Same for me using XP and IE6.Originally Posted by Ron Marshall
Same for me using XP and IE6.
Ok, i got on my neighbor's windows machine. everything looks fine in firefox, but as everyone's saying, in explorer the gif images don't show up.
does explorer have some kind of weird requirement for gif format or naming?
i wouldn't have expected this problem, since all the art was created using photoshop's 'save for web' feature.
EDIT:
ok, i just opened one of the gif files. it's in 8-bit rgb. i thought gifs were always saved as indexed color. could this be the issue?
Last edited by paulr; 17-Aug-2006 at 10:19.
Paul,
First off, I like the general looks and the concept. I especially like your Chicago series.
Now, on to the technical issues. What Cyrus and Frank said, plus my $0.02:
--IMAGES:
You seem to be using an older version of Dreamweaver with default settings. This may be causing some of your problems. Specifically, the images may not be showing becasue of the JavaScript issue. They are showing fine in Safari and Firefox.
Internet Explorer does tend to be finicky and usually require additional cajoling to display things the way it should. I could go on about this, but there's no sense in beating a dead horse, it's just Microsoft and it wouldn't help you much in this situation.
For this very reason, I prefer to NOT rely on client-side scripting for functionality and use it only for effects. That way, my pages remain functional even in non-complying browsers and all that suffers is just eye candy.
-- CODING
I also notice that you have your stylesheet embedded into every page and that you attach styles through span tags. While there is nothing wrong with this per se, it would be far more effcient if you
a) assigned a class to, say, links instead of wrapping the content of links into span tags with the same class assigned
b) pulled your stylesheet into a single external .css file and linked to it from every page in the head section
-- STYLE
The background gray is not dark enough and there is certain lack of contrast needed for comfortable reading, especially for users with less than perfect vision.
Same with the choice of font - you seem to be using Arial, which tends to come accross a little squished, so to speak. I would suggest Verdana, which was made with the web in mind. I know this is all a matter of taste, but the usability of your site would IMHO be greatly improved with these two simple changes.
Finally, your portfolio pages look very different than the rest because of the white background. Since those are made in frames anyway, I would suggest adding a third frame on top, as a quick fix, which should contain the same header as the rest of the site and possibly changing the background to gray as well.
Hi Paul,
Nice site--much easier to view than the pdfs.
I'm on a Mac so I'm seeing what you are seeing. Here are a few details:
The page is coming up several inches too wide--a scroll bar at the bottom and lots of empty space to the right when I scroll to have a look.
The new windows in which portfolios are viewed in have bright white backgrounds--is that really waht you want? To my eyes it makes the photos look washed out a bit...maybe match the grey background of your main page instead?
Clicking on "Paul Raphaelson" at the top left does nothing--normally you'd expect a click there to take you to the home view.
Clicking on the other word in the banner (which changes depending on where you are) always leads to the "Lost Spaces" portfolio.
You've got two images on the main page linked to porfolios and then four linked images in the portfolios section (two of which are the same portfolios as the first two, just with different images). I find that confusing. Why not pick a "signature" image for each portfolio and use it for all linked images? Why not pick a signature (or random?) image from all of your work and use that as a linked image to your portfolio page--or put links to all four portfolios on the main page?
Finally, the pdf linked image made me thibk it was a fifth portfolio and I was momentarily confused when it started loading a pdf. maybe make its nature clearer in some way?
All of which are minor details--nice redesign.
I'll stop back again later to look at the images more carefully (rather than racing around clicking on everything...)
--Darin
Frank, I love the validator, but I'm afraid all it does for non-tehcnical people is confuse them further. Also, if Paul is using a WYSYWIG package, an older version of Dreamweaver it seems, the validator will help him even less, because some of the problems may just be part of the generated code which could be hard to change.
It's like giving a spotmeter to someone with a happy-snappy for correcting exposures. Web design in general is a lot like photography - everybody can use a happy-snappy to produce a recognizable picture, but only professionals can produce high quality images.
No offense meant to either amateur photographers or amateur web designers
Last edited by Marko; 17-Aug-2006 at 10:46.
or in this case like giving a spot meter to someone with a seeing eye dog
So no ideas on why the GIFs aren't displaying on windows IE?
It can't just be a rollover image issue, because the gifs at the top don't have any attached behaviors.
Do the gifs need to be in indexed color? I just noticed mine were RGB.
Last edited by paulr; 17-Aug-2006 at 11:02.
the most used screen res on the web is 1024x768. Yes thats a PC resolution but since 80 to 90% of web users are PC users and approx 40% of those are using 1024x768, then its not to be sniffed at. Your design is a little too wide for that screen resolution and should be narrowed by approx 20 or 30 pixels to fit without side ways scrolling.
The design/layout is fine except I don't like the fact that galleries open in new window which shouldn't be necessary.
You have problems with styles causing sideways scroll bars for no reason on screen res higher than 1024x768. I'm on a W2K with IE6 and everything seems to work(18:00GMT). i.e. no missing tags or links not displaying.
Your menu links realy don't need to be images. A font such as Verdana set in bold and a suitable point size would work better and be clearer.
You know, it would be a nice print design. But there are a lot of issues with the whole thing and you might want to back up and rethink it rather than patching it and having a site that will really suck down the road, as well as being a bitch to update.
Tough love, sorry.
You've got the hard part down - the content creation - writing and photos are great. But do yourself and favor and trade with some decent coder to do things right.
http://programmermeetdesigner.com/ is a new site created by a 13 year old (!) that might hook you up with a good geek.
Said geek can also input good advice as to the architecture, blogging, etc.
Remember the keywords - accessibility, clean, simple, standards-compliant, hand code, no frickin Dreamweaver BS ;-) don't let them do some hacky Javascript Flash monster.
OK, having had a second look, this time in IE6 sp2 (XP):
1. Since you are already using tables, why not use tables for everything instead of a bunch of absolutely positioned boxes?
IE/PC is known to have an issue with rendering absolutely positioned blocks and their backgrounds, as well as having problems with the stacking order.
Those images that do not show up in IE/PC are all in absolutely positioned boxes. I still don't have an explanation for the images not loading at all, though. I'd need far more time to figure that out than what I have spent so far.
2. Horizontal scroll bar - again, looks like positioning/sizing issue connected with the box model.
3. Images vs. text for menus - Again, it'd be much easier if you used styled text links instead of images for your menu. More efficient and more accessible too.
4. GIF images ARE indexed by default. Indexing colors is the nature of the format.
5. Resolution is not a problem. Good desing should accomodate it automatically. Your design seems to have a sizing issue somewhere, either a single width or a cumulative one, that is too wide even for 1280 x 1024. 1680 x 1050 was finally enough, but not everybody has a wide aspect screen.
that's actually been my plan for a long time. i have a friend who codes for google who got started on the project a year ago, but he's in no hurry (he's working for prints, and can't pay the rent with those). so i had to get something done in the mean time.
i really think if i can solve the problem of the gifs not loading, the other stuff will be mostly academic. getting rid of the scroll bar a the bottom would be nice, but it's not urgent. i do need the art to show up. and i don't want to use text for buttons ... i'm pretty picky about typography and don't want to introduce myself to the world with display type set in arial or verdana!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks