PDA

View Full Version : Completely changed my personal website. AnyTips ?



Harold Mansfield
11-05-2009, 06:50 PM
I had to change it. I thought the other design was cool for about 10 days and then another idea hit me and I decided to just change it. Been looking at it all day, need some fresh eyes.
haroldmansfield.com (http://www.haroldmansfield.com)

Spider
11-05-2009, 08:47 PM
Seems a bit untidy, with 1 or 2 things out of alignment, but you'll get to that in due course. What I really didn't like was the section that flips back and forth all by itself. It has arrows on either side but they won't obey my instructions. I didn't have time to read any particlur section before it was whisked away.

I was left to feel very inadequate!

Harold Mansfield
11-05-2009, 09:56 PM
Seems a bit untidy, with 1 or 2 things out of alignment, but you'll get to that in due course. What I really didn't like was the section that flips back and forth all by itself. It has arrows on either side but they won't obey my instructions. I didn't have time to read any particlur section before it was whisked away.

I was left to feel very inadequate!

What is misaligned ? I don't see it, everything looks fine on my end.
OOhhh, never mind, you must be using Internet Explorer. I just looked at it and something is definitely off. (I keep forgetting IE , I haven't used it in so long)
Give me a sec to fix that.
Edited:
Got it now. One thing about IE, it will spit a code mistake right out at you. Checked it in all 3 and it looks identical now.
Thanks Spider.

I know you are not a fan of moving things, and I checked the arrows and they do work. There's only 3 slides and it then it takes you back to the beginning...it's not looped to go the same direction from #3 to #1. I guess I could change that.

vangogh
11-05-2009, 10:24 PM
The first thing I notice is the color and the moving images at the top. I'm with Frederick, I don't care for the sliding images. I don't like them in general though so take that for whatever it's worth.

There is a lot going on though. The bright colors for the packages and the moving images do compete with each other and in the end distract from each other. Decide which you want people to see more, which is more important, and then make the other less attention grabbing. Either a single image at the top or toned down colors in the packages.

Overall I like it. Once you get past the competing things at the top the rest of the page seems nice and clean. I like the social media icons and the portfolio images in the footer.

Harold Mansfield
11-05-2009, 10:48 PM
I thought that there may be too much going on. That red package banner is the one that I am not sure if it really bothers me or not. In a way it kind of looks cheap, but it hasn't totally turned me off yet.

I always worry that when you are using a sliding feature that if you don't turn it on, that people won't push the buttons to go to the next image and miss some of the content.

I'm going to turn it off for now and sleep on it and wake up tomorrow and see if I'm still on the fence about the red banner.

I actually could dull down the brightness of all of those colors...did a quick test and it did look a little more appropriate.

Spider
11-05-2009, 11:29 PM
Don't change anything for me, Harold - I don't think I am your typical visitor. Just noted what I saw, per your rquest.

I know everyone here favors Firefox but my stats (just looked) has 67% of my visitors using IE and only 22% using Firefox. Seems to me that it would be reasonable to design for IE and fiddle to fit FF, not the other way round. Unless, of course, your stats show a preponderance of FF users visiting your site.

Harold Mansfield
11-05-2009, 11:34 PM
Don't change anything for me, Harold - I don't think I am your typical visitor. Just noted what I saw, per your rquest.



No of course not, but I forget to check IE sometimes since I never use it and if you have any slight variances it will pick them up and display some real junk. That's always something to be wary of. I usually check all 3 (FF, IE, and Safari)

That's why I put stuff up for review, because someone will see something that I forgot.
At least with people (clients), you are talking to someone else, but when it's your own stuff, there is no one to bounce things off of or get a second opinion.

billbenson
11-06-2009, 01:00 AM
I know everyone here favors Firefox but my stats (just looked) has 67% of my visitors using IE and only 22% using Firefox. Seems to me that it would be reasonable to design for IE and fiddle to fit FF, not the other way round. Unless, of course, your stats show a preponderance of FF users visiting your site.

While the bulk of your visitors are IE, every new version of IE is more standards compliant. FF is more standards compliant than IE.

If you design for FF and then fix IE, you are less likely to have to change stuff when the next version of IE comes out. Fewer problems and less work down the road. Plus, do you really want to blow off 22% of your prospects?

