www.capitalwebstudio.com

What we mean by that is you can only post the *same* site once every three months. This is just so that we don't get a whole bunch of threads discussing the same site. Maybe that should be worded more clearly.

I think that you've got a nice basic layout here, you just need to refine it a bit. The first thing I notice on here is the heavy use of serif fonts. I just don't think they look very good on a screen. A sans-serif like verdana would be much nicer.

Another problem you have here is that your logo is very small. How are people supposed to remember who you are if they can't see your logo very well? Make that a lot bigger (will probably require some rearranging along the top). I don't mind the photos you've used there, but I feel that they're a little washed out looking. The text on top of them is also a problem - I feel that it's kind of overprocessed with the bevel and big drop shadow and everything. Too many special effects in one place, and it doesn't contrast well with the clean look of the rest of the site.

Now that I look more closely I'm noticing that you don't have a navigation menu of any kind, unless there's something that's not working in my browser. If I was a client I'd certainly want more information - more about this business, samples of past work, maybe some testimonials from satisfied clients, contact information, things like that.

I found the navigation! It took me awhile...LOL. I tried clicking all of the images on the page before I noticed the blue menu at the top.

More comments for you.....

- You need a little padding on the left side of all your text. It is scruntched up on the left hand side of the page.

- The header image is a bit heavy......especially for those still using a dial-up. It loaded right away for me but I am on a T1 line. It also looks a little over optimized on my screen, with a little blotchiness around the text.

- The fading screen load is REALLY annoying! I went to the "Application" pages and I expected the main page to pop back up when I hit the back button and I had to wait for it to fade back in.

- Some navigation on the "Application" pages would be nice as well.

Quote: Originally posted by theprofessional
... busy, busy, busy.

you called

first up, browser issues:

Opera6 (as opera6) - has javascript error
Error:
name: TypeError
message: Value to be opened by 'with' is not convertible to Object
the top navigation section doesnt display so I have no way of looking at your site, offer text links at the bottom or something. The "our mission" statement is hard on the borders, needs to be spaced out a bit

NS4.7 - no js error, same as opera

NS6 - top navigation displays but isnt clickable, and is bold and bulky, sits just above the guys eyes and covering the ladies eye

IE5 - top navigation section is misaligned, on mouseover the other two drop down, also very unclear they are links.
your link titles appear to have nothing to do with your site, its a web design site/company right? how do i find your portfolio, your options, your clients list (maybe under examples?) etc etc

whats the deal with the green bouncy ball? good thing its at the bottom as it could become very annoying

the middle images need some alignment work, on the database powered one, the text is to close to the images compared with the other ones, also the competive business one

overall a nice layout, just needs a few tweeks here and there

I didn't find the nav until Rayna said something. But I was on Opera too so it probably isn't showing up. I see it on IE 6.0 but it is camoflagued. When i look at the home page, my eye is drawn downwards and I can see how people might miss your navigation. You may want to consider a re-think on your navigation. Also, it would be a good idea to put a secondary set of navigation using just plain text at the bottom of each page. Especially if you are going to use that js menu.

You have the below paragraph set as your alt text for the top image. This is what I would do here....Use a short description of your site for the alt text. A sentence, maybe two. Take what you have below and what you have for the "Our Mission" statement at the bottom of your page. Combine them to make an impressive paragraph or two for your introduction to your site.

IMG ALT="Welcome to Capital Web Studio - located in
Braselton, GA. High quality professional website design &
programming. We use the latest in web design technology to
promote your business with the image of success using
photographic editors, image optimizers, quality text
editors, Flash animation, custom graphics, and market
research. Making sure your site capture's the audience's
attention, respect, and trust as it should.
Capital Web Studio's focus is to design layouts that pleases the customer and makes ease of navigation from their
perspective. With plans to be world leaders and setting
standards in our field, you can trust in our commitment to
create the best site you could possibly imagine. - President, Clint Willard"

I like how you have the screen shots beside the different sections. Have you thought about using unordered lists for the text part? That would define what you offer better IMO. Like this:

• Latest in imaging optimization software
• Powerful site programming editors
• Instant online site changes
• Low to high bandwidth designs
• Blah
• Blah
• etc.
• etc.

