Topic: I made this portfolio site for a graphic designer, what do you think? (Page 1 of 1)

http://www.thepixeldivision.com

10 second click through says the white on med to low grey: contrast baaad. On some monitors that text will most likely be invisible.

Jason

Agreed on the contrast issue. You'd be much better off with black on that light grey. Either that or make the grey darker.

There's also no navigation device to go back in the photographs section. That is, you can click on a link to get to the next picture in the series, but there's no link to go back. Yes, I realize that there is always the browser back button, but I think you should have a link just for consistency and ease of use.

Other than that, doesn't look too bad. Have you tried centering it to see how that looks? Because there's a bunch of blank space on the right at 1024x768. Just a thought.


___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org

quote:

---

On some monitors that text will most likely be invisible.

---

Like mine. *slaps crappy old monitor*

It's not -too- bad, and I keep my gamma setting really high so I can see a lot of definition in the lower colour ranges (which I'm more prone to making errors with when working in Photoshop) that I can't see at all on a properly gamma corrected setup with this aging trinitron -- it's really bad during the day when I have a fair ammount of ambient light in my study. But other non-computer savvy people don't usually understand such things and will simple see it as a flaw in your design.

Anyways, I don't understand why you went for the "Lined Paper" thing. I just can't see where it ties in with the rest of the design which I was really liking -- an interesting mix of bauhaus with somewhat kitch colours -- but the lined paper really killed if for me.

Oh and the website name / domain confuses me as well, why the word 'pixel' when you have Print, Photography and well, next to no web stuff in there. The design of the site and the portfolio of work just doesn't seem reflect the name of the site to me.

Appart from that it's not too shabby.

I can't read the white text on the bottom of the page. It's not just hard to read, I just can't read it at all...

Thanks for your comments.

Believe me, I spent ages trying to get the balance of the grey on white just right. One touch darker dominated the white plane too much, too light and it wasn't there at all. The point was to have them balanced. I know, on uncalibrated monitors people mightn't be able to see the text (and all other colours didnt work - BLACK!?) but this site is meant for graphic designers so they'll 'get' it - plus, it's the portfolio work that's important.

In response to the site's name: the work is DTP graphic design, pixels come into the equation all over the place. Simple. Plus, it wasn't MY name to come up with in the first place.

I thought about the 'back' button, but we felt it was unneccessary. Moreover, the website is still undergoing minor changes.

About the lined paper, indeed, I agree with you but my other half liked it there in the interim until some more attractive abstract patterns are placed there instead. Simple.

All that white space? I simply don't agree. The balance, I feel, is well struck and also to centre it would make the site amateurish and unbalanced, given the websites structural environment (similar to an amateur photographer's propensity to centre their subjects).

Of course, there are things/probs to be ironed out but simplicity was the key for this site.

Why would a graphic designer be interested on visit a graphic designer's portfolio site? I'd rather sya that the site is aimed at potential clients for these graphic designers.

And i doubt there is such thing as balance with both that color scheme and incredibly large white space in there. Not being interested in making a somewhat higher contrasted color scheme seems so counterproductive rather than profesional. Centering the content would not make your site amateur, as you ridiculously call it. I do agree in the fact that does not fit for the site anyway. And try to think out your balance very well, as in somewhat large resolutions, there will be damn a lot of white space, which IMO, is more amateur-ish.

__________________________________


Alevice's Media Library

The web is not print.

When it comes to colour and contrast, there's only so much control you can have when your work is going to be displayed on millions of different monitors that you have no control over. Web designers don't have the luxury that print designers do. If darker greys make the site too strong for your liking then perhaps you need to re-evaluate your design choices. The grey headings work well, but again with monitors, small size type will appear to blur if there isn't enough contrast. This happens more often with bright colours as monitors emits light as opposed to reflecting it so you'll automatically want a little more contrast.

So, forget the idea of creating some ideal "balance" between low contrasting shades as those shades will look completely different for every user to your site, which should be quite obvious given that most people who have commented here have mentioned that the text is hard to read I might assume you have a lower gamma setting than most.

Besides, I am a designer and I can't read the type. But Alevice is right, this site seems to be targeted towards business people, in which case they have no idea about such things and probably don't even know where the brightness and contrast controls are for their monitor. They'll see the site (of lack of) and simply pass it off as a bad design choice.

As for the overall composition of the website, well, comparing it to a photograph is about as bad as assuming you have any kind of precise control over the colour and contrast you use. Monitor sizes and resolutions vary. Magazines and photographs do not. There is a fundamental difference here, and it's a difference you need to evaluate in your design. You can ignore it if you wish but it is often seen as a good design practice to structure a site to compensate for different screen sizes. Although I dont this this is as big an issue as the colours.

You also need to rethink your link styles. The first time I viewed your site I thought it was just a "in development" shell without any real content in it. Only now upon closer inspection do I realise that there is content in it. This is because I just assumed the links in the bottom sections weren't links. They didn't look like links so why should I click em. If you want people to actually look at the content of the site then you'll need to make them look more like hyperlinks.

I would have to agree with the others on the unreadable type, I am a digital retoucher and prepress specialist so my set-up would be typical of a Media/Sep Buyers, Art Director, or Designer and I can barely make out the type. If you keep the color perhaps go with a slightly larger on gray to help readability. Design should not overiding function, expecially in this case as the portfolio is useless if you can't read the contact info. Another less important note, you might what to sharpen images slighly at they seem a little soft. This is most likely caused by scaling them down for web or perhap due to some descreening implmented at the scanner when scanning the print samples. Not much is need, but a slight move might help them pop a little.

J. Stuart J.

[This message has been edited by jstuartj (edited 11-23-2003).]