Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Design] >> Site Critiques



Message

tterrifc -> Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/25/2003 14:29:30)

Ok, let me have it. I've just redesigned an old design I did almost 3 years ago for the manufacturer that I have worked for the last 12 years.

The new proposed site is http://shineplus.mynewweb17.com. Not all of the content has been added, but the navigation is complete as well as the design. Do you guys like it or not? If not, what should I do differently?

This is the current old site http://www.protectallshineplus.com. Is the new site an improvement as far as retail eye appeal?

The site is for both for solid surface fabricators as well as the public.

Thank you all for taking the time and hopefully giving me great feedback.



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/25/2003 18:53:12)

I like both sites but the new one is top notch. I really like it.

What I miss at the new one is the presence of a lens flare or something similar, though I do see the black ray behind the photo image in the circular shape. I've done a very quick image as an example and didn't take time to optimize it well. If I wasn't working on a single layer, the flare would have been placed behind the text so as not to lighten it. I'm not suggesting the flare in the example is in the right place or the right style. If you like the idea, play a bit.

The only minor criticism I have is the script rollovers when you hover over the bottom tabs. I'm viewing at 800 X 600. I can only imagine how difficult it may be to read at higher resolutions. Think I'd change the text to something san-serif such as arial or verdana which show fairly well at small point sizes.

Nice work!

gail

[image]local://upfiles/1556/Sq46476.gif[/image]



sidewalk -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/25/2003 21:10:14)

quote:

I've just redesigned an old design I did almost 3 years ago for the manufacturer that I have worked for the last 12 years.


Terry, the new site is a vast improvement. I intentionally walked thru the new one first.

1. The new site has more vibrant color and good use of white. It is a very appropriate use of color for a cleaning product.

2. The navigation is very clean. The graphics complement the nature of the page. Compass; site map. Letters; mail box. Etc.

It is a straight-forward approach to selling a product. Well done in my opinion. Here is one thing I would change:

http://shineplus.mynewweb17.com/product.htm

I can't get 'home' from this page unless I scroll down and find that tiny 'home' on the bottom line. I would put a 'hot spot' on each of your banner logo's, so that when I click on the product name, it takes me home. I for one don't like to have to dig to get home. Often, I bail if I can't get home.

Best of luck with it, Dave



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 12:46:47)

Thanks for the compliments, Gail and Dave,

Gail,

quote:

What I miss at the new one is the presence of a lens flare or something similar, though I do see the black ray behind the photo image in the circular shape.


You are right, Gail. I do need some sort of flare and thanks for suggesting it...I will go to work on it immediately.

quote:

The only minor criticism I have is the script rollovers when you hover over the bottom tabs. I'm viewing at 800 X 600. I can only imagine how difficult it may be to read at higher resolutions.


Another good suggestion, but one that makes me cringe. That one's a little harder to correct at this point, but I will do my best to make that adjustment.

When you speak, Gail, I definitely listen.

Dave,

quote:

I can't get 'home' from this page unless I scroll down and find that tiny 'home' on the bottom line. I would put a 'hot spot' on each of your banner logo's, so that when I click on the product name, it takes me home. I for one don't like to have to dig to get home. Often, I bail if I can't get home.


Excellent suggestion, too. Since I'm already working with the lens flare in the top banner, now, would be an excellent time to add a legible link to home. Thank you, too, for pointing out that it is a site for a cleaning product and that the design and layout are appropriate for my customers.

Thank you, both, for taking the time to comment and offer valuable suggestions on improving my site. I truly appreciate it.



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 14:48:58)

Hi Gail and Dave,

If you two could happen to come by, here's the new top banner.

I added a small flare, better text rollovers and the product name will lead back to the home page.

new banner

Does it look better?



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 14:58:41)

I, of course, like the idea of the flare, but to be honest I don't care for it so the TM is highlighted. Can you either put the flare somewhere else or move the TM to the bottom rather than top of the S?

Like all the other changes. As I said, looks great!

gail



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 15:00:41)

Ok. It's not feeling right yet. I'll go back to it. Thanks, Gail.



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:10:10)

Hi Gail,

Does this get closer to what you were thinking?

[image]local://upfiles/1869/Tr51872.jpg[/image]



sidewalk -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:15:41)

quote:

Does this get closer to what you were thinking?


By George, I think he's got it.

Well done, Dave



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:17:06)

Thanks, Dave[:D]

I'm a girl, Terry[;)] Tom Terrific is a little misleading.[:)]



sidewalk -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:21:01)

quote:

Tom Terrific is a little misleading.


Nooooooooooooooo..................

<winks>, Dave



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:21:45)

quote:

Does this get closer to what you were thinking?



It's tterrifc!



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/26/2003 17:26:40)

You're quick, Dave! Thanks, again. Hope I can help you in some way in the future.[:)]

And, thank you too, to my good buddy, Gail! You've been a great help. Now I get to slice it all over again. [:'(]



tomperry -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 13:14:24)

I am in complete agreement that the new site is much more appealing. I'll take white backgrounds over black anytime. There is one thing that I noticed. The graphic "leftwords2.jpg" needs to be sharpened somewhat. Us old folks in Florida have a little trouble with small text and especially if it's slightly out of focus.

I believe a better solution would be to enter this left margin as text. It would be cleaner and also decrease load time.

All in all, it is a very impressive site.

Tom



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 13:25:05)

Did ya slice already terry?! [:o]

Just a thought about the phrase:

Household and solid surface cleaner, polish, wax and treatment

Perhaps only the first word should be capitalized. When I first read it, I said to myself: What the heck is Household and Solid Surface?

Another option is to put the words surface and cleaner on the same line.

gail



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 13:57:42)

Oh, Gail, I just re-sliced it!!!!! [:-] Not that I wouldn't redo it JUST for you. You're priceless.

I understand what you are saying with regards to wording of the phrase Household and Solid Surface Cleaner, Polish, Wax & Treatment. You'd have to work here to understand. Some things we don't have control over, get what I mean? The product is actually a Cleaner, a Polish, a Wax and a Treatment for all surfaces. Both the household and solid surface markets...make any sense?

If you can come up with a better solution, girl, I'm all for it and I will run it by the powers that be. I've always been impressed with your grammar skills.[:)]

Tom,

You are so right, but unfortunately I'm a desinger first and I have tried every which way to do what you said to do and this was the best I could come up with while trying to keep to the integrity of the design. I did think that I could accomplish the same thing using a background image with a table on top at a fixed size. I'll investigate that. Thanks for your input. You are right. It is most appreciated.[:)]



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 14:04:35)

quote:

I've always been impressed with your grammar skills.


I is very pleesed dat u r impressed wid my granmomar skills!

g



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 14:06:12)

Like I said, "Priceless!"



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 14:09:44)

quote:

make any sense?


Yes, now it dos. It surely dos.

gail

[edit] Ooops, sorry about my gammer error. [/edit]



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/27/2003 14:16:19)

Gail, I can't wait to show you what I've come up with thanks to you and the other wonderful people who were kind enough to give their opinions. Now back to work, both of us![;)]

The unfortuante thing about re-[:(]slicing...lots of work!!!



tterrifc -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/28/2003 14:40:34)

I've resliced and made the changes that each of you, Dave, Gail and Tom, suggested. If you all get a chance to look, please do and give me your comments. Is it better? Thanks to all of you I think it is.[:)]

revised site here



_gail -> RE: Opinions needed re: redesign of Co. site (8/28/2003 15:09:58)

Top notch. It's just tterrifc!

gail



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.21875