Site rewrite...please review

[BaldEagle]

Please review this rewrite and give me some pointers as to what makes a site appeal at first glance.

http://www.dwd.somee.com/aui

you can see the original site here http://www.antiquesunlimitedinc.com

also for Firefox users it should look and work the same, however I have a couple of issues to clear up. The main one is the top menu does not hide the submenus onmouseout and if I can't figure it out I'll ask for help. I usually like to figure problems out for myself but time is always a factor.

BaldEagle

 

[Arkette]

I have to say that my first impression of this design is very good, certainly a vast improvement on the existing site design. My main issue is the body text versus the background image. When you use this font, colour, size and weight over a busy image like the chandellier, then the text appears to be rather thin and spidery. I would suggest trying to find a different background image, something with smoother simpler lines and a lower tonal range. I would also probably give the text more weight so that it punches up above the background.

 

[BaldEagle]

Thanks for the comment. I have taken your advice and swapped out the background image to something less busy plus I have made the text standout as well. Could you do me a favor and follow the 'Rugs' link on the main menu and hover over one of the images. Next go to the 'Cameras' link and you will see that the images are much smaller. Hover over the image to reveal a small pop-up. Please tell me which one one of these behaviors you prefer.

BaldEagle

 

[BaldEagle]

BTW, Arkette, you have a great lookin' site.

BaldEagle

 

[ian]

Not sure what background was used before you made the change, but after the change I still think the background looks too pronounced or rich, making it hard and distracting to actually read the text which is rather bunched up.
Also the text in the navigation menu at the top of the site should be darker to make it easier to read.

 

[Arkette]

I think on balance I prefer the Rug section approach, but the camera's section approach is ok too, except that there was a lag before the pop up window appeared when i first loaded the page. Are the two thumbs the same image re-scaled or are they different images?
The new background image is much better, but i would still make it mono-tonal, given that were on an antiques, site sepia might be a good choice. For some reason the heavier text in my browser (Win2k, IE6) has rendered all the lower-case w's somewhat blobby so that they stand out from the copy like a sore thumb. I can't really come up with convincing hypothesis for why that is other than the remote possiblity that it's quirk of the colour rendering, so may shifting the font colour slightly might solve the problem.

 

[BaldEagle]

Again, I appreciate the comments/suggestions. I apologize for taking up so much of your time on this, but I want to get this right. The original site in my opinion sucked, aesthetically at least, so I want to impress the client with this re-write. I have replaced the image with a monochrome version to tone it down plus I faded it out just a bit more. As for the font problem you are having Arkette, I changed the font to Tahoma which seems to be a little better plus I darkened it just slightly. I do not see the 'w' problem you indicated but part of the problem may be that I am using a laptop and I will admit that sometimes things don't look quite the same when I view my work on an analog monitor (not sure if it is something with my color setup and not sure what type monitor you are using). The images would have to be reformatted if I was to go with the little pop-ups but I didn't do that yet as I was unsure how I was going to proceed. Also I don't know if anyone noticed it but my menu system was buggy especially in Firefox so I reworked that and cleared up the bugs. One last thing. I tried to increase the letter-spacing just slightly to make the body text a little easier to read, but for some reason it changes other things in IE (perhaps a bug I was unaware of). For example any place the I use a <br> tag didn't seem to work unless I doubled it up. However this then made it looked too spaced out in Firefox. I took it out. Obviously FF is doing it correctly but IE is not (surprise).

Again I appreciate all your constructive comments/suggestions.

BaldEagle

{edit} BTW, Ian I wasn't ignoring your comments about the menus, I did darken them.

 

[Arkette]

The whole point of joining a forum is to help each other and discuss things of mutual interest, so don't worry about taking up my time I will always help where I can. The 'w' problem is no longer there and I'm as much in the dark about that as you are. What was the original font? The monochromatic image is better but there is still someting not qite right. I'm going to take some time to think it over and get back to you later on.

 

[Arkette]

The attached zip file contains a modified page and a different background Image. I hope this doesn't offend you in anyway, it's only a suggestion. If you dont get the file let me know.

 

[BaldEagle]

No offense taken at all. And I think I understand what the problem is now. The Lalique.jpg you sent is not visible to me. It is practically pure
white. Only if I tip my screen forward almost flat can I see there is something there. Probably was good for you so in reverse what looks good to me looks bad for you. Do you have any suggestions on what might be causing this and possibly how to correct it. Seems the issue has to do with my screen. When it looks good to me it still doesn't look good for anyone else and that could prove to be a problem. Thank you.

BaldEagle

[edit] original font was Verdana, now is Tahoma

 

[BaldEagle]

I think I have my problem solved. I opened the image you sent me in PSP7 and still could not see it (all white). I did searching through the help files and found the section on gamma correcton. I adjusted the gamma until I could see your image although still a little lite. I then loaded the original image I created my bg with. Man, it did not even look like the same image I started with. It was quite a bit darker, so I am thinking that when I created the images I thought it was much lighter than it really was so to you it was still a little or a lot dark. I am going to give it another go and I'll re-post when ready and maybe you's can let me know if it works.

T
BaldEagle

 

[BaldEagle]

Ok, here goes. I have adjusted the image using my new settings. Please let me know if the image now looks better as far as being faded into the background goes. I understand that I may need to find a better image, perhaps something more along the lines of what Arkette sent me, but I do want to know if my settings are working correctly.

BaldEagle

[edit] this may also mean that I have to take a look at every other image I have displayed. Did anyone notice that all the images are too dark?

 

[ian]

The text is easier to read against the new lighter background. The text formatting does look strange though, looks like one big block of text, perhaps you should try experimenting with non bolded text.

 

[StephanieCordray]

I agree with ian about the text. Also I don't think grayscale is the best tonal range for the image. Perhaps a light sepia instead?

I would have commented before but I thought Arkette had it well in hand, .

When he/she was talking about the tonal quality there were sharp contrasts that made the text hard to read before. Now, you can barely see the image and it's pointless to have it there. To use a pic in a background behind text you need to use one that doesn't use a high tonal range but is still discernable as something.

 

[Arkette]

I'm really very sorry about the lalique image, I made an unforgivable and very basic error and so I'm sending it again. Let me explain, all the graphics suites etc here are on a self contained network which is not connected to the Internet. The only machines that are connected to the internet are the ones in the office block and the lounge. Anyway I used an office machine to create the lalique image and I didn't check the gamma of the monitor first, which needless to say was completely norsed up. The replacement image was adjusted on a graphics machine with corrected gamma so it should be ok. If you still have problems with it you may need to check the screen settings of you laptop. P.S. I'm not suggesting that you use this image, I only send it to give you an example of a possible direction, but feel free to use it if you want to.

 

[BaldEagle]

It seems my problem had little to do with my hardware and lots to do with my understanding. I now see (hope I get it) what you mean about the image tonal quality. I appreciate that you all have stuck with me so long on this as I am an old timer programmer and really not a designer. I really want to impress this client so that I can get referrals as they know lots of other antique and collectible dealers in the area. Many of them have ugly (in my opinion) websites I would love to rewrite.

Thanks for the insight. Ian, I really like this forum as help is always forthcoming and no one makes you feel like the know nothing newbie that perhaps many of us are.

BaldEagle

 

[BaldEagle]

I'm back. I wanted to address Ian and Stephanie's concern about the text. I went with a heavier type face and got rid of the bolding. Also I separated the main page text into paragraphs to try and eliminate the blocky look. Do you think the "Justified text" is part of the problem? I actually like it better now but still would defer to your opinions.

BaldEagle

 

[StephanieCordray]

It's not so bad with the text changes you've made. Don't always defer to us. If you like it, that's what really counts most... or rather if your clients do, lol. We can advise but it's still up to the webmaster for the final decision. I have sites that clients love but I don't care so much for myself. What I would have done by preference for those clients they hated... sometimes it is a compromise, you know?

 

[BaldEagle]

I think the next thing to do is let the client review it and see what they say. I thank y'all for your help.

BaldEagle

 

[ian]

In my personal opinion, the way the text is layed out in paragraphs and not "justified" it is much much much easier to read. When you read a book it appears in the format that you currently have it, which I think is the easiest to read.