How's this look on your monitor?

Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM

08/22/2007 08:30:40 AM · #1

Well, metatate.com has been recreated to be the professional web-site for the business myself and my friend have started (graphic design, images, and prepess - not to be confused with photogrpahy for hire â�¦ we're walking a bit of a fine line there but i don't want to do weddings or anything at this point).

Anyway, It's simple to say the least - I'm really just looking for feedback as to how it looks on different monitors at diff resolutions. Thanks.

Special bonus if you find more than the one glaring title mistake that I'll fix tonight.

Chinabun

Canon PowerShot SD990 IS

08/22/2007 08:34:12 AM · #2

considering you offer graphic design, why would you make the website so plain and informal?

saiphfire

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

08/22/2007 08:39:30 AM · #3

It looks very good and professional to me, except that for some reason on the main page the
"Approach
Portfolio
Capabilities
Contact"
appears a little screwy. For instance, the two p's in Approach appear to be slightly different sizes. Also, those letters seem more pixilated. I don't have the problem with any other text on the site.

My only other comments are:
-within the Portfolio section I might separate the photos from the brochures that you've made because it seemed a little odd to have them both in the same slideshow-thingy.
-I almost couldn't find your portfolio b/c I didn't realize at first I had to click on the little arrow... might make that bigger.

Edit to respond to previous post: Now that you mention it, although I do think the site is very professional-looking, it doesn't seem to be the site of a graphic designer. I think it's fine either way, but the site doesn't come close to comparing to your work.

I'm viewing on a Dell flat panel at 1024x1280, btw.

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 08:42:21.

Chinarosepetal

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III

08/22/2007 08:40:28 AM · #4

Looks great:P I wouldn't call it plain and informal - it's simple which fits in perfectly with your tag 'Simply creating reactions'

I'd consider comissioning work with you, based on what I've seen so far.:)
Took me a bit of time to find the wee orange arrow ;)

08/22/2007 08:41:41 AM · #5

wow - you're right! Very observant! - heads will roll for this ;P

Originally posted by saiphfire:

two p's in Approach appear to be slightly different sizes.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

08/22/2007 08:43:48 AM · #6

My only comment is that on the portfolio part, It took me a second to figure out how to view the images. The arrow button is rather small, and also on my monitor (firefox run on a 1024x768 monitor) the arrow needed to be scrolled down to. I would say have an image load with the porfolio page, because then it gives you some idea of how to scroll throught he rest.

JenniferDavidGA

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

08/22/2007 08:44:53 AM · #7

I like the simple clean look of it. I also had problems finding the arrow to scroll threw the portfolio. You have some great work in there.

It looked good on my cheap old gateway monitor. :)

Chinabun

Canon PowerShot SD990 IS

08/22/2007 08:51:08 AM · #8

Originally posted by Marigold:

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/22/2007 09:01:56 AM · #9

I like the site. Very simple and to the point - easy to navigate.

BTW, my company wants to put up a billboard on Pluto. Can you help us?

Shadowi6

Nikon D200

Sigma 10- 20mm f/3.5 EX-DC HSM

08/22/2007 09:04:54 AM · #10

stunningly simple.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

08/22/2007 10:08:31 AM · #11

Nice design, looks clean. Same comment about scrolling through the portfolio - I left the site, came back to this thread and then saw the comment about the little arrow - when on the page the first time I never scrolled down to see it as it was off the screen. Other than that, I would lose the asterisk and comment about Pluto. Just seems cheesy and really doesn't add anything. JMO...

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 10:08:53.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/22/2007 10:34:49 AM · #12

OH ! That's the problem (a Graphic Design major) ;P ... I have my BA in GD. I have messed around with all sorts of flashy sites and have come back to the lowest common denominator - simplicity. My business partner and I feel that we personally have seen enough efforts to make things complicated - so we went mildly avante gard.

I greatly appreciate all the feedback from you guys/gals and I welcome more - it looks like the main issue is the portfolio (at least getting into it which is the most important part ! ;P). Thanks.

Originally posted by Chinabun:

I'm a GD major

Canon EOS-20D

08/22/2007 10:48:45 AM · #13

I like the simplicity. A few picks, though...

Like aj mentioned, the arrow button on your portfolio appears below the main viewing screen and there's so much white space in between that at first, I figured you didn't have your portfolio up. People are going to miss that. I realize that 1024x768 is heading towards out but you're still going to miss a good portion of viewers if you don't design with them in mind.

In that same vein, I'd probably make your header bar part of the background and then make it non-scrolling. Otherwise, you can scroll about half again as far and there's not actually any content over there.

Here's a screenshot for you in case that helps.

emlbaker

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

08/22/2007 10:54:51 AM · #14

Title Error - Well at least I think it is.

In your portfolio you have the Financial Health & Wealth logo. When next arrow clicked the image changes but the title remains the same.

You asked for close scrutiny, you got it.

I like the plain simplistic look of the site. The visitor is not overwhelmed with images, sales pitches and the like. There is nothing worse than visiting a site looking for a product of service and having to sift through pages of ads/sales pitches to find what you are looking for.

Great work, hope it pays off.

I agree with the pixelation comment on the Menu text. The O looks a bit strange to me too.

Viewed on LCD at 1280 x 768.

ETA: I think that perhaps some more information on your contact page. email address is good, but the phone number (if that is what it is) means nothing to me. It does not hint at your location, and being that your domain is a .com it could be from anywhere. Just MHO of course.

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 10:58:18.

08/22/2007 11:19:40 AM · #15

In a similar fashion, one of the titles in the portfolio is off centered, while the rest of them are centered.

08/22/2007 11:22:02 AM · #16

Also, overall I would try to have everything fit on "one" screen, especially your entrance page.

Just so I know for my own site, what is the average screen resolution that the AVERAGE person is using now a days?

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

08/22/2007 11:29:29 AM · #17

There's the rub ... it seems like everyone is different - there are ways to create growing/shrinking web-pages where the contents fit to the page / screen and even scale is windows are enlarged or reduced - but that's not necessarilly the the most user-friendly either.

Originally posted by ajdelaware:

Just so I know for my own site, what is the average screen resolution that the AVERAGE person is using now a days?

justamistere

Nikon D3s

08/22/2007 11:47:34 AM · #18

Originally posted by Chinabun:

Yeh I agree it is simple. I meant plain by no color. I like what he offers, but honestly I wouldn't even make it to the portfolio if I had found this site on the net. I'm a GD major and this site just doesn't pull me in. I like the name on the side though. I guess I would add color to the home page or even some examples on the home page. I also don't like how when I get to the portfolio, it says look at some examples, and then I have to scroll down to find nothing but an arrow wanting me to go to another page where the samples are overlapping each other. I dont know. I'm one of those people who likes convenience and I lose interest fast. The res looks good on my laptop though.

Originally posted by Marigold:
Looks great:P I wouldn't call it plain and informal - it's simple which fits in perfectly with your tag 'Simply creating reactions'

I'd consider comissioning work with you, based on what I've seen so far.:)
Took me a bit of time to find the wee orange arrow ;)

I'm a Software Designer/Programmer/Analyst, etc. I agree Simple is good, but so is "Easy", as in Simple and Easy to use. With a little graphic appeal, too.

1) Each time I clicked on the Left-Margin menu the choices all disappeared and reappeared. Pre-download some sharp, size-optimized graphics (as in pictures), and you'll never worry about how it looks on any browser. Those were worries of the past.

2) I never got to see any portfolio samples only a "tiny" arrow, with not even mouse-over, instructions.

3) The first page graphic was good.

How is this look on your monitor?

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

08/22/2007 12:14:35 PM · #19

ARE yah!? ;P

Originally posted by justamistere:

I'm a Software Designer/Programmer/Analyst, etc.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

08/22/2007 12:19:23 PM · #20

I just looked at your front page (that's where you make your first impression, right?). I like the simplicity, and the colour scheme, but two things sort of jumped out:

(1) the tape, looks like a piece of a bandaid, looks sort of "cheap" to me :( [Hey, I'm not a designer or anything, just my opinion, ok]

(2) the line at top with the name - the letters but up to the bottom of the line and merge with the white of the background, and to me that looks weird. I wonder if a slightly, every so slightly wider band of blue to keep the letters in the band without merging to the white background might be worth trying.

08/22/2007 12:24:50 PM · #21

I knew I would have to brace myself when dealing with this crowd ;) - keep 'em coming! this is very good feedback. Thanks.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

08/22/2007 03:48:49 PM · #22

Some changes have been implemented - I linked my parter / web designer to this thread and he implemented some changes.

Feel free to let me know if we're closer to Nirvana.

We're not web designers (yet) so some changes will be done at a later time (the banner width).

Message edited by author 2007-08-22 15:50:33.

MonicaJames

Nikon D200

08/22/2007 04:24:45 PM · #23

Originally posted by mk:

I agree with MK. Both horizontal and vertical scrollbars are active even though there no content to see on the bottom and the right. I am not sure what is the resolution that you used when you build your page but there are existing javascripts available to actually read the resolution size(s) of your viewers and then you can code around that...