perforated-edge.com

I don't like the "lorem ipsum" style of dummy text, but you said it's temporary
You should make the main text a text not make it an image (portfolio section) .. guess you'll work it too
The idea is really nice .. try to develop it some more .. so far it's a bit bland. But again .. genius idea.

Can't wait to see it finished

I use 1024x768 resolution, and even though there is a ton of whitespace on your main page, I have to scroll to get down to the "good stuff". Not really sure what it is, but it looks like a link, click and it's kinda like a popup. The blue-shadow stuff I'm not sure if it's intended to be offset, because the offset varies from image to image. I'm guessing it's intended to be like that, but others might think that it is a browser issue that wasn't checked.

Finally, after typing in your url (or clicking on a link) I'm not rewarded with any info. Just more choices. Hmmm... if I click on something else will I be rewarded this time? I think the first page of a site should have a happy medium between zero info, and a condensed version of 'Atlas Shrugged' approach shown on some micro-font sites.

Peter

thanks for the comments guys, more would be great!

Peter, bit of a mess up on my end, i had my browser on small icons so most people see less browser than me. sorted now - does that work for you?

the site is a concept site to a degree and while i've tried to trade off concept with ease of use i understand that usability purists are going to have a field day

while the site initialy shows no info i believe it gives easy access (no loading required just a click) to a basic sumary of exactly what the site offers.

dojo,

i quite using the ipsum filler text, doesnt detract from the design and looks like normal text cos no repetition. each to their own i guess - what do you do?

glad u like the idea. it is a bit bland on first load - which was a problem for me and i tired to fit in photos etc to improve but decided that subsequent pages are better and the intial page has the interactive element i wanted. glad you like tho

JP

I don't use any dummny texts. I finish the sites and only after that upload them Different ways of doing things

Looks good to me. If anything, I would make the background of the text scroller a different colour, maybe that blue or orange.

Well, you've lost the 25% of visitors that use 800x600 or lower resolution. You've also lost another 10% of visitors that have JavaScript off. If this is a web-designer site, showing how you can deliver a message to the World, this isn't what I'd call a picture-perfect start.

Also, when you hover over the couple, they get chopped in half. I still don't see the bottom 3/4" without scrolling. The popup text barely fits on my monitor, might not fit at all using another OS/browser.

To me, content dictates presentation. Some people say that want a site like so-and-so. Great, but they have a paragraph of two of text content, whereas so-and-so is a verbose, article based site. Get your message at least roughed out, then work on how it is presented.

Quid pro quo?

Peter

thanks guys

Peter, all comments greatly apreciated and addressed below:

i did some research into our audience and best estimate is we will ave about 20% that will not see the site in its optimised state. i decided that I did not want to go lowest common denominator so thats a conscious decision. anoying but its the nature of teh web

two of your points trouble me tho.

this should not happen can you explain or send me a screenshot as im confused by this

the other issue is that if you are is 1024x768 you should be able to see the site in full with no scrolling. you must have a lot of toolbars is all i can guess, its designed to work with 3.

i used to work in web usability and while i agree that for many websites content should dictate design. however here we are trying ot bring accross a message that i fely was best expressed visually. because of that and the fact the site is a bit different its gonna have a mixed reaction. hopefully more people will like it that not tho!!

JP

http://mailto:john%[email protected]/ - your sig doesn't work, the syntax is wrong. I've sent a snapshot so you can see how things fit. The couple chopped didn't happen this time.

P.S. the email to [email protected] failed as well:

[email protected] on Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:56:22 +0100
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=us;a= ;p=netdecisions;l=UKLDNBH020504241856JSGPQGVR
MSEXCH:IMS:Netdecisions:NETDECISIONS:UKLDNBH02 0 (000C05A6) Unknown Recipient

Peter

sorry mate

the signature was from years ago when i sold TWF sorted now

please resend and thanls

http://mailto:john%[email protected]/ is still the wrong syntax. mailto:[email protected].

I'm adding another important rule to Suzanne's mantra of "validate" - "test"!

Peter

Hey, JP! How's it going??? It's been a long time When I saw your name there I thought someone had ressurrected an old thread!

I agree with peter about the 800x600 thing. I have my resolution at 1152x768 but I keep my windows taskbar on the right and opera panels on the left. I hear that many people who use really large resolutions never browse with windows at full size. Why would you consciously decide to ignore 20% of your potential clients??? If this was a personal site it might be okay, but since you're trying to get business then it's a pretty risky thing to do. Especially considering that most of the people looking for this type of service aren't particualrly technically knowledgeable

When I look more closely at the design, I don't think it's necessary for it to be that wide in the frist place. The front page might actually look better if the picture was smaller and there was some sort of frame around the whole thing. When I go to the portfolio site, everything on the right could easily be moved in without compromising the rest of the layout. You could easily make this a fluid layout that works for all screen widths.

I do like the general look and feel. I find the drawings to be very unique and the colour scheme to be light and fresh. It's jsut frustruating to browse a site that doesn't want to work with my preferred settings.

The three buttons along the bottom of the home page, that bring up the extra text, are very nice functionally and aesthetically. However, I'm not sure that this is going to work with the large amount of text you've got in there. If you had a smaller bit that wouldn't require scrolling this might work better. Then you could use a "more' link to direct users to additional information. It's hard to read a lot of text at such a small size there.

That is a damn pretty website - i was able to view it perfectly with safari (mac os x)

Why put SOME links at the bottom only and others at the top only? That would annoy me as a user.

Why would you want to blow off 1/5 of your potential audience? Out of every 5 potential visitor, you're going to make 1 want to leave (based on your OWN estimates). I'm not saying go with the "lowest common denominator", but you could at least bring in a little bit more of the audience.

hi guys

updated the site a bit

seems the design is liked as a whole which is the main thing. the issues are with the way it has been developed.

believe me if i could readily fit my site to 800 res i would - however you guys have convinced me i need to address this so i will look into solutions.

megan. lovely to see you again glad your still about. thanks for your comments. the site is more design that web design so its more about making an impact with an original design that showcasing great usability. however while not willing to sacrifice the design i will look into making the site more accessible to different resolutions and browser settings.

Any more comments greatly appreciated (does it work on yoir browser? )

JP

I like it. It looks good, has nice graphics, loads relatively quick but you have too much javascript in your source code.. have you tryed using external js files ?

And also, where's your DOCTYPE ?

OK took a lot of your advice on board (not all im stuborn)

also had to make the site bigger due to more content.

the second room is not complete but you'll get the idea

could i have some opinions please?

Thanks a lot!

http://www.perforated-edge.com

JP

It looks nice and the menu is original but you have some major issues from an accessibility point of view. I would suggest creating an alternative text only version.

I would have a note on the splash screen letting (stupid) visitors know that the site is in a pop up window.

-Rob

I like the style of the site as well as the innovative menu, I dont like the way the site is handled via a popup... However I also saw this type of design on a certain site I forget the URL of, it was darker and the room rotates... Anyway, the site looks good...

guys,

thanks for feedback so far

access is a slight issue but i went for form above function to a degree, it was conscious but i do like the idea of a text version so thanks for that idea

the pop up is actually new, before an issue was that many did not see the bottom nav due to the fact they had lots of browser menu bars. the pop solved that.

bit gutted you have seen a similar thing, i figured it was fairly unique.

J

I can not view it on my laptop.

laptop spec/browser?

cheers

JP