browsers, the CONTACT page has a problem with the leading. Squished together, it is.
The version of Firefox I use (Version 1-something), has the very small text.
Still, it's looking good. |
|
|
|
08/22/2007 07:09:55 PM · #29 |
| Looks identical in IE7, Fx, and Opera here. |
|
|
|
08/22/2007 08:39:30 PM · #30 |
is that a good thing ?
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Looks identical in IE7, Fx, and Opera here. |
|
|
|
|
08/22/2007 09:11:35 PM · #31 |
Go to the site and, in this case there is a boring screen, where you have to mouse around somewhere and click something just to get to a menu. Why is that? Is this not a waste of time? Ya trying to po your visitors?
You see this quite often....and I personally don't like it.
Hope this is the input you are looking for.
|
|
|
|
08/22/2007 09:15:05 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by metatate:
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Looks identical in IE7, Fx, and Opera here. |
is that a good thing ? |
Yes when the concern is text size variation across different browsers. |
|
|
|
08/22/2007 09:21:33 PM · #33 |
Looks good. A couple of suggestions if I may.
Front page photo:
Add a subtle animation to it. For example, make a small crease on the bottom right corner so it look slike it's slightly bent and then have it move a little as if it's catching a breeze. You could minimize the file size if you sliced the photo into two and just animate the bottom part.
Top bar:
I'm on a 1600x1200 display and I notice a horizontal scroll when I resize the browser. Not a big deal but it makes it look less professional. An easy fix would be to simply make that bar completely solid and set with a width=100% that way it resizes on the fly. Another option would be to chop it up into three pieces if you wanted to maintain the fade on the right side of it. Just set the middle piece to width=100% so it handles the resizing.
Anyway, just a couple of suggestions from someone who continues to procrastinate about finishing his own site. :P
Message edited by author 2007-08-22 21:23:39.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 10:35:27 AM · #34 |
WE followed some of the suggestions. The splash page is the same (no animation) - you only see it once - and it's just meant to associate with the business card to say "you're here!"
Take a look at the revised site and let me know what you think.
Thanks everybody.
metatate.com
Message edited by author 2007-09-06 10:35:59. |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 11:53:11 AM · #35 |
I like the sites simplicity. Some observations and nitpicks...
1. On the contact page the photo of the kid is a little pixelized on the toy phone and that side of his face.
2. It seems there's a little extra space on the page so that I have to scroll down. It's just a little and I only have to roll the mouse wheel once or twice but it looks like there's enough room in the white space to reduce the vertical size a little.
3. I might switch the links you have on the top left to have the portfolio under the capabilities. I went in order and would've like to see the informative pages all first before looking at the portfolio because they're short and simple but informative. I would still keep it above the contact us page though.
4. In the portfolio I clicked on the portfolio first and when I was finished I looked for a link to get me to the photography but had to go back to get to it by clicking the portfolio again at the top left. It would have been nice to have the photography link still there as I'm scrolling through. And vice versa. If I chose to look at the photography first then I'd want to be able to switch to portfolio without having to go back to the top left.
All very nitpicky stuff. Overall I think its a great business and looks very professional, simple and well done. Some great work in there too. |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 12:13:18 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Sheryll:
1. On the contact page the photo of the kid is a little pixelized on the toy phone and that side of his face.
|
Ditto with the kid on the capabilities page for me. The rest look good but those two are rather pixely. (1280x800 TFT) |
|
|
|
09/06/2007 12:48:46 PM · #37 |
I was going to mention that, too. The reason is that you used HTML to reduce the size of those images, rather than resizing them ahead of time. Size them to the appropriate dimensions before incorporating them, and viola, they'll look fine :)
Originally posted by latentflip:
Originally posted by Sheryll:
1. On the contact page the photo of the kid is a little pixelized on the toy phone and that side of his face.
|
Ditto with the kid on the capabilities page for me. The rest look good but those two are rather pixely. (1280x800 TFT) |
|
|
|
|
09/06/2007 01:06:35 PM · #38 |
Not a big fan of the font type as it appears "chippy" if that makes any sense (what about VERDANA?). The use of CSS code directly in to the html-code might seem a little weird and messy? The arrows are a little small. The picture on CABABILITIES are not resized so details are not good.
otherwise it looks good on this monitor (1280x1024.) i like the simple approach. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/25/2025 10:53:43 AM EDT.