Spider
11-06-2009, 09:04 AM
...If you design for FF and then fix IE, you are less likely to have to change stuff when the next version of IE comes out. Fewer problems and less work down the road... I have been creating my own websites since 1996 - what version of IE was that? I have never noticed any discrepancy between different versions. Microsoft's attempts to be backward compatable have proven successful for me every time. But then, I don't push the envelope - my pages are all uncomplicated, plain vanilla.


...Plus, do you really want to blow off 22% of your prospects?Better than blowing off 67% of my prospects! Don't you think?

But neither needs to happen.

Harold Mansfield
11-06-2009, 10:08 AM
I don't really design for either, or if I did, I never noticed. I usually check the top 3 to make sure everything is the same.
Lately I've gotten so use to it just being right on IE, that sometimes I forget.

I still see sites that have the "best viewed on Firefox", or "best viewed in Internet Explorer" badges on them and I always thought that looked so unprofessional (Even big companies).
Every site should be best viewed on everything. If you have IE, FF and Safari covered, you should be fine..Safari and FF never seem to have any problems.

There are still a few sites that I have to go to that only work in IE (Usually sites that need me to log in) and I can't for the life of me figure out why, in this day and age they still hold on to that, and haven't hired someone to make the website universally compatible with all browsers. It's really kind of archaic.

vangogh
11-06-2009, 12:28 PM
I have been creating my own websites since 1996 - what version of IE was that? I have never noticed any discrepancy between different versions.

That's because you're still building sites based on the same technologies that were used in 1996. Most browsers are backwards compatible. I don't think it's about pushing the envelope. More a case of not taking advantage of advances that have happened over the years.

I do agree with you completely though about supporting IE. Most people still use it.

What Bill was saying is in general the easiest way to develop sites across all browsers is to build those sites to web standards and then tweak for any browser not supporting those standards. IE is usually the biggest offender when it comes to not adhering to standards so most developers will first make sure their site works in another more standards compliant browser and then tweak later for IE.

You may not have to tweak though. I've built enough websites now that I know the common problems browsers will have with my code and I've learned to find solutions that work across browsers. While I still test in IE for every site I develop, I generally find the site already works as intended the first time I open it in IE.

@Harold - with the colors and the moving parts just know that both are competing for attention, meaning neither really ever captures attention. Ideally you want to identify the primary action you want people to take on a page and then identify a secondary and maybe tertiary action.

You want your primary objective to stand out the most. Your other objects should still be there, but you want them to be relegated a little more to the background. Looking at your home page I take it the main action you want someone to take is to click on one of those colorful boxes that leads them deeper into one of your services. Anything else on the page pulling attention is only going to take away from someone clicking one of those boxes.

Everything else on the page should simply be supporting what's in those three boxes (assuming clicking one is the main goal for the page). Your home page looks to me like it's trying to do too much. That only leads to confusing people who don't really know what to do next.

Harold Mansfield
11-06-2009, 01:12 PM
Yep, I noticed that without the scrolling featured post, it feels a lot more comfortable. I still think I'll dull the colors a little on the banners,
A second set of eyes is always a good idea..after you look at something all day, you get desensitized.

vangogh
11-06-2009, 04:06 PM
A second set of eyes is always a good idea

Very true. Our brains have a way of filling in or filtering out information the more we look at something. After awhile you're seeing what your brain wants you to see and not necessarily what's really there.

How many times have you proofed the same small piece of copy and years later it still has errors in it?

Paper Shredder Clay
11-09-2009, 04:48 PM
Over all, I like your site a lot, especially the portfolio images in the footer. The only distracting things to me are the very bright three boxes of color 1/4 way down, it seems to go opposite of the softer cooler colors directly above it and the video seems too large, I would make it smaller and a link to a lightbox effect. I love your social icons. I would love to hear the story of your logo. Seems very sensual.

Harold Mansfield
11-10-2009, 01:29 PM
Over all, I like your site a lot, especially the portfolio images in the footer. The only distracting things to me are the very bright three boxes of color 1/4 way down, it seems to go opposite of the softer cooler colors directly above it and the video seems too large, I would make it smaller and a link to a lightbox effect. I love your social icons. I would love to hear the story of your logo. Seems very sensual.
Yes, been meaning to soften the colors on those boxes, even flirting with the idea of doing something a litle different with them, just been a little busy lately.

