Something a bit different! (Full Version)

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



Message

RickP -> Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 14:20:52)

Just finalising a site revamp here.

I did the original a year or so ago but have recently been trying to think of a better way to execute the two horizontally scrolling pages (!) - Horizontal scroll bars aren't the only 'rule' of 'good web design' it breaks (!) but see what you think. When I first done the site I had never seen a (designed-to-be) side-scrolling website, and still haven't, but maybe you can point me to other known examples - I'd be most interested to see them.

Thanks to a few folk who helped me a couple of weeks ago re 'vertical alignment' issues - you'll see where this comes in with the page layout for the two 'galleries'.

As ever, all comments, observations, tests appreciated...



jaybee -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 15:09:39)

Rick, I'll give you a link to a gallery I did but I can't post it here as it's behind a security system and I'll have to allocate you a login id and password. I'll pm it to you. It'll give you a radically different idea.



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 15:31:36)

Looking forward to viewing this Jaybee! - but I bet I know how it works... you've rotated all images 90 degrees and added a note to the viewer to please place their monitor on its side [:D]



jaybee -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 15:55:09)

Oh Rats! You got me!

[:D]

Eeejit!



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 16:06:21)

Hi Rick,

Hope you get some ideas from Jaybee's site. I just may not be able to think outside the box on this one, but afaik, horizontal scrollbars are just not allowed! When you scroll across to see the other paintings, you lose the business title which was left aligned.

The other thing with the opening page is that the background image repeats on a 1280x1024 monitor, and the footer information may have been a little more contrasting against the background.

Nicole



womble -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 16:27:01)

I know it's what your client wanted, but I'm afraid I'm with Nicole on this one - horizontal scroll just doesn't work for me, and the same with the totally different style on the gallery pages (was that the other 'rule' you mentioned breaking?). Home page and the contact page I like though! [;)]



Mike54 -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 17:50:33)

quote:

I had never seen a (designed-to-be) side-scrolling website, and still haven't


I've seen a few photographers sites which they did with side to side scrolling intentionally but for the life of me I could never figure out why.[:'(]
Somewhere in the fog and cobwebs I seem to remember an art site that moved with the mouse so you didn't have to scroll per se (kind of a 3D thing) but that was a one time deal and I don't know if it was flash or js. (probably flash)
Is there a particular reason for the horizontal scroll?



Donkey -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/10/2005 18:07:16)

I applaud the idea, and for trying to be different, but I'm afraid I have to agree with the majority here. It doesn't work for me either.



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 5:00:32)

Thanks all

Sorry to hear that no-one likes the horizontal galleries[:(]

I suggested the idea to the client who liked it a lot. The next job that came my way was another artist who requested specifically to have a site just like that one - so there are some more side-scrolling pages lurking out there![sm=yikes.gif]

Nicole said...

quote:

When you scroll across to see the other paintings, you lose the business title which was left aligned.

The other thing with the opening page is that the background image repeats on a 1280x1024 monitor, and the footer information may have been a little more contrasting against the background.


The first point would affect any vertically scrolling page too!

The background was sized sufficiently for up to 1024px (width) but you are right - it needs to be extended to work up to 1280 these days. The footer doesn't contrast much, agreed, - I'm not sure if making the footer more visible is important or not - maybe I'll darken the text there slightly (?)

Thanks all for comments thus far [;)]



jaybee -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 5:39:56)

I've sent you some links to scrollers that scroll within the page. Much neater and for some reason nowhere near as annoying.



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 6:04:03)

Hi Rick,

Actually, making sure a background image doesn't repeat isn't limited to 1280 x 1024, there's 1600 x 1200 y'now, and there'll probably be others bigger in the future. Generally i don't use images that will be noticed if they repeat. Normally patters more than images.

Also, and it may not apply in your case, but have you tried increasing text-size over and over, to see if the image starts to repeat? You've chosen a background-image and text colour with enough contrast, but many sites don't consider that "silly people" like me will endlessly increase text size to see what happens to background-images and whether text is still legible when it repeats.

Re: Horizontal scrolling. Mice don't come with a horizontal roller on them (thank goodness), but I use the vertical one on my mouse all the time. The only time I don't use it is if page length is extremely excessive.

