speaking of "too plain"... (Full Version)

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



Message

RickP -> speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 16:48:02)

This site is nearing completion and I would value some feedback. Like the last query (from Nicole) I am wondering if it is slightly too plain? Does it need just a tiny splash more colour or a subtle background image/fade effect maybe? The site is all about art and so there is lots of colour in the images shown but does the site need anything more? Any suggestions on this or anything else welcomed.

I am thinking that my main h1 tag on each page (top left) - "landscapes", "marinescapes" etc. needs something a bit more catchy but I am loath to loose the h-tag and replace it with image text - any thoughts?

All feedback appreciated:

Graham Lock .com



Xylina -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:10:26)

I'm not really into art all that much, but I like your site, especially the frames around the pics. Nice touch.

Looks good, and easy to navigate.

Jennifer



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:17:11)

Thanks Jenifer - that's greatly encouraging [:)] - the client hasn't seen the site yet and I was wondering if he would like the image frames - glad you do. [;)]



dpf -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:18:17)

I think the word ART looks flat on the banner...try a stroke or edge around it....



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:26:34)

Hi Dan

Yes, maybe... once I finalise the background and the top left header text that I mentioned then I may return to the banner for a final tweak. Thanks for the input.



womble -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:36:22)

Looks good! [:)]



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:44:14)

Cheers Womble - I assume that you wouldn't change anything in the appearance then!?



Nicole -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 17:47:50)

Hi Rick,

It's a very nicely laid out site, very easy to navigate and seemed quick to load (including the pop-ups), but i am wondering about a couple of things.

Firstly I'm wondering about the space between the names Graham and Lock.com, and whether the guy himself is planning to advertise his site with that space when it doesn't appear in the domain name?

Everythings nice, the banner, nav buttons, colour scheme and the actual artwork, but I'm not too sure that they match each other? I mean, the artork is kind of oldish / rustic and the rest of the page looks more modern? Should the banner be a bit more rustic also?

I don't think the site looks plain though, plain neutral background colous are best in my opinion for an art or photography site.

Nicole



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 18:07:44)

quote:

I mean, the artork is kind of oldish / rustic and the rest of the page looks more modern?


Hi Nicole

Thanks for the positive feedback and the above point which is interesting... My thinking had been that to make the most of the artwork the rest of the site should be plain - I didn't want too much of the artwork used in the design work. However... the 'plain' look is quite contemporary and as you rightly point out the artwork is not of a contemporary style. Is it a case of 'good contrast' or 'poor blending'!!!? [:D] I really can't say, being objective about it (?). The "A R T" on the banner has been mentioned - maybe I should use something more rustic there instead (?) Perhaps offer the client two options to view of this.

Thanks



womble -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 18:27:46)

quote:

I assume that you wouldn't change anything in the appearance then!?

<indecisive>Um, not sure.</indecisive>
I think the frames go well with the artwork, and I like the contemporary look of the site, but on a second look, like Nicole, I'm not too sure the two go together. Maybe swapping the blue and beigey colour round would work better? Difficult one...

Of course you could always persuade the artist to change his painting style to fit in with the site [:D](sorry, it's late and I'm getting silly!)



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 18:42:45)

quote:

Of course you could always persuade the artist to change his painting style to fit in with the site (sorry, it's late and I'm getting silly!)


No, no - don't apologise - I think our clients should all change their goods & services to fit when we come up with a design that we like [:D]

seriously though, you may be right about the beige and blue swap - or something similar, it has occured to me. The whole site is CSS formatted in one style sheet so I can easily change all the colours (plus a quick job on the banner images to blend). I'll offer the client the choice of course.

BTW, if anyone knows of a contemporary (style) artist who wants a templated site (cheap!) do tell me [:D]




rubyaim -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/18/2005 18:49:53)

Rick, I really like this - it's a lovely showcase for the artist [:)]

Wow, have just looked at some great sites here in critiques - wish I had even a smidgeon of the artistic talent you guys have.

What a nice way to start the working week - now back to the dungeons...







Tailslide -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 3:11:08)

I like it - nice and simple - let's the artwork speak. Simple in this context is good.

Only things I found that you might want to look at are that the site has a horizontal scrollbar at 800x600 and the <label> tags aren't being used correctly.

They should look like this example: 

<label for="firstname">Name</label><input type="text" id="firstname" name="firstname" size="22" />


This links them directly to the correct input.



d a v e -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 10:25:41)

plain is good, though i think clean and contemporary would be a better description! always best to show off the artwork - incorporating the artwork into the scheme/layout would only look messy and be confusing in this kind of site.

i like the colour scheme and particularly the frames

could try a serif font for the headings but a quick play for me in firefox didn't look sooo promising... see what you think



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 11:37:40)

Thanks All

Glad you like it Sally... "showcase" is the current brief, so that the artist can approach galleries and agents etc. using the site as the initial means of showcasing his work, so I'm glad I'm on the right track [;)]

Tailside - I've been checking regularly at an 800px setting - it's not as nice as 1024 but does just squeeze in on my moniotr at this setting - thanks for alerting me, I may need to shave off a fraction.
Can anyone else tell me if this site causes a horizontal scroll bar to appear on an 800px setting?

Re the form labels - they are new to me (I'm slowly trying to become one of the 'good' designers![8D]) - thanks for the pointer, I'll look at the tags again.

Thanks Dave - Yes, I was thinking of trying a 'Times Italic' for the main page headers (top left of each page). I think Brush Script would look best but alas it's too unpredictable what people will end up with - I could specify Times Italic as a second choice but then the font size would be all wrong compared to the larger size need for something fancy like the Brush Script ... (!) ... (?) ...oh well, I'll have a think about that one.



d a v e -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 12:07:01)

you can refer to this as well...
http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html

how about georgia??



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 12:21:00)

I have this list printed and on my wall[;)]

So much for "Geneva" & "Helvetica" being so universal - I don't have them[:(]



Tailslide -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 13:02:28)

Geneva and Helvetica are the Mac versions of Tahoma and either Trebuchet or Arial respectively.

If you've got a PC you should have Tahoma and Trebuchet MS on there.

I don't think the site's saying that all these fonts are universal, just which are similar to each other on each platform.



Nicole -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/19/2005 19:04:37)

Hi Rick,

For the record I don't get any horizontal scrolling at 800x600, but you may have fixed that overnight my time.

I notice on the links page of this site that you've put your logo there and that you are specialising in websites for artists etc.

This site is a good site that I've used a few times to get ideas on how to present things, it lists illustrators, photographers as well as some other useful links like web designers, copyriters etc.

I find it good to get some ideas on how other designers are presenting sites like this. Something to keep in mind though, photographers, illustrators and artists are obviously very creative people and therefore I'd imagine they're quite demanding/particular on how they want their work presented on a website.

Nicole

p.s.

This is the list of standard windows fonts that I have stuck on my wall.



RickP -> RE: speaking of "too plain"... (9/20/2005 9:03:52)

Thanks for the links Nicole

I'm not necessarily aiming to specialise in Art websites but I have done four now - My link just says "art websites... & other small businesses" - just a good way to make it relevant to the links page on an art site [;)]

Re the fussy artists... so far in my limited experience (ahem, hope none are reading this![:(]) I find most of them to be brilliant at art but quite clueless about promoting and even presenting it! If you saw some of the homespun cards and posters I've seen you'd know what I mean! - That's just a very broad generalisation based only on some limited experience though.

Thanks for the screen width check - I had fixed it - although I previously checked it I had since added some extra padding which pushed the edge over the width (!) ... if you see what I mean[:D]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625