November 2017
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30


website frontpage question


I changed the background on my entry page.... made it a gif and included text. PLEASE take a glance and tell me what you think. Do you think static is better, let people mouseover on their own? or should I have it fade from one text to the next instead of all at the same time? Do I need to make the delay longer during the time it shows the full text? I'm vacillating here, help me out!

::::EDIT:::: I changed it back, but you can see the debated image here.

feelings: curious

back to top

Comments
jamina1 ══╣╠══
belenen ══╣curious╠══
but is it easy to navigate? Easier than the static image?
genesiskenshin ══╣╠══
I think as it mouses over each bar the writing for that bar shows up. Oh make it last a little bit longer too.
belenen ══╣garrulous╠══
that would be pretty.... but that would take javascripted image-overs, which entirely too much work to code by hand. I'm just thinking of using an animated gif.
karmia ══╣trevor╠══
As pretty as it is to have the words fading in and out, I think you should probably leave them constantly visible. Rule of thumb for web design is the faster and easier it is to navigate, the better. Period. The biggest complaint for websites is it's too difficult to figure out where you're going just from looking at the links. Intuitive is best.
belenen ══╣garrulous╠══
actually, I'm only debating between fading in and out and having no words. If you hover over each spot, a description pops up anyway. I refuse to have the words static.

I might totally redesign the front page anyway.... but I like using the waterstar. And if you click the middle of it it shows you a sitemap, which is what most people go to first.
karmia ══╣╠══
Definately not no words. Mouse over with something showing up in the status bar is great-- if you have IE or netscape. Folks on Opera are screwed, and I don't know about Mozilla.
belenen ══╣garrulous╠══
Atually, that has to do with tags... most people use ALT tags, which shows up in IE due to a bug (ALT tags are not supposed to show up). I recently discovered this, and changed mine to TITLE tags, so they should show up everywhere.... I don't know for sure about opera, but in theory they should show there too.
karmia ══╣╠══
YEah, I know all about that. But still, that's a pain in the ass. Hypothetically speaking, if you have ten different pages, and I just so happen to do it so that I end up having to hover over all ten points before I find the link I want, that's a waste of time for me. In that time, I could find a website with navigation that's easy and intuitive where I just have to glance and I know instantly where I'm going. It's kind of like speed reading versus regular reading-- technically, the brain and the eye can take in and comprehend a bunch of words and text at once, so if they're all there, the brain can figure out where it wants to go in a split second. Doing the Title tags is kind of like actually sounding out every word on the page-- it just takes longer. And in the end it makes a difference.

And even if you go with the, "well, it's more artistic this way," then you've got to consider who your audience is. If it's all artists who will appreciate a pretty design over computer practicality, then you're good to go. But if you want a wider base, say you want your jewelry business to get bigger, then you need to consider what will hinder people. Most web users only spend a matter of SECONDS on a website before they decide whether they like it or not. For instance, I went to your page. I saw the star thing. First thought: splash image. Do you click on it to get to a main page? Then the words popped up. Wait, is that a mouse over thing? But then I moved my mouse, and I realized after some frustration, the appearance and disappearance had nothing to do with what I was doing. That's when I finally watched it see what labels went with what.

If it had been a page of someone I didn't know, I would have left. Why? My theory is fuck the site, I can find people who aren't so bent on being artsy that they make a site that's not uber-user-friendly. User friendly means you want to have customers; artsy means you want to be eclectic. Eclectic is great if it's a personal site, but in the business world , customers are first. Period. If you think art is first, then you end up screwed, because there are plenty of people who'll put the customers first and manage to produce the quality. Now, I'm not saying that you can't be artsy and love the customers; this is just first impressions. Internet shoppers don't know you or how wonderful of a person you are going in, they just know they've got a site they can't navigate within a second of loading the page. Will ordering be just as difficult? How about getting the product in the end? If you've got word of mouth visitors, they'll be more willing to be more patient, but folks coming in off google or yahoo won't give a flying flip.

Honestly, I don't see a problem with trying to work static words into the image. You just have to stretch yourself artistically so that it works. Yes, web design has artistic aspects, but it IS a separate entity, as explained above.
belenen ══╣passionate╠══
well, www.belenen.tk is my personal site --- my jewelry site is www.origin-waterstar.com. (I just link to it on my personal site) So the belenen.tk site is really just for myself and people who want to get to know me. (and the www.origin-waterstar.com site is going to be totally revamped soon, to be as efficient as possible)

Thanks for taking the time to really comment -- you've no idea how much I appreciate it!
anar_anar ══╣╠══
ayy, its so purdy :) and i personally think you should leave it fading... but yes, do delay it a bit longer...
jedibubbles ══╣╠══
*twitches* Uh, I'm not sure how to say this babe, but you need a crash course in web design. I'm not saying that my own grasp of the subject is masterful by any means, but I know a little bit of the basics.

Like the lovely-yet-accursed swirly green background that you occasionally use for this LJ, your new page STALLS OUT MY BROWSER. My scroll button, it doesn't scroll--it CRAWLS. And I can't click on things on occasion because my processor is so overtaxed trying process the mouseovers. Mind you, this is NOT a slow machine--I can start Maya 5 Unlimited in about 4 seconds and Adobe Photoshop in under 3--nor do we have a slow connection here at UCF.

The Waterstar is, as always, a damn cool splash page/image map, but it's hard to navigate. There's a reason my Shiva menu has a small accompanying menu bar now--people, SMART people, couldn't figure it out. (And while I love that menu, it won't be carrying over to zelokachick.com for that exact reason.)

On the Internet, even normally patient people are bloody impatient. They'll get bored and leave just because one blinkin' image takes too long to load up. (My dad hammered that into my head at age 13.)

I know you're going for artsy and pretty, but your site currently stands firmly in the realm of visually overwhelming. Take the tiled backgrounds on the majority of the pages, for instance; I know you like the patterns and the images but they're distracting, make the text challenging to read (never a good thing), and just don't look good. With web pages artful simplicity generally works better.

Artsy can work, even for commercial sites, but it has to be very obviously laid-out. Take Kristen Perry's site, for example. There's visually alot there, but it's arranged simply and serves a purpose--to simultaniously present the menu and give you a taste of her work. Just the layout speaks well of her art skills. (I'm hoping to get zelokachick.com looking that nice at some point this summer!)

I think the Waterstar has the potential to rock as a menu, but it definately needs quick-loading (read: non-browser-taxing), instantaneous (no fade-ins/-outs) mouseovers since static labeling could get a bit tricky without drifting into the realm of tacky. Or, maybe it would be better to have the Waterstar off to the right--it could even still be image-mapped for those who know the site well--with a subtle menu bar on the left. Again, Perry's frontpage is a good example. (Some of her site can get a bit confuzzled, but at least the frontpage is clear.)

For the tiled-pattern backgrounds, fade them a bit more so the text is legible. (Really they're just there to give the page a little character and color, right?) And I would really recommend switching the tiled-image backgrounds out to maybe just featuring the image on top of a very pale tiled-pattern or solid color so as to not overwhelm the text. You want people to like the image, not get sick of seeing it over and over. Which, sadly, is what tiled-images do for me.

I know you WANT to assume that people looking at your site are smart and artsy, and will find their way around with ease while appreciating your visual cleverness. But in reality, you need to knock the IQ down a few notches so people who aren't familiar with how your brain works don't get frustrated.

I love you, and I want your webpage to be as pretty as possible, so please don't let your feelings get hurt!
belenen ══╣passionate╠══
wow long entry.
One thing: the backgrounds are going to go. I had been thinking about that.

I LOVE the idea of adding a menu to the left! (I can't believe that hasn't occurred to me before) I hated the idea of adding it to the top or bottom, but the left is perfect...

I have been wanting real critique on www.belenen.tk for a while, so no need to worry! I've had many compliments on my jewelry site, but have not yet considered my personal site finished enough to "publish" to search engines.... for one thing I haven't even done the meta tags yet.

And if you haven't switched to firefox, do it. It's much faster, and firefox kills 98% of popups. (in my experience, anyway) Plus you can add all your links in the menu bar of the web browser.... SO convenient.
belenen ══╣passionate╠══
actually I decided to just make the backgrounds less obtrusive.
on communication, social justice, intimacy, consent, friendship & other relationships, spirituality, gender, queerness, & dreams. Expect to find curse words, nudity, (occasionally explicit) talk of sex, and angry ranting, but NEVER slurs or sexually violent language. I use TW when I am aware of the need and on request.
Expect to find curse words, nudity, (occasionally explicit) talk of sex, and angry ranting, but NEVER slurs or sexually violent language. I use TW when I am aware of the need and on request.