?

Log in

3 Years In the Making! - The Annals of Young Geoffrey: Hope brings a turtle [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Young Geoffrey

[ Website | Edifice Rex Online ]
[ Info | livejournal userinfo ]
[ Archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| EdificeRex Online ]

3 Years In the Making! [Feb. 27th, 2005|08:17 pm]
Young Geoffrey




It's not done; it will never be done. But it's close enough for jazz.

The new version of my site is now online and ready for your laurels and brickbats, There's much less new work there than I'd like (and of what is "new", my most loyal Gentle Readers will have already read some), but it's a start - and, I've come to realize, on the web, nothing is ever final.

I do want to know what you think, whether positive or negative, but I'd much prefer you say why you like it, or don't.

That's it. Now that the swine is (sort of) finished, I expect to be more of a regular presence on your friends' pages than I have been of late.

For now, I'm going to make something to eat. Sometime soon, I'll tell you about my (unexpected) visit to the auto-show, my continuing battle with the Demon Weed, and bore you with how sweet I am on my girlfriend.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: sooguy
2005-02-28 05:02 am (UTC)
I just had a quick browse of the new site and like the layout and the navigation.

I think the negative-reversed images you used were a bit much after a while. It loses its impact after you use it several times. Just my personal opinion.

I am one to talk though. My site has been in flux for 6 years now and there is very little consistency between old posts and new.

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ed_rex
2005-02-28 09:20 am (UTC)
I don't know about the reverse images, either. For now, at least, I'm quite fond of them; but I can imagine growing weary of them given a little time. For now, they stay. But as you said about your own site, the web almost demands that things be in flux.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wickedgiggle
2005-02-28 06:15 am (UTC)

here's my two cents

Alright, I'm just going to comment in here as I go through your page.

index page: The jpeg needs to be saved at a higher quality, there's um what I call fuzziness around the edge of the oval. Or, you could just make it a gif with a lot of colors, and take out the purple altogether, just have the oval on a transparent background. Also, there's a bit of white at the bottom of the oval that seems like it doesn't belong.

home page: the header table is cool, but it seems too cramped. try upping the cellpadding, I think it would make it look better. And again, the jpeg fuzziness. the alignment also seems a little weird. You're probably not using the same resolution as I am, (I use 1152x864 but I have my browser window set at 1024x768) but the table allllmost fills up the window. It's good for it to not fill up the window, for smaller resolution compatibility... but I'd center align it, or make the table even smaller, or something. it seems awkward as it is now.

only other thing that jumped out at me, by some of the 'new' graphics, there's a broken image right before it.

But overall, I like it. the layout is nice!
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wickedgiggle
2005-02-28 07:36 am (UTC)
Ah... I found the culprit!!

Screenshot
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ed_rex
2005-02-28 09:16 am (UTC)
How in the world did you find that?!? (I think it's fixed now; thank you.)

Thanks also for your comments on the design. I'll not likely make any major changes until the structure has been "smartified" (no that's probably not a word), because I really don't want to go through changing the HTML on every page again, but I'll definitely take your thoughts into consideration when I do.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wickedgiggle
2005-02-28 07:13 pm (UTC)
I found it by highlighting the broken image and some text right above it, then right click and "view selection source". This is in firefox, I'm not sure how it works in other browsers. I know you can view page source in any browser, but I'm not sure about the source of a specific selection.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ed_rex
2005-02-28 07:31 pm (UTC)
Sorry, what I meant was, "How did you know there was a broken image?" Unless I was halucinating, it looked fine when I viewed it in Mozilla.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: wickedgiggle
2005-02-28 07:32 pm (UTC)
Hm, weird. It actually showed the little broken image icon for me.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ed_rex
2005-03-02 12:35 pm (UTC)
I probably just missed it then. Proof-reading kind of editing has never been my strong suit; especially when I've been working on the same damned thing for what seemed an eternity.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: venividivici3
2005-03-01 02:06 am (UTC)

image

I can see what he means by the fuzzyness around the oval...

but it doesn't show the broken image icon ((and im on mozilla right now))

lookin' good baybeee.

love,

laura
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ed_rex
2005-03-02 12:36 pm (UTC)

Re: image

Yes, the image isn't as crisp as I'd like it to be; give me more time with Photoshop and/or The Gimp and I'll get it right.

I hope your week has been going well (and productively), my sweet.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)