Qhimm.com Forums

Off-topic forums => Completely Unrelated => Topic started by: Jari on 2009-10-09 20:09:43

Title: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-09 20:09:43
Don't worry, I'm not looking for free help. :-P

I was just wondering - since we have at least couple of creative topics now - if there are any webdesigners here, and if they'd like to show off.

I dabble with webdesign occasionally - have done it for living, as well. My current project, which might or might not ever get finished, is this (http://sandbox.borgborg.org/).

Right now it's totally unoptimized, more or less broken proof-of-concept. With markup that would cause a seizure to puritans. :-D It does validate, though, surprisingly enough. I was certain that it wouldn't... Not to mention that it's so emo that it would cut itself, if it could. :-P It's also a very good example of style over substance design, something I often end up doing when I don't have a client restricting what I can or should do.

One day it might turn into a Wordpress-theme with couple of neat tricks up its sleeve (you haven't seen all of it, yet). Or not. It all depends. :-D
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Grimmy on 2009-10-10 04:58:45
The broken glass is a great idea, but it should be more transparent. Overall the concept and execution are good. I personally love lorum ipsum dummy text in anything. I used flash and weaver to make sites and never had such great results.
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-10 17:29:38
Awww, thanks for the comments. :-)

The glass originally was more transparent - and darker. It however turned out that I had yet again forgotten that some Photoshop layer blend modes don't really translate to transparent .pngs (as they use data from the underlying layers to calculate the effect, and you can't do that in a browser), so I had to ditch that idea and without the gradient overlay set to... well 'overlay'-mode, it was too transparent for my taste - I guess I wanted something to show for so expensive file; that overlay eats ~400KB each time it gets loaded. So, a big no-no in regular use, but I don't plan to have that many visitors, besides I has no bandwidth cap on my host. :-P This is meant to be blatantly artsy fartsy site, and users can upgrade their connection, if it's not fast enough for them, for all I care. :-D That doesn't mean that I wouldn't optimize it - quite the contrary - I just won't be shedding any tears if it turns out to be considerably heavier than your average website.

For that matter, the background was more of grey/silverish/blueish, so it has already once changed color scheme during the desing. The original background image proved to be quite unsuitable for tiling, although quite pretty.

I'm akshually going for a slightly dirty glass, and having a some kind of imaginary light source shining on it, the metal background should be bit lighter in the same place the glass is lighter (and less transparent).

Anyway, I did a small experiment.

Site a (http://sandbox.borgborg.org/index7.html).

Site b (http://sandbox.borgborg.org/index6.html).

Look pretty much the same, right? They were meant to look identical, but after a small mishap in Fireworks, they are teeny weeny bit different looking - it's not intentional.

Site b is actually 10% lighter in filesize than Site a, yet it loads 20% slower. Care to guess why? :-P

It's because Site b makes 27 requests to the webserver, saturating the maximum allowed simultaneous connections, while Site a only makes 4 connections. In other words, Site b builds the broken glass overlay of several smaller images (which to my great surprised actually compressed better than one large - I expected it to be other way around, due to overhead and stuff), while Site a uses single image, and each div just show a small part of it. It's Intertubes magic! :-D

Anyways, considering that you all seem so terribly interested, I probably better stop typing and go back to tweaking. Next up; some fancy JS. :-P
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-12 23:03:34
Shameless double-post! :-D

Le Progress (http://blog.borgborg.org/).


Next up is probably bit more JS-trickery for the traditional navigation interface.
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Timu Sumisu on 2009-10-13 01:32:08
i can do flash! a little less so in terms of actionscript, but if ye need nething animated lemme kno!
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-13 02:09:32
Thank you. :-)

For now I'll just tinker on my own, it's not a very serious project, and if it ever will truly materialize, it'll probably be mainly for myself. But I'll keep your offer in mind. :-)
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-27 23:54:23
Le update (http://blog.borgborg.org/).


Oh boy. List so didn't work for that mass of text. :| Oh well, can't be arsed to fix that now, you'll just have manage.

I think that covers most of the shit I've managed to do. I'm fairly pleased with myself, so far. :-D Understand that I'm not really a programmer, I suck at PHP and I find JS-code revolting. :-P Thus, small achievements in those areas please me and give me satisfaction. :-)

Pay no attention to the first photo of the first page - yes, it obviously should be rotated, but I couldn't be arsed to, since I was just interested in the EXIF; and that was the first one I found that had all the fields written by the camera still intact.

I wonder what I'll start to tweak next; certainly the content styling (fonts, headers, post info like date, categories and shit, and comments) needs work. I think they are straight from Viewport, except for the fancy-ass post titles.

Also; it's very much in development mode right now; for example there's an assload of JS-scripts being loaded. When it's ready I'll of course combine them into one monolith, minify it, pack and obfuscate it and then gzip it. That alone takes several seconds away from the page loading time, as browsers have this nasty habit of loading only one JS-file at a time. Thus sites with a dozen of them will take an obvious performance hit.

----------------
Now playing: Chris De Burgh - [M1+ Top 1000 #114] Lady In Red   [foobar2000 v0.9.6.3 beta 2]
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-29 00:24:11
I do some fix! :-D

Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: drfeelgud88 on 2009-10-29 05:43:28
I like the way those sites look. Look great. Site A loads a lot faster than B.
*cough* You just triple-posted *cough* lol.  :-D
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: Jari on 2009-10-30 04:42:20
It's not like I'm stopping you from replying to my posts. :-D Seriously though, I plan to use this as a project blog of sorts, so most likely I'll end up making several consecutive posts.

Anyway, I think I managed to fix the navigation button issues with IE8. IE7 renders them rather horribly, dunno if anything can be done about that - it seems that the fix that helped IE8 to get the png alpha working while opacity is being manipulated does not work with IE7. At least it does show the buttons, which is something... I might just skip fixing IE7 altogether, IE8 is enough of a pain in the ass. Needless to say, IE6 would be nigh impossible - I'm totally not going to bother with it. The user share is very low already, and the rest... well, they can upgrade for all I care. :-P

As a bonus I chopped a whopping 350KB from the filesize by going from PNG32 to PNG8 - there's slight degradation in the visuals, but it's not too bad. The main reason for the slow loading right now are the multiple JS files, but I'm not going to touch them until I finish the thing, because it's rather impossible to edit packed and compressed JS. :-D I think it might be possible to make the final design somewhere between 500 and 600KB (not counting the photos), which would be quite ok with me.
Title: Re: Any webdesigners in the house?
Post by: drfeelgud88 on 2009-10-30 04:49:42
Well I don't use IE, it's too laggy. I use FireFox hehe.  :wink: