All right, I'm hoping on starting a new web design company. The main problem I'm facing right now is the design of my own site. I want something good. Right now I've got the site divided into three frames. One is the left menu, one is the basic content of the site, and one is just an 8-12 or so pixel sort of "frame" between the menu and the content.
Here, I'll just post a screenshot of what I've got. I'll link to it since it's a big file:
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/cr..._photos/web.jpg
I don't know what you guys think, but personally I think it needs something a bit more grabbing on the main page. The clouds look a tad cheesy... and the re-used CD image in the left menu makes it look redundant.
Please give me any suggestions you can. The best one so far was by my mom... she suggested that I use a windmill with links on the blades.
Any other ideas?
Full Version: My new web design company...
All right, I have totally re-done the site. It no longer looks as dumb, and I've gotten rid of the frames, so it should run a lot smoother. New screenshot:
http://s167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/cr...nt=gilvarry.jpg
Please tell me what you think. As far as the actual web design company goes, I might need to get a trademark on the name, maybe a license to do that sort of thing... I live in Michigan and I'm fourteen... not sure what the rules about that stuff are. Then if I make too much money I might have to pay taxes... anyone know any more about this or where I can find out more?
http://s167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/cr...nt=gilvarry.jpg
Please tell me what you think. As far as the actual web design company goes, I might need to get a trademark on the name, maybe a license to do that sort of thing... I live in Michigan and I'm fourteen... not sure what the rules about that stuff are. Then if I make too much money I might have to pay taxes... anyone know any more about this or where I can find out more?
Both are wider than my default browser windows. Both are wider than my maximized browser windows, unless I turn off the taskbar, etc.
Your first design looks like it might work for both the site's welcome pages and the site's content pages. Your second design looks like it is just a welcome page, and the site's content pages will have a different layout.
But both are just images, rather than real web sites, so it's hard to evaluate them as web sites.
Your first design looks like it might work for both the site's welcome pages and the site's content pages. Your second design looks like it is just a welcome page, and the site's content pages will have a different layout.
But both are just images, rather than real web sites, so it's hard to evaluate them as web sites.
QUOTE
All right, I'm hoping on starting a new web design company. The main problem I'm facing right now is the design of my own site
Well, I must ask something. How come that more and more questions are: "I'm starting web design company, help me to design my site"?? After 20 years in design and prepress, and one year of learning about web, I started my own business. However how can you expect to work when you are not sure how to design your own site? It is evident that you are not sure in some basic design questions, let alone the web.
QUOTE(stjepan @ Jul 4 2007, 07:41 AM) 
QUOTE
All right, I'm hoping on starting a new web design company. The main problem I'm facing right now is the design of my own site
Well, I must ask something. How come that more and more questions are: "I'm starting web design company, help me to design my site"?? After 20 years in design and prepress, and one year of learning about web, I started my own business. However how can you expect to work when you are not sure how to design your own site? It is evident that you are not sure in some basic design questions, let alone the web.
I can say very little except that I don't plan to be doing any learning about web design unless I actually practice the art on a regular basis. How can I do that if I am not designing sites? I hope to learn as I get my business up and running. I'm getting DreamWeaver in the mail in a few days and am working my way through several books on web design. I understand what you mean here; I just wanted to know what others think of the design. After all, you must realize I am not the visitor.
QUOTE
Both are wider than my default browser windows. Both are wider than my maximized browser windows, unless I turn off the taskbar, etc.
Hmm, I find it strange that the second should be. It's really only a table 530 pixels in length... though maybe I just have a larger screen? The first is set to adjust to that stuff. The menu table on the left is fixed though the one on the right gets larger or smaller depending on how much space it will get.
All right, the site is up at http://www.gilvarrywebdesign.com. For now a buggy Flash version is up until I get the HTML/CSS version up, or just come up with a better Flash version.
I *strongly* recommend you turn that flash into HTML/CSS. After all, the web is still primarily written in those two languages, and you'll maximise your potential customer base.
I see a blank gray browser window.
I see the flash, but it is a simple page, even I could do it with html/css 
Really, no need for Flash.
Really, no need for Flash.
Yeah, I'm working on an HTML/CSS version, though it was easier just to put a Flash version up there until I'm finished. If you're all going for HTML (assuming that Mr. McGrew is due to the fact that the Flash version isn't working for him) I think I had better switch over.
I see Flash only if I want to (thanks to a Firefox extension) but a lot of people don't enable it at all, or only enable it sometimes, or can't use it at all - like those who may be in a corporate environment where the IT people have set security policies.
And a search engine sees nothing at all (bad for your business)
So, it should be used to enhance a site, not be the site in total.
And a search engine sees nothing at all (bad for your business)
So, it should be used to enhance a site, not be the site in total.
Hi there, I know my views are probably antiquated and out of date, but when designing a site I have always found it more usefull to use tables and then percentages so that they supposedly auto fit regardless of screen size, the next way of accomplishing this would be to make a layout for each major screen size with a standard default(1024x768) I think is todays standard. And I always tried going more for simple straight forward rather than graphically heavy although that depends on the sites purpose. Of course a site about an artist and his work is going to present that versus a site on how to make popcorn(brain freeze prevented a better analogy sorry) but I hope I'm making sense. Just my opinion for whatever it may be worth hopefully something about it helps maybe :-)
QUOTE
Yeah, I'm working on an HTML/CSS version, though it was easier just to put a Flash version up there until I'm finished.
You use Flash, I use Illustrator, some of us Photoshop... It's ok if it's just for presentation purposes for you client, otherwise as Peter said, Flash is the final touch on your design.
Yeah, now it's HTML/CSS. The table doesn't resize with the window, since I've known that to end up with really strange results, especially with the sort of thing I've got now. I might be able to make it resize later, but I'd want to be able to test it on a number of different resolutions, and I've only got two to test it on right now.
Anyway I've been fated to having that old giraffe of mine as my mascot... and I've bought the domains gilvarry.net, gilvarryweb.com, gilvarrywebdesign.com, and gilvarrywebdesign.net.
Anyway I've been fated to having that old giraffe of mine as my mascot... and I've bought the domains gilvarry.net, gilvarryweb.com, gilvarrywebdesign.com, and gilvarrywebdesign.net.
The screen size or resolution is irrelevant. What matters is the width of the browser window. And the font size (possibly enforced by the browser's minimum font size).
FWIW, the "featured site" blurb at the bottom of the left sidebar doesn't fit in my current browsing environment. I get
And the centered text in the main content area looks wonky, especially when the last line ends up being significantly shorter than the rest.
FWIW, the "featured site" blurb at the bottom of the left sidebar doesn't fit in my current browsing environment. I get
QUOTE
featured sites by
us
www.creaturefeature.info
with the ".info" of the domain name sticking out into the main content area.us
www.creaturefeature.info
And the centered text in the main content area looks wonky, especially when the last line ends up being significantly shorter than the rest.
The site would benefit greatly from a fluid layout. (Broken record, anyone?)
When someone like Darin, who surfs in a window and enforces minimum font sizes visits your site, it's shown up for the fixed width/layout thing that it is. I.e, it looks a mess.
I'm using a 17" monitor at 1024x768 which is par for the course, and your home page is this little biddy thing in the middle of my screen.
I can't stress the need for a fluid layout highly enough.
http://blog.html.it/layoutgala/ <-- 40 to pick from. Go for it.
A few issues...
Result: 0 errors / 20 warnings
line 3 column 1 - Warning: <link> isn't allowed in <html> elements
line 43 column 108 - Warning: missing <li>
line 53 column 321 - Warning: discarding unexpected </b>
line 53 column 325 - Warning: discarding unexpected </font>
line 79 column 29 - Warning: missing </font> before <p>
line 79 column 63 - Warning: inserting implicit <font>
line 79 column 105 - Warning: discarding unexpected </font>
line 8 column 1 - Warning: <link> inserting "type" attribute
line 30 column 32 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 31 column 35 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 32 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 33 column 34 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 34 column 34 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 35 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 36 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 37 column 20 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 43 column 108 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 53 column 1 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 56 column 4 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 79 column 29 - Warning: trimming empty <font>
When someone like Darin, who surfs in a window and enforces minimum font sizes visits your site, it's shown up for the fixed width/layout thing that it is. I.e, it looks a mess.
I'm using a 17" monitor at 1024x768 which is par for the course, and your home page is this little biddy thing in the middle of my screen.
I can't stress the need for a fluid layout highly enough.
http://blog.html.it/layoutgala/ <-- 40 to pick from. Go for it.
A few issues...
CODE
Result: 0 errors / 20 warnings
line 3 column 1 - Warning: <link> isn't allowed in <html> elements
line 43 column 108 - Warning: missing <li>
line 53 column 321 - Warning: discarding unexpected </b>
line 53 column 325 - Warning: discarding unexpected </font>
line 79 column 29 - Warning: missing </font> before <p>
line 79 column 63 - Warning: inserting implicit <font>
line 79 column 105 - Warning: discarding unexpected </font>
line 8 column 1 - Warning: <link> inserting "type" attribute
line 30 column 32 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 31 column 35 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 32 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 33 column 34 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 34 column 34 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 35 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 36 column 23 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 37 column 20 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 43 column 108 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 53 column 1 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 56 column 4 - Warning: <img> lacks "alt" attribute
line 79 column 29 - Warning: trimming empty <font>
QUOTE
When someone like Darin, who surfs in a window and enforces minimum font sizes visits your site, it's shown up for the fixed width/layout thing that it is. I.e, it looks a mess.
FWIW, my browsing environment varies widely, depending on which system I'm using at the moment. The displays range from 1024x768 to 2560x1600. I rarely use full-screen browser windows, even on the 1024x768 system. The default font size is configured sensibly on all my browsers, and minimum font sizes prevent web sites from dropping much below the default font size. Of course, I've configured different defaults and minimums for each system.
OK, I've come up with a new version that handles window/text resize much more easily. It's not up on the site yet but it should be soon if I get everything worked out.
I see the errors, the new version should be bug-free and if it isn't I will strive to squash as many gremlin-beetles as possible.
As for the text, I actually want to include a system such as is used on www.biblegateway.com so that my viewers can resize the text according to their preference.
Now what do you think of this on my homepage?
Learn more about getting your own website. What are...
Web Designers? Web Hosts? Domain Names?
Web Servers? Web Clients? Web Space?
The stuff above is all centered.
"Web Designers? Web Hosts? Domain Names?
Web Servers? Web Clients? Web Space?"...these are hyperlinks that take you to pages explaining this stuff.
Thoughts, ideas, etc?
I see the errors, the new version should be bug-free and if it isn't I will strive to squash as many gremlin-beetles as possible.
As for the text, I actually want to include a system such as is used on www.biblegateway.com so that my viewers can resize the text according to their preference.
Now what do you think of this on my homepage?
Learn more about getting your own website. What are...
Web Designers? Web Hosts? Domain Names?
Web Servers? Web Clients? Web Space?
The stuff above is all centered.
"Web Designers? Web Hosts? Domain Names?
Web Servers? Web Clients? Web Space?"...these are hyperlinks that take you to pages explaining this stuff.
Thoughts, ideas, etc?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.