I would get rid of the green bouncing ball at the bottom. Forgive my opinion but really serves no purpose and it looks just a tad amateurish.(sp?)

Personally I think the pictures of the people at the top are far too big and you have fuzzyness around the text on them. Your logo should be bigger and be noticed first.
You need a good navigation system which is on everypage in the same place, not hidden at the top and it's annoying how it all jumps around when you mouseover.
Definitely use a san-serif font like veranda, much cleaner looking & easier to read.
The text you have as your alt tag should be the first paragraph of text on screen, introducing the site not hidden away.
The Our Mission part looks odd and out of place with the sudden introduction of red and it's butting right up to the browser edge.
The jumping ball is just unecessary IMO, a slight case of 'I can so I will' and to me it spoils the look of the site.
All the pages of the site should look the same, have a full navigation system and much of your text is way too small. Don't use page transitions, they just aren't professional.

Good start but just needs pulling together.

Thanks for the input.

Here's my plan now:
1. Get rid of the nav. at the top and use a more compatible one under the top imagery. Plus include text nav. at the bottom.

2. Redo top imagery altogether. Will use Flash instead, something small, not so much to hog bandwidth.

3. Use disaster-master's advice on the unordered list and use a different font.

4. The application stuff was supposed to be a quick fix for clients to print out for there use. That's why it's plain. I'll replace this however with a form fill out that gets emailed to me. The contract will still be available, as they need to print, sign, and fax.

5. Remove the Flash thing, it was just a test by me anyway. I've been learning it for 12 day's now. And do the combine of the mission and pop-up thing off the top image.

Completion planed by: 3-25-02

You seem to like flash, but a word of warning, people get bored of flash and unless it's done very well I would tend not to use it for 'little bits here and there'. For your type of site I think some pictures like you had are better with a better/bigger logo and non-flash navigation. If you want to show off your flash skills then have it in your portfolio.

What I had in mind was to create something small and moving behind a bigger logo of my biz name. But I quess this is getting detailed enough for the graphics section of the forum.
Sufice it to say, wait till you see what I mean. And why not use small pieces of Flash here and there and for the nav bar?

First reason is that not everyone has the plug-in. If you're going to be using something other than plain text or images (with alt tags!) for navigation you should always provide an alternatve way to navigate the site. Opera 6 also lets you disable plug-ins, which I often do.

Another problem is that animation can be really distracting if it doesn't stop. It can be okay to have a small, discreet animation running continuously but other than that everything should stop after a short time.

Here's a good example of animation that isn't too distracting: http://www.nextfxdesigns.com/

YES! That is what I mean. Why does everyone take my ideas before I can use them?
And on the "Everyone doesn't have the plug in..". Statistics show that 96% of users do. And in my own opinion as a predictor of the future, Flash will lead the way to the next step in how the net is viewed. As band widens, and it is, the web will become more multimedia oriented. Kind of like interacting with your T.V. set in a big way.
As long as webmasters confine their sites to slower users, the net will grow only slowly in its awe. It is our job to create such appeal as to make users want to upgrade, use plug-ins, accept cookies, and be dazzled. What it comes down to is taking the risk. Risk comes with it failures but, even bigger successes.

I disagree with that, at least in part. There is a time and a place for Flash, and it seems ot me that Macromedia is really directing it towards application development. Great, wonderful - there are a lot of uses for that. But at the same time there is still a lot to be said for nice simple, easy to access information. You also have to remember that good quality multimedia work requires a lot of time and a lot skill and therefore a lot of $$$.

Quote: As long as webmasters confine their sites to slower users, the net will grow only slowly in its awe.

I really don't think it's fair to target a site only to people with the best and newest equipment. High speed connections are becoming more common but they are still fairly expensive and aren't even available in some areas. You get into the "haves" vs. the "have-nots" and I don't think that's fair. I think that the priority should not be the "awe" factor but rather the accessability factor. The 'net should be available to as many people as possible - that should be the priority.

And when you think about it, the "awe" factor doesn't last long. Face it, people are cynical these days, they aren't easily impressed. Once these things become commonplace people aren't impressed by them anymore. What is dazzling the first time often becomes annoying the second time. It seems like every new technology becomes passé after a short time, and then you're left with practicality. Or maybe I'm just old fashioned....

But this is a big side note, lets get back to the critique, shall we?

Aside from the fact that the average surfer doesn't like Flashed pages (to long of a download to watch graphics zooming around for no good reason) Flash has some serious accessability issues. It may be an issue effecting primarily the United States. Both the Federal Government and AOL have had complaints lodged against them under the American's With Disabilities Acts. The complaints argued that their websites were not complaint with W3C Accessability guidelines. The Justice Department issued a ruling saying that the ADA did cover websites and the Federal Government is currently under a court order (I believe) to reach full complaince with the W3C standards. Flash is not complaint with those standards, particularily sites with flash navigation schemes. BTW, all those cool looking drop down menues violate W3C standards also...

As for the bandwidth issue. I went to a higher speed connection to get pages to load faster, not to admire those pages that always exhorted me to be patient and wait for them to load because their graphics were soooo kewl.

BTW, forgot to mention... AOL settled out of court. Not admitting guilt, but agreeing to come into full W3C complaince.

I agree that I hate big Flash splash (intro) pages, takes too long and serves no purpose. But a little here and there wouldn't hurt. Besides, isn't the new Flash X suppost to be compliant with disabilities?

If done tastefully it should be okay. Just make sure that the important stuff is still accessable to people who may have flash turned off.

thepro,

Well... we risk whacking this thread totally off topic by changing it to a discussion of Flash. Considering the fact I've been too much of a weasel to critique your site that seems kinda unseemly, so I better give my impressions first.

When I went to your site I thought it was nice looking, but I couldn't find the links. I was actually moving my mouse around waiting for a hand to appear as I tried to find them (much more patience than a surfer would ever show). As others mentioned, the ease of navigation has to be strengthened considerably. I would shorten the height of the banner across the top to pull the content of the page up into view and bear in mind that most people look for the site's global navigation beneath a top banner. The bouncey ball didn't bother me all that much.

I beleive Macromedia did say they were going to have Flash X allow readers to extract text. I have no idea how well that works... or how you set it up so somebody browsing with a reader makes sense out of it (that is, if the Flash has navigation purposes). I also understand that Flash can output .gif rather than flash streams. That's got to be slow, but I've never seen it done.

Just my biased opinion now... of course Flash has some uses and place on the web. However, I don't think it is ever going to be as pervasive as Flash supporters think. It reminds me an awful lot of the hype over java applets (not servlets) -- looks good at first, but what do you really do with it to add value to a site's content? Course I could be wrong...

Yea, I think I'll move to the Flash discussion to get started on that. Otherwise, I posted above my plans for changes.

Thanks for the input.

Don't forget to post back in this thread to tell us when the changes have been made.

Oh, don't you worry about that. I had planned to put all my sites on this thread as I go. Or do you think I should start a new one for each site?

Quote: Or do you think I should start a new one for each site?

If you want a different site reviewed, start another thread. But for further review of this one, continue with this thread.

Well I like it!

hey Clint - site looks good - I'll give ya mmy usual copyedit:

Merge current business proccesses

Competitive Business Stratagies

Banner & link advertisment - a few of those

Advertisment follow up - hyphenated as a noun

to make our clients' success (the?) top priorty

Certain Images Copyright To Their Perspective Business - respective?

you can close up the gap above the last line of text by closing the TD on the same line - you've currently got it closing after a script

perhaps a copyediting service could help you clean up any flaws on other pages

OK. Here it is. The new and improved website for capitalwebstudio.com

For now I have only got the Home page and Services link completed.

Post your comments and critisism.

Hello theprofessional,

I like your web site! I think it needs more though. It's just to plain.

"Copyright © 2002, Capital Web Studio
All rights reserved"

heh heh...

I'd say you really need to pick up a copy (or take one out of the library) of Robin William's book on typography for non-designers. Actually, her whole series of books for non-designers would be good reading.

Further to that, the font is too damn small.

"Professional graphical representation of your business and it's vision."

At the risk of being mmi, it is vision? (Get your copy proofed.)

