Preserved Topic: site review (Page 1 of 1)

feedback anyone? <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/redface.gif">
http://www.worldzone.net/ss/vogonpoet

I like it. I have a couple of suggestions... the links along the wooden bar look like they're kinda cramped there. I think there should be a bit more space to the left of "About" and the right of "Gb." Of course, that might require remaking the whole table and everything, so you might not want to do it.

Also, you might try a one pixel black border around the textbox. (Unfortunately, I forget how do it exactly, but if you want help I can probably figure it out.)

I tend to agree with you slime! Originally I did not have the contact link in the nav bar and as you rightly say, after I added it tended to 'squeeze' everything up too much... .. I did consider some form of decoration around the text box, but got kinda lazy! oops.. maybe I need to re address that issue <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/redface.gif"> thanks for your comments.. (btw does it look like wood? lol... I guess it does on reflection!.. I wasnt sure what it was supposed to be...it just happened).. cheers

Checked out the whole site. I like it. There isn't a uniform feel to the site, but I don't think that's a bad thing here as it allows for more variety on a site that's main purpose seems to be fun. I particularly liked the Gallery and Links page graphics. I did have a few qualms though:

1. You could lose the splash page. I'm not against splash pages on principal, this one just seems to be the least appealing to me of all your pages. It seems to be the most simple and quickly produced image on your site, and that's not what you want for a front door.

2. The contrast on your main page with the light grey on dark grey text needs to be upped a bit. Legibility is king.

3. The about page graphic seems very blurry and the color scheme just rubs me the wrong way. It looks a lot like the web-safe color palette which is maybe why I don't like it (I have nightmares about 216 colors). Maybe after you sharpen up the 3d I'll like it better.

Overall I think this site shows quite a bit of originality and that's the most important thing in my book.

hey jiblet.. I know what you mean about my splash page ( you mean the entry page right?)... I only just changed it the other day, was bored with the old one and knocked up the current one pretty darn quickly!!!.. (too quickly perhaps! ;o) I never thought that the splash page was so important, BUT, I guess first impressions count right? ... hmmm... as for the about graphic, I see what you mean about it looking a bit washed out , but it wasn't done with the dreaded 216 palette, I think it looks a bit 'naff' cos I might have used to low a setting when I saved it as a jpg file... always worried about DL time and sometimes maybe I should think a bit more about quality.. not sure what ya meant about more "3D"? do you mean more depth?... anyhow... I appreciate you taking the time to review my site...and I do like your comment about 'originality'... I too think that is important... cheers ~Vp~

infact jiblet! lol... you were so right, I chnaged back to my old splash page for now!!!!... and added a border to the left and right of my text box on my main page and darkened the bg col a tad to contrast teh text a bit more (thanks Slimes!) <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/redface.gif"> cheers.. great suggestions so far...

Nice job! I just have a few complaints.

1. The site shows absolutely no continuity. After the splash page and main interface were washed out and desaturated completely, I was very surprised to find rainbow gradients and black backgrounds on the other pages. This might not necessarily be a bad thing, I'll leave that up to you.

2. The images seem rather washed out and blurry, when a crisp, sharp image would look better. Especially the About page.

Overall, it's definitely a skillfully crafted site. <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif">

man! am I taking it in teh butt for the blurry washed out 'about' page image!!!!! <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif"> however one thing I am learning from the rsponses posted so far, is that maybe I am being a little too conservative with download times... hmmmm... point taken... I have been led to believe upto this pint to try and keep each page to a max of 40-60kb total (graphics and all)... so maybe I am a mislead?..any recommendations of single page size?..I appreciate the skilful remark and I shall try to improve the 'visual quality' of my images... o O (size versus quality- whats the right mix?) thankyou for your feedback mbridge... all is welcome.... cheers

btw..the splash page and the main page were supoosed to be 'desaturated'.. (as in B&W) <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif">

What I meant by the re-doing the 3d on the about page was not to add more depth. But add definition to the edges of the elements. It looks like it has been blurred, maybe that's from using ProJPEG or Image Ready to compress and smooth it, or it could have to do with the method you used to make it in Photoshop... Anyway, it doesn't seem to be a problem on your other graphics, so I'm sure you'll figure it out.

