Two versions, which do you like?

[progravix]

I recently performed a redesign on an existing client's site. I was very bored, and thought it would be nice to make a change. I've only done graphic design for this client (brochures, flyers, forms, etc.) When she saw the new layout she blew fire. She was so "disgusted" and felt that the new layout detracted too much from the actual product, hand-signed open edition prints.

I think that sometimes people just prefer a bland website, while others like complex sites, burdened with oodles of animations and gobble-de-goop.

Well, here's the two sites:

http://www.russellhouston.com/

and

http://www.russellhouston.com/new/

[B&T]

They are both fine, I could go either way. But if you make me pick I would pick the old one. Just looks more professional to me.

[Chase]

I do believe the first looks more "professional" as B&T said, but only in the sence of "professionalism" itself...

As for the content of the site, I think the new design is better. It follows more accurately the new trend in art websites, and is much much much more asthetically appealing.

My vote is triple folded, taped for security, and says "I vote NEW"... humm, guess I let the cat out of the bag there, huh?

[oatesj77]

i liked the new one also, though both are nice. the second seems to fit the content better, the first has a too techy feel for the subject. the only big difference is the size of the header, the new one takes up nearly a third of the screen and you don't see as many of the prints as you do on the first.

[Marko Peric]

While both designs are pretty good, I'm going to go with the current majority and say I like the new design better, although Oates is right, the header takes up too much space. In fact, you basically have duplicate header banners, with the full colour "Huston Design" one above the black "Welcome" one. Also, your top nav links, while they look good, don't have to be so tall.
I do like the faint outline of the golfing figure behind the pictures. Nice touch.

[YvetteKuhns]

I agree with Marco's comments. The welcome header is not needed at all. The links have more height than necessary, and they should appear below the header.

The web page design is centered but have blank space on either side in a higher screen resolution. The home page is quite long so a Back to Top link would be helpful or you can include the link menu at the bottom of the page as well.

The white background in the new design shows the images better unless the image has a light background. You could add a border in Photoshop or with CSS to keep light backgrounds from blending into the page background.

The text has been saved as images which means search engines cannot read the text. You probably wanted a special font face, but if you rely on search engines to get visitors, you may want to reconsider. I realize that your target audience will not be visually impaired, so that point does not need to be made for this website. Using text will also improve the load time of each page.

If you are selling products, you should have privacy, payment and refund policies. I didn't find them. Hey, I noticed that the header banner has different images behind the name Houston Designs! Interesting.

Overall, a nice design and beautiful images. Much more updated and appropriate than the first website design. Nice job! :)

[Chase]

I actually like the Welcome header. Even though it's redundant, it in a way isn't. The upper header is very graphical and artlike illustrating the style of the artist and thereby branding it with the name...

the lower header is a personalize sort of feel by saying 'Welcome to' the place that you just saw described above by that image

and that leads you beautifully either down to content, or up to navigation depending on what your goals on viewing the site are.

i think it's beautifully done... not saying that any website is ever perfect, but i for one like the double header