next »

[thehen]

Hi there,

I've pretty much finished my personal website refurbishment which is going to take the shape of a(nother) web design blog.

The sites lacking in content at the moment, but it will hopefully soon be up to speed.

If anyone could point out any cross-browser issues it would be greatly appreciated.

Web Design Blog - seo apologies

[dev_cw]

Sweet! This is a nice design. It has been a while since I have seen an purple web sites. Very rich textured design, I like it. Another great example of a MODx powered blog.

On OSX/FF all seemed to be OK.

[thehen]

Cool, I'm pleased you like the design. It doesn't really conform to the whole generic 'web 2.0' good design ethos so I wasn't sure how it would be received. Hopefully the design will reflect the content when it starts to appear.

Does the footer image at the bottom appear to have too sharp a cut off on the left and right? It looks fine on my monitor at home, but Im on my GF's and it looks a tad unnatural. . .

[netProphET]

I love it Henry! Web 2.0 Shmeb Shmoopointoh! I get bored of the clean, big copycat look. The bottom fade looks just fine on my monitor - if I had it set any brighter I might see what you're talking about. Design is stable in FF 2.x Linux.
Nice, man. +1 feed subscribed via Bloglines ;-)

[thehen]

I love it Henry! Web 2.0 Shmeb Shmoopointoh! I get bored of the clean, big copycat look. The bottom fade looks just fine on my monitor - if I had it set any brighter I might see what you're talking about. Design is stable in FF 2.x Linux.
Nice, man. +1 feed subscribed via Bloglines ;-)

Ah thanks. My first subscriber 

[dev_cw]

I just saw you in a css gallery...with a 5 star ratting 
http://www.css20.com/2008/04/09/henry-hoffman/

[thehen]

I just saw you in a css gallery...with a 5 star ratting 
http://www.css20.com/2008/04/09/henry-hoffman/

Wow, that's pretty cool. It sprung up in a few other CSS galleries, though with not quite as good a rating (in fact not nearly as good.) It just shows how subjective design is I guess.

[smashingred]

Henry,

I think you will see a divergence over the next while away from ultra clean white and grey sites, especially for personal sites. Your site is clean in the sense of uncluttered, has enough whitespace or negative space and is well designed.

Great work.

Cheers,

Jay

[thehen]

Henry,

I think you will see a divergence over the next while away from ultra clean white and grey sites, especially for personal sites. Your site is clean in the sense of uncluttered, has enough whitespace or negative space and is well designed.

Great work.

Cheers,

Jay

Yes I agree; many sites that feature heavily in galleries/showcases have built upon aspects of ultra clean websites but are indeed moving towards a more visually rich approach. As long as the design pleases the demographic, I suppose it doesn't really matter.

I would actually say that the use of negative space is one of the weaker aspects of my design; I think it looks a tad busy. I think this is mainly because I didn't include some of the elements in my orginal mockup (rss feed, HR's, drop-caps etc) and it led to them sort of being added as an afterthought.

I'm working on another design for a different project and I've definitely learnt from these mistakes. My problem is generally that I get so engrossed in a design that I forget what I want to achieve with the end result 

Thanks for the comments.

[smashingred]

I would actually say that the use of negative space is one of the weaker aspects of my design; I think it looks a tad busy. I think this is mainly because I didn't include some of the elements in my orginal mockup (rss feed, HR's, drop-caps etc) and it led to them sort of being added as an afterthought.

The fact is that negative space doesn't need to be a huge gap in text or visual elements it is enough space to give elements to breathe. You aren't designing a poster you are designing a blog. There is inherently lots of elements on the page on a blog. In that I think you succeeded. In addition the contrast helps reduce the visual clutter and anchors the important bits visually.

Can't wait to see your next project.

Cheers,

Jay

[dev_cw]

What is the difference between visual clutter and richly textured (for the non-designer)?

BTW - I would add the rss feed link into the Browser address bar as well. I did not notice it a first (even though I did roll over it), I am conditioned to look in the address bar for the nice orange icon.

[thehen]

What is the difference between visual clutter and richly textured (for the non-designer)?