As for overall page size, I must admit I am spoiled. At work I have a Ethernet to backbone connection and at home DSL, so it's easy for me to say this, but I think sizes of 200-300k per page are reasonable for general interest design sites. I like 20-50k for highly commercial sites just because there your goal is to sell something to the most people and you don't want to lose a single viewer. With a site where you are showcasing your design skills, quality is paramount. And many popular internet sites take so long to load that a lot of modem users expect a decent site to load slow...

Ahhh, we've come a long way since 95 <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif">

[This message has been edited by jiblet (edited 23-08-2000).]

Its a pretty decent site, I like the color scheme and graphics.

Jestah
ieJestah@hotmail.com
ICQ - 77252449

I think what people are saying is not that the faded grey look is *bad*, but that you should be consistent. I usually make all the pages on one site have the same "scheme" throughout them. Going from a black-and-white page to a colorful one makes it almost seem like you've gone to a different site.

Personally, I really like the washed-out look that you have on your splash page and first page. I think that adding contrast to this would take away from the feel you've created. Just remember that consistency is important - when the theme changes, that feel is lost.

exellent feedback so far, I would like to thank you all who have made comments and suggestions <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif"> I never really considered the continuity issue before or 'theme' of my site, but it makes sense that by drastically jumping from visual style to style could 'break' a viewers 'mood', (not to say tho that a surprise or two is bad!).
Good point about graphic file size too Jiblet, I guess thats why a good splash is important to encourage a visitor to want to enter the site and perhaps 'deal' with slower download times... I am only connected at home via an old 33 modem (26400 bps max) LOL so I try and think of other poor devils in my situation! ;o)
Thanks again for all your helpful and informative ideas.. I have learned a thing or two I shall try and implement in future work!
Cheers <img border=0 align=absmiddle src="http://www.ozones.com/forum/smile.gif">

Augh! I just read jiblet's post, I must disagree that 200 - 300 k is reasonable. On my 56 k modem, that would be something like a five minute download, I beleive. I would never hang around for that. I usually try to keep my pages under 40 k; sometimes I'll get as low as 20 k.

When you have a lot of graphics on one site, keep saving and re-saving jpeg images at different compression levels until you find the right balance between good quality and low file size. A large jpeg may be up to 15 K, but I'm usually willing to lower quality to keep it from getting much bigger than that. Smaller jpegs, like buttons, can be down around 2 or 3 K, maybe 4 if they're bigger.

*nods in agreement* I think this weekend (only time I get!) I shall rework that 'about' graphic and see if I can spruce it up a bit ;o)

Well let me edit myself then. 200k-300k is reasonable if you are trying to show off the best graphics you can make. BTW, on a good 56k connection you can DL @ 5k/sec which means a 300k page would take 1 minute exactly. Personally when I was using a modem (even worse with faster connections) what really got me pissed off was over-saturated web-servers that slow down your surfing more than any graphic ever could.

Basically my point was that you can't make big graphics then compress it until it's the size you want. Instead you have to design with minimum graphic size in mind from the beginning OR compress it as much as you can and eat the loss of hits due to file size.

OK, I guess I see what you're saying there. =)

all good points jibley and Slime... I do most of my designs using 72ppi with a 600 x600 or 600x400 canvas... kinda gives me a feel for 640x480 screen res... (one of these days I should update my own perceptions and risk 800x600!!!) lol... perhaps some 'pepes' out there have figured how to chnage there resolutions from the factory defaults!!! hehe... cheers ~Vp~

Can never resist a bitta Vogon Poetry.
Theres not a bypass being built nearby is there?



<smiley> </smiley> Weadah