Site Check!!!!!

can u guys pls tell me what you think about this site???? its still not finished i just want to know what u think about the layout, the logo, color scheme, etc.

here's the link... http://www.pcdsigns.com

thanks

P.S. It is very slow i know that...i would like some tips on optimizing....how do get good resolution and still keep a page under 60 k??

[Ddr]

I think your site is very sharp, very clean, and very appealing. I have a super fast connection so I didn't notice the load time.

Your graphic user interface is set on a white background. To me, that is the only detraction from the site. The red and black theme is striking, yet easy to read. The white background exposed all around it make it look like it was made to the wrong size. Just my opinion.

I was looking at your source code and quite honestly it was just a bit advanced for me (tells you how much I know). I probably would have attempted to build that same site with SSI and tables. I dont know how it would have affected the download times.

Dale

[(jj)]

Nice layout and good use of the colors, but I think I have to agree with Ddr on the stark white background. It's just a bit harsh with the darker colors of the rest of the page.

Wondering why you have the large left margin, causing a horizontal scroll when viewed via 800x600 ?? I looked at your coding and see you have a setting for a 800 pixel width which as you know will not fit a standard 800 wide resolution. But even that does not explain the extra wide white left side margin.

But other than that, I like the way you have the page designed.

Just my "For What It's Worth"

[alphadesk]

Nice page. Good colors and all. I think the border on the left has to do with the absolute positiong part.

A question? You have the style scroll bar css after the closing html tag yet it still works. Is this normal. I guess your example shows it can be anywhere.

[Jeff321]

I agree with (jj) regarding the white space on the left side. I still use 800x600 resolution, as do many others, so be sure to test that out when designing websites. Other than that, the site looks very sharp

[komik]

nice layout....I agree with the white edging.....As to optimizing you said it is not complete but your background image is 48k. which isn't that bad but could be even smaller. Using table and spliting up the image. will help download speed somewhat. At least it appears to the user that it is....There is a lot of area of solid color that could be put into a table and use a 1x1 background image to fill that area instead of an entire image...or the use of bgcolor attribute......I used a similar laytout technique on my site and the download speeds have been pretty comprable not sure if it is 60k or not but most have said it download ok.....


Mark

what do u think about the font i used on the home page?? im also thinking of using that same font on the title ("welcome to"). as u can tell im not very good with typography so ill take any suggestions on what kind of font to use or which one for that matter.

Thanks guys....... link is below

its above in the other posts lol,

i need to know how to change my signature.

[Ddr]

Sure, the font is fine, but did you see the unanimous comments about the white background by the 5 poeple that looked at your site?

Dale

yes i did, im still thinking about how to fix that. the white background isnt the only problem im facing. i also need to reduce the download time or optimize my site.

Thanks for the comments

oh yeah P.S. (unrelated) how can i change my signature on this thing??

[Jeff321]

Go to the top, hit "User CP" then click on "Edit Profile".

[komik]

What graphics program are you using.....I know with photoshop you can use the image ready function to slice and create the html for a tabluar format ...of course you have to change the background color of the image since it is white too......again if your using photoshop or other layered based programs this is very easy to accomplish......

Fireworks works well to but I haven't got used to working with it yet

I also noticed in the code your using Layers....Something that I have not used very often because you can load images over images which really hurts download time....unless your preloading the images in the background.


Mark

I am using photoshop but i dont know how to do all that slicing stuff, i havent used image ready for anything, i probably should learn though huh.

I am thinking im going to design the whole thing over again, bc this interface is really giving me some problems.

[Ddr]

dont throw away your look. I dont give out praise lightly, and I have to tell you, the appearance of that site is a winner. I would try to keep the look even if you need to change the method. If there is any help I can give, dont hesitate to ask.

Dale

[(jj)]

I have to agree with Dale, the look of your site is a keeper and you shouldn't be so quick to toss it out.

As far as the load time goes, I'm not seeing a big problem there and I'm on a 49k modem connection.

I think you just need to look at a few modifications to clean up the excess. I admit that I know nothing about layers but I'm sure there has to be a way to do what you want without starting over from scratch.

Just my "For What It's Worth"

im thinking about taking it into image ready, i have 2 questions....

1) about file sizes.....if i take the background into image ready and slice it up into 4 parts, i dont mean the red part on the left nor the graphic on the right, i mean the the middle black part with the grid.....if i cut it up will that bring the file size down?? these r just questions to help me understand image ready a little more.

2) about tables...... if i slice the whole thing and then take that into dreamweaver, will i be able to make the page stay in the center when people stretch or reduce the size of their browser window?? bc right now if they reduce it the page stays where it is causing side scrolling....not good.

About the white background i dont know what to bc i had to put it white so that u would be able to see the drop shodow of the page. one thing that i was considering was making the bg black and that shadow white, but i decided on white.....good or bad move??.....would u like to see what it would look like black??

hey guys thanks for ur good reviews... obviously i wasnt feeling too good about it. the bad reviews on flashkit forums helped anyway im looking forward to your help.

Paul

[Ddr]

Hi Paul

No, slicing the image into parts will not change the file size. It could possible change how the image loads. What you really should do is look at ways to economize the image using the "save for web" feature. You can try all kinds of file size reductions, even conversions between jpg and gif format, and see if the image quality holds while you cut the size of the image file. You can experiment.

Yes, you can take all the components and bring them into Dreamweaver, assemble them in a single table as table cells, or embed them as individual tables inside a Master table. Either way, by specifying the dimensions of the tables in % rather than absolute pixels, the tables should grow or shrink to fit the size of the viewers browser window.

And last, as far as the drop shadow goes....it is nice, but nearly as "important" as the overall great design of your graphic interface. If you wanted to keep some background, I would suggest making it a pale red, as in the faded parts of your buttons rather than a stark white. That is just my humble opinion, there may be better solutions to that. But I would definitely make that background area just a small percentage of the overall width of the master table....perhaps 3 or 4% on a side.

Hope this helps, come in back if I can do anything else.

Dale

[muijefr]

Your site works well at 1024x768 using IE 6, NetScape 4.7 and NetScape 6.2. Your problem area is balancing between surfers using 800x600 vs. 1024x768. I use to have the same problem balancing between 680x480 and 800x600 (ha!).
Potentially you can present a good one-page-home presentation for either setting.

You have a great deal of dead space below your "Welcome... text" that might house your PCDSIGN.COM vertical graphic as a horizontal and do you want it to be PCDSIGN or PCDSIGN.COM. In either case, you can place it in your black space and eliminate the pcdsign.com text and fit the page into a one page presentation that works for 800x600 or 1024x768. "I think" for professional considerations, showing your potential customers your design flexibility is better served than bowing to the 1024x768 mantra (my monitor can display 1600x1200 in true color so I don't have an ax to grind about size).

hey guys what do u think about this... http://www.pcdsigns.com/diffpage.htm or should i leave it red like it is??

[komik]

I you want you can send me your PSD file and I will slice it up for you. (sometimes it is easer to learn when you can see it) and send it back with the slices. Mine original was similar to yours.....I reduced the size by using many different table methods....If you look at my code there is only 9 images....not including the news stuff... Mine centers like you want yours too...this is just a embedded table trick.... I didn't optimize for 800x600 but isn't hard to do.....I can also send you back the HTML code...(I use front page though)......Anyways if you need help....send away

mark

mark@mwsandracing.com

[komik]

Here is a great thread here about colors and optimizing.....

http://forum.powweb.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2855

Sure you have read but just wanted to point it out in case you hadn't

mark

hey guys i forgot to ask you what u thought about another site i designed for someone. here it is..... http://www.theclubdirectory.com

this one is done except for the fact that i am maintaining it, i keep adding stuff every few days so its technically a work in progress. it has some of the same problems like the fact that it doesnt stay in the center when u enlarge the browser but i thought it came out ok let me know what u think....then we'll get back to my own site

Later!!

P.S. it also loads slowly but there is way too much done on that one to go back and reduce the file sizes lol

[Ddr]

Paul, the second site has some great things going in it, too You really do have talent and great eye for design. Stick with it and get the technical stuff under your belt. You will go far.

Dale

Thanks man, yeah im going to keep learning all the tech stuff cuz that's really whats messing me up. im going to keep working on my site and ill keep u guys posted.

Paul

hey guys,

i created some logos to replace the one on the site bc that logo is just not cutting it, i want to do some business cards and want to be able to use it on letter heads etc. and i think these logos are better for that. this also means that im going to have to redesign the site, im going to keep some features from the one that i have right now but im thinking that im going to do it in a vertical format instead of horizontally, for example the menu bar is going to be on the top of the page horizontally. and the colors of the site will be like the logos.

Anyway let me know which logo is the best or even if any of them r any good.

here's the link http://www.pcdsigns.com/logos.htm

thanks a lot

[Ddr]

As I said earlier, you are talented. They are all worthy of consideration, but if I had to choose, it would be the bottom one.

Dale

[alphadesk]

I like 2 and 4.

2 is clean and to the point.

4 caught my eye, but I would use the S instead of the N to do the underline/overline part.

I am a blue freak so I really like the colors.

[Jeff321]

I'd go with 3 or 4.

Thanks for ur comments guys,

one question though.....is it a good idea to use gradients like i have on these logos?

[Ddr]

Yes, it is what gives a design pizzazz. You just have to make sure that you have the images compressed enough so they don't slow down your site significantly.

Dale

[komik]

I like 2 and 4...... #1 is ok but something about it that just like personal thing I guess #2 is very clean and user is eyes are drawn to what they are supposed to...the name. #3 draws the users eyes to the center of the image and at quick glace hard to make out. #4 draws the users eyes to the left...which can be good since we read left to right. My pick is #4...... As for the gradients. There are some downs about them. One the file size is a bit larger because the numerous colors needed to produce the effect. The second is not all the colors used to create the gradient fall within the web-safe color palette and may cause the image to produce lines between the web-safe colors on some browsers.

can u guys give me an idea on some good alternatives for the gradients...a specific color maybe or should i just not worry about that and stick with the gradients??

[Ddr]

Komik had some very specific thoughts...no doubt things learned through experience....and I dont mean to argue with his viewpoint about gradients.

I just take the approach that I want my site to load fast, but also look good. I test, tweak, and re-test things in different browsers and with a dialup and a DSL connection to see how it loads.

If gradients look good, load properly, and the colors show true, then I say use them. I would pare the file size down to the minimum I could without sacrificing quality, then look to shave other things on the page to offset the file size of the logo. (that is, if the logo is that important) It comes down to compromise between style and function. You can make a website so thrifty that all it has is black verdana text on a white background, or you can add so many bells and whistles that it never loads at all. Somewhere in between, you need to decide how slow is slow, how fast is fast, and is your target audience going to be willing to wait for your content while it loads. There are a lot of things to assess. The final answer is probably different for every target group of every website.

Sorry for the ramble there,,,,just my opinion.

Dale