Logos != title images. If you're designing logos, know that there is a LOT more involved than pretty text in Photoshop.

"Using the latest in technology and the most professional tools, you can be sure we can provide all that any other design company can offer."

Are you a design firm or a web development company?

Just some quick observations. I don't normally critique sites in the same field, so this is as deep as I go.

As a general rule text images should be saved as gif's and not jpg's.

less color = gif
millions of colors = jpg

I am sorry....I hate to sound rude, negative, or bitter but not knowing the appropriate use a gif and a jpg is simply a sign of an amateur in my opinion. I believe you really need to re-examine whether or not you should be charging unsuspecting businesses money for your services before you truly have the level of knowledge needed to call yourself a professional.

This really doesn't do much for me, there is just far too many differing styles here. I'm not overly keen on your main logo and it just doesn't look right with the page title 'services' next to it and then each sub heading is different. Just doesn't work for me.

Quote: No one knows marketing on the web better than a professional web design company and we are no exception.

I would have to disagree as many website designers don't know the first thing about SEO work!!

You also have different colours of text on the services page and I agree that the font is too small and would be much more professional looking, easier to read and cleaner using veranda.

Let's see. The © was fixed and as far as the text graphics being jpg instead of gif, that was optimized better this way in my opinion. I tested it both ways. And I'll enlarge the text, making it all one color.
And come on guys, If your selling website design locally in a small town in order to build both your portfolio and experience, and you charge a very reasonable price in comparison. Wouldn't it be a good idea to advertise as professional as possible. There is a difference in being small time and big time I'll admit, but psychologically if you try to be big time, you will become big time. So to speak anyways.
And furthermore, in comparison to half the "Website Designers/Developers" out there, I very much believe I have the right to call myself a professional. I use the same tools as most, know the same languages, and most of all I handle my clients in a professional manner. I can design shopping cart systems with admin abilities, forums, chat, and integrate intranets. I am A+ Certified and one step away from Network+. I just hope I'm doing a good job at this, considering that I work 10 hrs a day 6 days a week (regular job), have 3 fighting teenagers, and a wife who thinks this kind of thing is just plain silly non-sense. How much time do you get to foster your skills? I get 2-3hrs about 3 days a week and Sundays about 5hrs.
Anyway, thanks for the comments and critisism. Together we can make this a beautiful Internet to live on.

Your page is too wide.

If you don't mind missing users with lower resolution, please bear in mind -- as a professional of course -- that pages that are too wide don't print properly (hmmm... how many pixels wide is an 8.5x11 piece of paper?). By locking your contact information to the right side of your design you've manged to have it get cut off when printed.

It printed just fine for me. Everything shows up from left to right and top to bottom on one page. What would make one person's print one way and different for another? I have a 21" monitor here at work printing to a HP 2500C. Printing it with the window minimized to 800 x 600 and maxed at 1152 x 864 produced the same results.

Being able to program in different languages does not make you a "designer".

I see that we have a difference in opinion of what the term "professional" means. To me it is a person that has a professional attitude, has professional integrity, abides by a strict code of professional ethics, and has a very in depth knowledge of their field.

You may possess some of those characteristics but you seem to be lacking in one important area if you are marketing yourself as a "designer" and that is a very in depth knowledge of designing for the web.

Until you do I believe it is offensive to call yourself a professional designer and it is deceptive to your potential clients to sell yourself as something you are not. I understand the whole "think big and you will become big" line of thinking but what ever happened to truth in advertising?

I tend to agree. In a strict sense of the word (dictionary definition), "professional" may simply mean someone who makes money doing something. However, those definitions usually include the word "expert" at some point, and I personally think that the word usually, if not always, carries that connotation.

http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=professional

If you look at the listings under n for noun, you could say that any one of those three definitions, on its own, would qualify someone as a professional. I would say that a true professional should have all three. I would not consider myself to be a professional in this sense.

theprofessional,

I suppose it might depend on the settings of your printer. I printed it out on an HP Laserjet 41000 DTN and the right end cut off.

I'm sure you're familiar with the Yale Web Style Guide. The information is a bit dated, but still vary valid. Here is their discussion of the Web Safe Area for Printing.