The logo ? Nothing special really. Logo's aren't really my forte'. It's just supposed to represent a big "M" (my last name), I hope it doesn't come off as something other than that.

greenoak
11-10-2009, 05:36 PM
the looks confused me...at first i thought i was on a wordpress site..i didnt see your title.....is that you in the picture? shouldnt there be a main point? when im on your music spots there is no confusion....its rich and interrelated...
it must be hard when you can create almost anything in any style....

ann

Harold Mansfield
11-10-2009, 07:34 PM
the looks confused me...at first i thought i was on a wordpress site.
It is on Wordpress.



.i didnt see your title.....is that you in the picture? shouldnt there be a main point?

No that's not me in the picture. Well...there's the featured post (with the picture), the wording with the logo, the title, and the bright specials ..all say that I work with Wordpress.

There is some additional text that I have been thinking about adding above the fold, maybe I could make things a little more clear.


when im on your music spots there is no confusion....its rich and interrelated...

It's a much older site too. There is no way that I can have that much content on a site that I hope to use to draw business. That would be confusing.


it must be hard when you can create almost anything in any style....

ann

True, it's easier to work for clients because they have an idea of what they want. When you do it for yourself , you have to narrow in on something specific out of hundreds of ideas.

I am sure that I will continue to add, and tweak things as I go along.

huggytree
11-10-2009, 08:44 PM
too much going on...too many different colored boxes......just too much...

I like simple and basic for a home page...just bullet points and a nice paragraph.

I see all that info and I dont want to read it.

maybe i suffer from A.D.D......I like to read at a glance, not spend 10 minutes

Harold Mansfield
11-10-2009, 09:39 PM
too much going on...too many different colored boxes......just too much...

I like simple and basic for a home page...just bullet points and a nice paragraph.

I see all that info and I dont want to read it.

maybe i suffer from A.D.D......I like to read at a glance, not spend 10 minutes

Interesting. I thought I was being as simple as possible when it came to the actual text. I don't think there's more than 10 complete sentences on the entire home page.

I'll definitely take that into consideration. Appreciate your thoughts Huggy.

Paper Shredder Clay
11-11-2009, 05:08 PM
Honestly, I never got the "M" until I read your post. I think maybe its because of the black against the blue, that kept me from seeing it, maybe if you had the blue with a darker blue, it would be more obvious. LOL, now though every time I see it I see the "M". Not a bad idea, just took me some help to see it.


Yes, been meaning to soften the colors on those boxes, even flirting with the idea of doing something a litle different with them, just been a little busy lately.

The logo ? Nothing special really. Logo's aren't really my forte'. It's just supposed to represent a big "M" (my last name), I hope it doesn't come off as something other than that.

greenoak
11-11-2009, 10:18 PM
i knew you would have all those answers.....and i caught a lot of them on a closer look.....
..i was just giving you impressions from a quick look....which is about what you get from cruisers.... i thought.
as an outsider i have no idea or insite about why wordpress would be impressive....
p.s. im glad that wasnt your picture!!!!
ann

Harold Mansfield
07-08-2010, 03:39 PM
Well, I don't know how or why but 2 days ago my database just seemed to go blank. I was changing something...probably wasn't paying attention..to make a long story short, the site just went blank. After a full day of my host working on it, I lost patience and did a quick redesign.
I always said that I needed to redo it and that I hated the way it looked so this forced my hand.

It sucked, but I'm glad the old site is gone. Now I think it's simple and to the point just how I wanted it.
I know VG will probably hate the slider because it's so overdone, but regular people still get a kick out of it so it stays for now.

Business Attorney
07-08-2010, 04:28 PM
VG might not like it, but I think it is a neat feature. On most websites, I find those things more annoying than helpful, but I think for a website designer, it makes sense.

Harold Mansfield
07-10-2010, 12:33 PM
"You da man" David. Thanks.

vangogh
07-14-2010, 11:15 AM
I don't have anything against sliders. Like Harold said I just think they're overdone. They became a hot trend and so you see them everywhere and sometimes in places where it makes no sense to include one. Why have a slider for 2 images for example. I don't think that's the case with your site though.

Harold Mansfield
07-14-2010, 11:25 AM
I'm sure you know how it is though. When I was a bar manager, I used to carry liquors that I couldn't stand but "the kids" loved. Non web people still look at those and "wow! can I get one of those?", but of course they don't see them everyday.

I heard there was some issues with the guy that came up with the script and wanting people to license it. Have you heard anything about that?

vangogh
07-14-2010, 11:59 AM
Yep. Kind of how it always works. I haven't heard anything about the guy who wrote the script, though at this point I can't imagine that will happen. Too many people already using it and it's not like you couldn't code the same thing in a different way.