I've just finished a very lengthy report into a group of websites an organisation run telling them why their websites are poor, and mostly they just break from what people are used to. People aren't used to horizontal scrolling because it involves doing something that they're not accustomed to.



Mike54 -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 6:33:13)

quote:

Re: Horizontal scrolling. Mice don't come with a horizontal roller on them (thank goodness)

Actually Nicole I discovered yesterday, while playing at Ricks site, that if the page isn't long enough for vertical scrolling the clicking the scroll wheel does in fact initiate horizontal scrolling.[sm=unsure.gif]



[image]local://upfiles/2876/DB095B2DAC6B4DDDA3E1B80581CE1992.jpg[/image]



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 6:46:46)

Gosh Mike,

You've just made me realise my mouse scroller thingy clicks!

It clicks, but nothing happens though!

lol

Thanks anyway



womble -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 8:04:47)

quote:

Re: Horizontal scrolling. Mice don't come with a horizontal roller on them (thank goodness)


Mine does (M$ Intellimouse Explorer 2.0) - makes horizontal scroll on sites slightly less annoying, but it's still there. And if I click my scroll wheel it flips me between open windows....I'm just so lazy! [:D]



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 9:37:51)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike54

quote:

Re: Horizontal scrolling. Mice don't come with a horizontal roller on them (thank goodness)

Actually Nicole I discovered yesterday, while playing at Ricks site, that if the page isn't long enough for vertical scrolling the clicking the scroll wheel does in fact initiate horizontal scrolling.[sm=unsure.gif]



[image]local://upfiles/2876/DB095B2DAC6B4DDDA3E1B80581CE1992.jpg[/image]


Oh, that's just the special little preloader-ps2mini-mousedriver-module-thingy that I included to make this feature work with mice! - I thought I'd better include such a feature - for those that don't mind a horizontal scrolling page TOOOO much (!) - glad it's working okay!
[:D] [8D] [sm=whistling.gif]

Seriously Nicole, you're right about the increasing resolutions and the problem of having a single image bgnd. As usual, for me, there has to come a point in design where I cater for the majority and accept that there will be a few cases where a feature may not work as intended. One topic on my mind, which I was intending to post on the forum soon, is the subject of setting a max-width to page layout. If this is possible (TO MAKE IT WORK CONSISTENTLY), on pages like this I would set a max-width of 1024 ( a bit under actually) and that would cure the problem of worrying about the relatively few who have a screen res above this.

Thanks for all further input - & thanks Jaybee for the sites sent via PM[;)]



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/11/2005 16:12:56)

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

14% of web users already are viewing sites with screen resolutions higher than 1024. It may be increasing slowly, but it's not decreasing.



Lily -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 13:37:42)

I'm not going to be as technical, as I can see that's being dealt with. Just wanted to say I love the background image (I do have a soft spot for sea images) and I also like the horizontal scrolling. Perhaps a minority view here, but for me I liked being encouraged to feel I am walking around an art gallery. Maybe I'm just underprivileged to be living in the back of beyond and don't visit many except when I make the effort and travel!
Best wishes, Lily.



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 14:35:08)

Nicole...

quote:

14% of web users already are viewing sites with screen resolutions higher than 1024. It may be increasing slowly, but it's not decreasing.


I think that the figure given above is more for people 'in the trade' rather than the 'average user'. Visitors to the W3C are usually people working in web dev/design who are far more likely to use above average screen res - IMHO. Certainly, from all my own sites stats (and experience of users generally/observing in places I go) the number of people using above 1024 would be less than 1%!

Lily...

quote:

and I also like the horizontal scrolling. Perhaps a minority view here, but for me I liked being encouraged to feel I am walking around an art gallery.


Wey-hey!!![:D] Someone who likes it at last - thanks. The 'gallery feel' is exactly what I was trying to achieve.

All...

I would have to say generally - being entirely objective (seriously!) - that all other people that have seen this design have liked it! That is, 'the average Internet user as opposed to other designers. I say this not as a self justification but as a point of interest/note. IMHO, and as a very broad generalisation, I think the average user does not see sites in the same way as the average designer!

Now I'll duck, I'm sure I'll be in for it![sm=fie.gif]



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 15:05:12)

Hi Rick,

I agree that the stats given on the W3Schools website could be a little bit distorted for the reasons that you say, but I don't know of any more comprehensive site that shows trends like they do, does anyone?

Regardless of whether the figures are as high or not, they are still on the increase as at least Dell for one are selling hundreds if not thousands of bigger and more powerful monitors every day capable of higher screen resolutions.

We can deny the figures as much as we like, but I for one will make sure anything that is capable of breaking a site apart that I'm creating will be taken into account.

Lily makes a good point of horizontal scrolling mimicking being in an art gallery. Perhaps a 3d panorama thing like a lot of real estate sites have is an option you might consder?

Nicole



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 16:57:38)

Nicole, I have a confession... [:)]

My "less than 1%" estimate was supposed to a combination of anecdotal evidence combined with site stats - I'm afriad I must have imagined the latter!!! - having just checked with three stats progs on my server none of them give res [:)] - apologies.

However... I'll still go with the personal guesswork opinion that the figure for those (other than 'in-the-trade' folk) using above 1024 is not likely to far exceed the one percent. - based on everyone I know as home users and some local big organisations (like the local council for which I work P/T).

I use 1152 x 864, which is as far as I am comfortable with on a 19" monitor but I think you possibly use higher res on a smaller monitor if I remember you mentioning once before having a 17" screen. I think this is pretty unusual if it is the case.

Whether or not homes and offices will go more and more for bigger monitors (over 17") - (generally meaning bigger res) as time goes by I wouldn't like to say (?) That will be interesting to see...



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 17:12:42)

Two other questions please about this site...

In the 'galleries'...

Do I need to have a text that says "scroll this way etc." ?

Do I need a text that says "click images to enlarge" ?

Do you think that the above two factors are obvious enough for most people or should they be spelt-out?

Thanks



Nicole -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/12/2005 17:48:35)

Rick,

I use a 17" monitor set at 1280 x 1024 resolution. This is my preference as yours is yours. Some people may choose to use 1600 x 1200 on a 19" screen, and this is of course their choice also.

I don't have the ability to check how my sites appear at higher screen resolutions than the one I currently have set, but if somebody alerts me to a background repeating or some other element that looks odd because on a higher resolution monitor, then I make sure I try and find a fix for it.

Back to the W3Schools stats, I've always doubted that 20% or whatever users they say are using Firefox, I believe it'd be closer to half of that, or even as low as a quarter, but that's still 5%, and if the screen resolution figures are misleading by a half or three quarters, then that still equates to a percentage I'd consider large enough to cater for. It's only when figures state that something is used by less than 1% of viewers that I'd consider it not worth catering for, unless of course that figure is increasing as opposed to decreasing (as 640 x 480 screen resolution and Netscape v4 is).

We're web designers afterall, and clients pay us to design their sites to display the same on as many variations of hardware and software as humanly possible.

We can disagree on this all day, but that's my stance and i'm sticking to it okay!

To your other questions, I'd include both of those notes "click to enlarge" and "scroll to the right" or something similar.

I also wonder what's going to happen when your client decides to add more images, just how far you're prepared to go with horizontal scrolling? We all know sites that scroll endlessly downwards, and whether a page has just gone on too long, but as we're talking outside the norms here, just how much horizontal scrolling is far enough, and should any site navigation be repeated along the way or at the end?

Nicole



RickP -> RE: Something a bit different! (11/13/2005 6:02:00)

quote:

To your other questions, I'd include both of those notes "click to enlarge" and "scroll to the right" or something similar.


yes, I think that would be best.

quote:

I also wonder what's going to happen when your client decides to add more images, just how far you're prepared to go with horizontal scrolling? We all know sites that scroll endlessly downwards, and whether a page has just gone on too long, but as we're talking outside the norms here, just how much horizontal scrolling is far enough, and should any site navigation be repeated along the way or at the end?


Once again, there is no difference here when compared with a vertically scrolling page - obviously there has to be a limit, taking into consideration page-weight, design appearance, how many screen widths/lengths a page should ideally scroll etc. As with other art sites I've done, the design is pretty much fixed as it is ( as a show case rather than something to be regularly updated ) so it will just be a case of swapping one or two images once in a while.

Thanks again for the input.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.109375