BTW, I went back and checked and not only your logo, but also chunks of your text got cut off.

I would feel really guilty calling myself a professional web designer. And to be painfully honest, don't think you are either.

You said, "psychologically if you try to be big time, you will become big time". I disagree here (in the context that you are using this). It does help to have a positive attitude but you shouldn't pat yourself on the back too much or you will get stuck in a crack that will only make you out to be the idiot sooner or later by misrepresenting yourself.

And just because you use the tools of the trade doesn't make you a professional. You have to master those tools. Any joe blow off the street can use front page, dreamweaver, photoshop, or take classes in programming but that doesn't make them a professional until they can apply those things with almost prefection.

I am not saying these things to be mean. I am just stating my honest opinion on this matter. If I were someone off the street looking for a web designer, your inflated opinion of yourself would turn me away real fast. People tend to be more receptive to honesty.

Rayna, do you think I should tell my potential clients, whom you know I can get them a very decent website up, that I'm just a novice but well worth the money. Your first big client you landed, did you tell them "I've never done anything this big, but we'll try our best." As long as the perception you give your business can be backed up by your product or service, that's not deception. That's maximizing your potential in order to grow and expand. That's business, you take risk and gambles sometimes, but the rewards can be enormous.
Keep it coming. I enjoy conversation with intelligent people. I'll admit I have more to learn, but I am proud of how far I've come and how far I plan on going.
By this weekend I should have some things ironed out on my site and the rest of the links finished. I will be very interested in what everyone has to say about my application section.

hey Clint - I think everyone here respects your desire to do well in the web dev biz and yer in the right frame of mind saying

Quote: I'll admit I have more to learn

you say

Quote: I can design shopping cart systems with admin abilities, forums, chat, and integrate intranets. I am A+ Certified and one step away from Network+.

but, as you know, those abilities are employed to develop technical elements in a website and don't relate directly to stuff like design theory, use of colors and fonts, digital imagery, writing for the web, information theory, etc - you say

Quote: in comparison to half the "Website Designers/Developers" out there, I very much believe I have the right to call myself a professional.

this may well be true - but of course there are a lot of developers out there who don't have much of a clue - (I won't get into the issue of how much work they get ) - I think this debate comes down to a question of emphasis - be confident, yes, but humility has its place - sometimes as a way to avoid prideful falls :whine:

Is this a design critique or a semantic debate?

Well, let's see if we can combine the two...

Using jpg for your text navigation is, to me, unprofessional. Just look at the obvious quality difference between the subheadings (gif) and the navigation. Image optimization is a balancing act, not a contest for the lowest file size

Defining your entire page structure by the use of spacer gifs is, to me, unprofessional. Your main page is composed of about 50 individual graphic files and your services page is pushing 100! Kind of defeats the purpose of image optimization, doesn't it? This doesn't look to be coded at all. Rather, it appears to have been laid out in some graphics app and then sliced.

The use of 4-5 different fonts is, to me, unprofessional.

Putting a half-built site up on the top tier of your domain is, to me, unprofessional. "under construction" pages are considered tacky to be sure but I'd suggest some sort of "coming soon" page while you get the site together.

I don't have any serious problems with your textual content except perhaps for the fact that your work really doesn't seem to live up to your claims. However, that is for an intelligent consumer to discover.

Where else but your own web site can you have licence to blow your own horn. However, you need to be able to back these claims up with
a) a professional web site of your own, and
b) a body of work to lend yourself legitimacy.

"do you think I should tell my potential clients, whom you know I can get them a very decent website up, that I'm just a novice but well worth the money."

You really have yet to demonstrate the former and yes, honesty can work. Novice or professional, you need to be able to back up your claims with results.

"Your first big client you landed, did you tell them 'I've never done anything this big, but we'll try our best.' "

Not necessarily the first but yes, I am quite frank with clients when dealing with issues beyond my expertise.

Representing yourself as a professional is important but misrepresenting yourself as one, can ultimately ruin your reputation and your business.

I think the thing that's striking people badly is that you say you have a lot to learn, but when people more experienced, more knowledgeable and more educated (on the topic) than yourself point out where you are going wrong, you dismiss them and argue your point.