Richly textured = organised visual clutter 

BTW - I would add the rss feed link into the Browser address bar as well. I did not notice it a first (even though I did roll over it), I am conditioned to look in the address bar for the nice orange icon.

Ah thanks. I'm an RSS noob so to speak and haven't integrated it into a site before. I'm going to look into doing the address bar thing now.

[smashingred]

@thehen.

To get the RSS icon to show up in the address bar you need to add the <link> with the URL of your feed document to the head of your template.

Code:

<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Your Blog Title Here" href="blog.url" />

On the Richly Textured vs. Visual Clutter: (This is a personal opinion as these are not academic but subjective terms) Richly textured designs are those that use layers of elements and many elements that oppose minimalism or extreme whitespace. Visual clutter is a result of poor organization of elements in a design that distract, confuse or frustrate the viewer either physiologically or psychologically. Richly textured designs can give warmth, create mood, and enrich an experience, clutter just messes it up.

Many elements != Clutter
Clutter = Lack of structure, organization and relationships
Richly Textured opposes minimalism and starkness
Richly textured doesn't necessarily need to have tonnes of elements but depth, tone, and relationships between elements both subtle and strong.
Some minimalist designs are visually cluttered.

Again these are opinions of someone who is a student not a professor of design (student as someone with a library card and an Amazon account and has spend time learning from others and doesn't consider himself a graphic designer by any stretch of the imagination).

[sottwell]

If it's pretty, it's Richly Textured. If it's confusing and ugly, it's visual clutter. I'm no way a designer, but I know what I like.

http://www.ndesign-studio.com/
http://www.sparkplug.com/

My two favorite sites.

[dev_cw]

Richly textured = organised visual clutter

I get it. 

If it's pretty, it's Richly Textured. If it's confusing and ugly, it's visual clutter. I'm no way a designer, but I know what I like.

This is along what I was thinking.

[thehen]

http://www.ndesign-studio.com/
http://www.sparkplug.com/

My two favorite sites.

There's something about http://www.ndesign-studio.com/ which really gets my goat; I think it's one of the most overrated designs on the internet.

I think it's probably because the vector background reminds me of the tacky framed pictures you can get when you go to Majorca (or somewhere of equivalent diminished culture). The layout's okay; it's neat and well structured.

I do like some of Nick La's other work, namely his Web Designer Wall, not much else.

The SparkPlug site is clean and simple.

@thehen.

To get the RSS icon to show up in the address bar you need to add the <link> with the URL of your feed document to the head of your template.

Code:

<link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Your Blog Title Here" href="blog.url" />

Thanks for that, a great help.

Again these are opinions of someone who is a student not a professor of design (student as someone with a library card and an Amazon account and has spend time learning from others and doesn't consider himself a graphic designer by any stretch of the imagination).

Have you seen Good Will Hunting? Your quote reminds me of the guy's attitude towards the education system.

[dev_cw]

Code:

href="blog.url"

It should be href="feed.url".  Just a detail but I am sure you figured it out 

[thehen]

Code:

href="blog.url"

It should be href="feed.url".  Just a detail but I am sure you figured it out 

I'm struggling a bit with the RSS. The URL is .HTML extension and I can't seem to get it to be a .XML.

Also this "feed.url". What does this mean? Doesn't the url to the XML file just go in here?

[dev_cw]

Actually the extension does not really matter, due to FURL, if you have it set to html all docs will have the html extension. Feed.url reffers to the the url of the feed. On your site it is /feed.xml.html - I often use the full URL including the domain. You ccan use the same path as the existing feed link.

I subscribed to your feed without any problems from the link but not from the icon in the address bar. In the address bar you have a different path it should be...wait you just fixed it. This is sure a fast time at ridgemont high

[thehen]

Actually the extension does not really matter, due to FURL, if you have it set to html all docs will have the html extension. Feed.url reffers to the the url of the feed. On your site it is /feed.xml.html - I often use the full URL including the domain. You ccan use the same path as the existing feed link.

I subscribed to your feed without any problems from the link but not from the icon in the address bar. In the address bar you have a different path it should be...wait you just fixed it. This is sure a fast time as ridgemont high

Thanks for your help, I got there in the end