Topic: Graduate Society site

Hi,

I justed wanted some feedback on the site I'm working on:
http://members.optusnet.com.au/grasweb/index.htm

Ignore the content, as that is still being developed and as such, there isn't much substance yet.

Just wanted to know if it works on browers other than IE6 as I can't really test in such an environment (especially MACs).

I know it looks ok in NS 7.2 and the latest FireFox, except that there is a bit of white space at the bottom of the page sometimes (it's an error I can't be bothered fixing).

Please be gentle

Thanks

Be gentle? *smirk*... not a chance.

Markup

In mid 2004 there's really no excuse to still be using tables to control your layout. Read up on CSS layouts & design, and re-code it now before you end up burying yourself in markup soup. Trust me, in the long run, it's a much easier way to design and maintain websites.

Alas, the W3C validator is down, so I couldn't check that ( http://validator.w3.org/ ) but if you haven't done so already then you should. Looks fine in opera but I can't offer any Mac testing atm, so I'll skip onto the design issues.


Design

Messy messy messy. Did I mention it looked messy? I counted in excess of 25 1px black lines per page, and I wasn't looking at a piece of evenly spaced graph paper - no wonder my head hurts. How am I supposed to process and make sense out of that many lines? There's little to no order or symmetry between them, so it just makes things look uber messy, which is uber bad.

The beveled effects, drop shadows, blurry and conflicting branding imagery aren't helping either. You need to simplify. Stop putting everything in boxes, and stop separating everything with a line. White space is a designers best friend, use it, and use it often. Symmetry is another element you?re seriously lacking. Balancing out your spacing and offsets would do a world of good for that site.

Stop cutting up your main divisions! The little notches and large chunks taken out of the menu and background look like you were grasping at straws trying to add some interest to the site, but I'm betting you won't need them at all if you remove the excess amount of lines you already have. The 45% angels on the end of the menu items & headers also seem a bit like an afterthought as they don't mesh too well, but if you stop boxing everything off then you won't have to worry about them anyways.

The main branding image (gras title) is blurry - sharpen it up. It could also do with a bit of a face-lift in terms of the layout. The subtitle just seems wrong to me. Ditch the colored squares in the top right. You have colored circles in the top left, they look nice, no need to confuse the situation with yet another shape. Simplify and clean up the drop shadows and bevels, or remove them completely. Choose one kind of background imagery and stick with it (either the grass or the really blurred circles) personally, I prefer the grass.

It seems like a simple site, so keep it simple. If you want to add a bit of a visual punch, use a nice photograph or a really subtle (and by that I mean freak'n uber subtle) gradient in the background, or both. It's always best not to try and sell the content with the site design itself, at least not for a website like this.

Anyhow, that's my 0.2 c

(Edited by Cameron on 08-10-2004 14:01)

quote:

---

In mid 2004 there's really no excuse to still be using tables to control your layout. Read up on CSS layouts & design, and re-code it now before you end up burying yourself in markup soup. Trust me, in the long run, it's a much easier way to design and maintain websites.

---

You're kidding me right? I use tables for the news and events, as I believe that they can be displayed in a table (because there are dates and text ... i.e. tabular data). But that is my personal preference. The rest of the design (the actual layout) is in CSS...

I've validated it and it's valid XHTML, Bobby AAA but fails CSS because I use an IE hack.

Agree that bevel and shadows are a bit overboard. Will see if I can tone it down.

Have a problem with the gras title because I don't have the original file, so I can't make it look better even though I want to.

Agree the coloured squares.

I wish I had a photo to add ... but I don't at the moment ... can only work with what I've got ... which is nothing. My biggest problem is the top bit aswell... And possibly the grey background color. Hmm...

I like cutting up into sections ... adds structure to the page.

I can't help but think it looks a bit buggered in Opera. Is it really that bad? Here's what I see: http://members.optusnet.com.au/grasweb/screen.jpg Is it really that messy?

I don't need to sell the content or the site for that matter, as it will be relevant to the target audience, the design is more for my piece of mind An artistically challenged person trying to make something look nice.

The table should go there are better ways to do that. It is pretty messy. I think it needs to be simplified a bit.

Dan @ Code Town

I don't think it would be too difficult to re-create that logo again either. You shouldn't really rely on scanned or second hand imagery for stuff like this. Ask your client for the original logo files. I too would argue the use of a table for the News & Events section. I see a total of two elements per item. Something as simple as <div id="newsItem"><hx>date</hx> <p>content</p></div> should suffice. Float the date heading to the left and all will be sweet.

As for the photography, there are numerious stock photography websites around that provide cost free and royalty free images. You probably won't find something as relevent as taking some photos yourself, but I'm sure you'd be able to find something of use.

It rendered perfectly in Opera 7. Opera 6 is a little wacky - some obvious padding & margin mishaps here and there but nothing that'd render the page un-usable. Netscape 4 on the other hand is all bad news. Perhaps you should @import your CSS if you're relying on mostly CSS level 2 stuff to style your page.


"I like cutting up into sections ... adds structure to the page."

No, no it doesn't. It adds visual conflict, which translates into confusion for the end user. Keep things nice and simple and you'll do just fine. The content itself will provide the structure; all you need to do is make sure that structure is translated onto the screen in a clear and easily understood manor.


"I don't need to sell the content or the site for that matter, as it will be relevant to the target audience"

I don't understand that. Are you saying you don't need to design for the target audience because they have to use the website anyways?


"An artistically challenged person trying to make something look nice"

This is design, art has nothing to do with it .

(Edited by Cameron on 08-11-2004 04:51)

quote:

---

"I don't need to sell the content or the site for that matter, as it will be relevant to the target audience"

I don't understand that. Are you saying you don't need to design for the target audience because they have to use the website anyways?

---

Yes, that's excactly right. The audience will use it anyways . They have no choice and get what I give them. I know it's mean, but this is a volunteer thing and I've actually got work that I should be doing.I'm no web designer (obviously), so no money, no time, little skills. "Fixing it" sounds alot easier for a pro . Is it also mean that I hate NS 4 with a passion? because I do! Has it not DIED yet?

I guess why I like cutting it up into sections is because people can just scroll to the relevant sections and read that. But I see that maybe it's a bad thing . I guess if you know the site back to front, then it's helpful, but for a new user, it is can be confusing.

I'll see what I can do ... but I'm leaving the tables for now ... because I'm lazy hehehe

BTW ... thanks heaps for the comments.

Ok ... I've tried to declutter it a bit.

Is it improving?
New link: http://members.optusnet.com.au/grasweb/grasweb/