The printer issue -- anyone in this field more than a few months knows that just because it works on your configuration, that doesn't mean it works anywhere else. Don't argue with the feedback, learn from it.

There are many people out there who make websites. Far more do it for fun than for a living. You don't do it for a living, either, I might point out. Most of the people who you are arguing with, do. Don't you think you might want to pay attention to the people who are living off their work?

Quote: Your first big client you landed, did you tell them "I've never done anything this big, but we'll try our best." As long as the perception you give your business can be backed up by your product or service, that's not deception.

Most certainly, YES, I have told clients that something is not within my scope of knowledge. To me this is called professional ethics.

If I hire someone to clean my carpet I expect to have my carpets cleaned by someone that has the knowledge and equipment to get the job done. What I don't expect is for someone to sell me a service they know little or nothing about then show up on my door step with a bucket and a sponge.

What is deceptive is selling a service that you can't provide at the professional level you are claiming to have. Like I said, it boils down to our differing opinions of what a professional really is. Plainly put, what you offer as a professional service does not meet my definition.

I am by no means saying my definition is the most correct one. However, I would consider myself a professional designer. I have an in-depth knowledge of my field and I continue to expand my knowledge, I believe that I have integrity, I work by a strict code of ethics, conduct myself in a professional manner, and I make a decent living.

I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!
OK. You've all proven your point. While I lick my salted wounds and sadly admit that I am not as good as I thought, I ask for your forgiveness. Truth is, I have not anyone or anything to base my level against. Therefore, I based it myself by comparing the looks and functionality of what I could do against other sites. And I have to say, the majority of sites I see look like my first experiments with FrontPage.
So then, I stand humbly before my masters in search of perfection through understanding, attention to detail, study and practice. Enough with this talk about ethics and professionalism. I will become good at this in due time, and with the help of my peers I may be able to become great.
So whataya say we get back to my site.

I quess my first mistake with this whole thing was letting my image app slice it and create it. I hear that's amaturish, but you have to admit that it's speedy. You just plug in the dynamic stuff, change a few lines here and there, and finished.
I promise not to use this approach again. This weekend I will hand code the structure and plug in the images.
The content will be changed also to reflect a web design/development business without all the hopla about professionalism. I've already changed the text font to Verdana.
As a freelancer I do enjoy both the development (php, mysql, perl..) and design (images, layout, flash..). Is it wrong to run a business that does both? I have no interest at the moment to contract anything out, until I get so busy I have no choice.

If you can do it all well then there's no reason why you can't offer both.

I agree if you can do everything well then that's fine, but doing it as a self-employed business on your own there generally comes a time when you have to say I'll concentrate on this and get someone else to do that when required. You really need to concentrate on what types of sites you are likely to be doing that'll make you money, we have found that basic html sites are what's needed in most cases (with the odd bit of flash & e-commerce here & there) and if we come across anything that requires anything different (database, etc) we will outsource when necessary.

Look forward to seeing the revamped site.

Yea, about that revampt site. I'll post some stuff in another section about this whole ordeal in getting your images to....
Well, you'll have to find it to see it. I'm sure it'll be some great questions that budding designers would like answered for themselves. I'll get to it later today. See you then.

Hmmm. Well it's clear that this site must have changed since I looked at it. People were talking about flash stuff but that don't seem to be there anymore. Only the services link worked on my visit and one thing I did notice is that the text sizes are different between the services and the main page. Style sheets are your friend man. Make one style sheet and use it on the whole site. I think consistency is pretty important and style sheets are great for that.

Good news everyone. I've just aquired a brand new suite of web design software, Macromedia's Dreamweaver, Firworks, Freehand, and of course I still have Flash. The re-design will be in the works and the outcome should be impressive.

Your right about those style sheets, and man does Dreamweaver make it automated. No site that I ever build will be without style sheets anymore. And graphics will have a much better look now with a lot more versitility.

At the moment I'm redesigning a site for a client, so as soon as I'm finished I may be able to get to my own, maybe, hopefully. Seems like I get a lot of referals and business from word of mouth. I can't study or even do my own stuff from all the work. Till then, thanks for all the help and watch for me to post back here when it's ready.