Splash Page - All splash pages annoy me, but yours seems particularly silly. Do your users really need a breakdown of which browsers are supported, which versions of those browsers, and which ones have problems with your site? I tested the site in IE6, Firefox 0.8, and Opera 7, and they all rendered the site reasonably well, with no serious (ie. content-destroying) bugs. Also, the splash page image takes forever to load, even on broadband. My advice: ditch the splash page entirely.
Usability - The entire site is contained within a frameset, so that the URL stays the same, no matter where you go on the site. Whether this is for aesthetics or something else, it makes it impossible to link directly to a page within your site. And the user has to click through the splash page again.
Doctype - You have one on your page, yet the validator points out 149 errors, most of them being undefined elements (<csaction>?) and undefined attributes. My guess is the doctype was automatically inserted by a WYSIWYG editor, and you didn't bother to edit any of the junk markup it outputted.
Code - You have tables nested up to 6 deep in some parts. It seems like you're already using CSS to format the text on your page; why not take the extra step and learn CSS layout as well? It'll make your site a lot easier to work with and update, it'll loads faster for users, and will save bandwidth as well.
Color Scheme - Grey and maroon... hmm. It's not a bad color scheme, but it seems like there's too much grey and not enough color. Feels sort of draining, just staring at all that grey.
Banner - Seems kinda large to me, but giant header graphics seem to be the cool thing nowadays. Whatever. Also the left and right edges of the graphic don't align with the rest of the content below. Might wanna fix that.
Visuals - The animation in the middle in pointless and distracting. It looks like a glowing window shade. Also, the random bits of bright orange text around the page don't look so good. I think you were trying to draw emphasis, but it just comes off as irritating. The content boxes look like they could use a bit more padding, especially between the header and content.
Misc - What's up with the "Artifex (artist)" thing in every heading. I don't even wanna guess what language it's in, so why not just be up front, and give it to us in English?
Overall though, the site is visually appealing (I'm a sucker for the OS X look, so I'm somewhat biased). It just looks like it could use some more polish, some more color, and some less code.
[EDIT: Gosh, that was the most disorganized post I've made in a while.]
[This message has been edited by ozphactor (edited 04-11-2004).]
Not going to touch the visual or code, I don't have time for that right now, but...
Saying this:
quote:Wallpaper Folder
Besides websites I have also made a few wallpapers on various topics. These are free to download.
Followed by this:
quote:Please note that all visible content on this site is strictly under law of copyright. The wallpapers shown on the left although free are still copyright material. It would be much obliged if all content remain un-copied.
Is a complete contradiction. You can't tell people that can download (digitally copy) something then tell them they can't copy it. It makes no sence and it leaves yourself wide open and comes off rather unprofesional to boot.
A really easy way to impliment copyright stuff online it to use a creative commons licence. Have a look at www.creativecommons.org for more information. The licences (what it the plural of licence?) avaliable are perhaps not going to be as restrivtive as you want, but it's actually better to keep the door closed but unlocked when it comes to copyright, then at least people who'd like to use your work will knock and ask instead of breaking in through the bathroom window so to speak.
OK, apparently I'm the only one who can't access this page. Is everyone else going to the same place I'm going? www.contours.tk? Everytime I click that link I get a 404...
From: A graveyard of dreams Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 04-16-2004 13:06
The page seems to work for me.
Don't have time to do a review now, but I'll be back
_________________________
"There are 10 kinds of people; those who know binary, those who don't and those who start counting at zero"
- the Golden Ratio - Vim Tutorial -
No, templar... what I mean is that I cannot see the site at all. I think there might be a problem somewhere along the line between here and there. Unfortunately, there are no other inmates in Korea, so we cannot test my theory.
It all looks fine, but it does take a while to download. I'd say thats mostly your hosts problem as I'm on a 2k bit down line, but a few of the images on your site are 30kb+ which is a little bit much. I'm sure you could optimize 'em a little smaller.
Also, with your splash page, maybe you should have the "red eye" in the same position as your main page, it would look better switching imho.
oh, and I don't quite get the point of your "view finder" being in the popup , there are far better ways of working that into your layout. Its in the same style as your main page and there is near enough space for it on the bottom right for example.
Thank you tom and jdauie. I don't know why I didn't think of that.
As for the site itself... well, I don't really see the need for the splash page. I think you'd be fine without it. Also, "system requirements" rubs me the wrong way. Going around telling people how to set up their browser (and which browser to use) in order to view your page is generally frowned upon.
The pseudo-Latin (I say "pseudo" because I'm pretty sure "portifogli" is not Latin... looks like Italian, actually) titles have been mentioned above... I agree with ozphactor on this one.
As for the copyright issue, you should be more specific about what people can or can't do with your images. You might even want to take a look at a Creative Commons license. I think it would be enough, though, to say that the images are free for download and personal use, but may not be used commercially (ie, to make money). I'm not a copyright law expert, though, so you should probably look into that.
Overall, the site has a very narrow feel to it. I realize that it's not actually all that narrow, but I think the long, narrow boxes make it feel that way. I don't think you really have enough space to go with three columns here...
Minor quibbles:
"Connect to me" should be "Link to me." At first I thought it was a contact link, and was confused when I find it wasn't clickable.
In your wallpaper section, "Illegal Alliance" links to a graphic named "Unappropriate Alliance." Nothing earthshaking, of course, but I think you should decide on one name.
OK, all that was before I took a look at the code... in short, it looks about seven or eight years old. Table-based layouts? Font tags? You shouldn't even be old enough to remember when such things were the web designer's bread and butter. You do link to a style sheet, but it does little more than define a few classes and your link behavior (by the way, in the .bg class you link to a file on your hard drive--you might want to fix that). I just don't even know where to begin with this code... it's just a massive, bloated page of tag and table soup. You definitely need to look into CSS if you're serious about building web pages.
[Edit: In the spirit of helpfulness, here are some FAQ links you might want to check out:
posted 04-10-2004 05:57
anyways heres me site:
