• Web Development - WAYWO - #8
    5,576 replies, posted
[QUOTE=KmartSqrl;45338529]That video background is WAY too distracting, especially for something behind the main call to action form on the page. It's something you don't technically have rights to use, and since you're probably planning to make this in to a commercial product that becomes even more important. If you can't answer the question "How does this background video help achieve the goal for this page?" with a [I]really[/I] good answer, I would ditch it. I'd also consider getting rid of the comment box on the form at the bottom of the page. You want to have as few fields as possible so people are more likely to fill it in. If you really want it there, hide it until the more important stuff is filled out and submitted and already in your database (the email especially). I'd consider JUST asking for an email up front and then get the other info after you've gotten the email.[/QUOTE] I'm struggling to find something to put as the background of the 'sign up' section :( any ideas? I feel like plain white doesn't put enough emphasis on the fact that signing up is a great thing for them
Try a solid color or a cool geometric background like you have under the top of the site. You could do that in a different color or something as well maybe? I'd keep it simple and use the design of the form itself to make the form pop more.
[QUOTE=KmartSqrl;45342700]Try a solid color or a cool geometric background like you have under the top of the site. You could do that in a different color or something as well maybe? I'd keep it simple and use the design of the form itself to make the form pop more.[/QUOTE] [url]http://speedsums.com/landingpage/index.html[/url] how's this? I feel like the feel of it doesn't really match the feel of the rest of the site, but I did want to make the sign up section stand out and now it does
Definitely an improvement, and I think that blue should be used as an accent in other areas of the page too, especially the top section as it's quite monotone. Here I've added a bit more vertical padding to the white section, and added a 2px #007FC3 border top and bottom: [t]http://i.gyazo.com/88003f10f5f910cf08a950c3147d06de.png[/t] Logo and Login/Sign Up buttons move around horizontally depending on the browser size, and I feel they should be anchored to the same width as the screenshot below them. Also, minor issue with the email addresses wrapping onto a second line: [img]http://i.gyazo.com/1ac8a23f05c8cbc3e3baeb9cabc981ca.png[/img]
[QUOTE=HarryG321;45343904]Definitely an improvement, and I think that blue should be used as an accent in other areas of the page too, especially the top section as it's quite monotone. Here I've added a bit more vertical padding to the white section, and added a 2px #007FC3 border top and bottom: [t]http://i.gyazo.com/88003f10f5f910cf08a950c3147d06de.png[/t] Logo and Login/Sign Up buttons move around horizontally depending on the browser size, and I feel they should be anchored to the same width as the screenshot below them. Also, minor issue with the email addresses wrapping onto a second line: [img]http://i.gyazo.com/1ac8a23f05c8cbc3e3baeb9cabc981ca.png[/img][/QUOTE] Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to incorporate the blue somewhere at the top too and thanks for pointing out the email addresses issue - what screen resolution are you on just out of interest? thanks
So I'm working on an open-source project (started from scratch because the previous open-source code was awful) called Slavehack: Legacy. Could I get some feedback on the current menu I have versus the mockup made (not by me) like 3 years ago, the original, and what you guys think? Mine: [t]http://i.gyazo.com/4466b55ede2b8e9d0a93e4f8fad03135.png[/t] Mockup: [t]http://i673.photobucket.com/albums/vv100/speedy_053/layout.png[/t] Original: [t]http://i.gyazo.com/d854e8b1fe1cfc5f42948e9c76444ca2.png[/t]
[QUOTE=WitheredGryphon;45345779]-stuff-[/QUOTE] that's a botnet controller.
[QUOTE=TrinityX;45346755]that's a botnet controller.[/QUOTE] It was one of those browser games back in the day when flash games actually had a low graphics setting.
[QUOTE=Alcapwne;45343983]what screen resolution are you on just out of interest? thanks[/QUOTE] 1280x1024
[QUOTE=WitheredGryphon;45345779]So I'm working on an open-source project (started from scratch because the previous open-source code was awful) called Slavehack: Legacy. Could I get some feedback on the current menu I have versus the mockup made (not by me) like 3 years ago, the original, and what you guys think? -images- [/QUOTE] Oh man, I remember that game.
[QUOTE=Alcapwne;45343129][url]http://speedsums.com/landingpage/index.html[/url] how's this? I feel like the feel of it doesn't really match the feel of the rest of the site, but I did want to make the sign up section stand out and now it does[/QUOTE] Definitely better. I think the thing that feels off to me now is that the blues in the screenshot and the blues used on the page are sort of mismatched which might be what's making you feel like it doens't fit right.
[QUOTE=Alcapwne;45343129][url]http://speedsums.com/landingpage/index.html[/url] how's this? I feel like the feel of it doesn't really match the feel of the rest of the site, but I did want to make the sign up section stand out and now it does[/QUOTE] It would look better if you remove the screenshot at this resolution IMO. [t]http://i.imgur.com/G9xFb7N.png[/t]
[T]http://i.imgur.com/AtJ1JQb.png[/T] I dunno wtf I'm doing, cc appreciated.
[QUOTE=Jelly;45357347][T]http://i.imgur.com/AtJ1JQb.png[/T] I dunno wtf I'm doing, cc appreciated.[/QUOTE] The only problem I see is that the spacing between the container edge and the public eye icon is off, compared to the buttons/labels on the right.
[QUOTE=RusselG;45357547]The only problem I see is that the spacing between the container edge and the public eye icon is off, compared to the buttons/labels on the right.[/QUOTE] Woops, didn't catch that. Thanks!
[url=http://hypertext.ml/collect/]The first prototype of this thing I'm working on[/url] It's been described as "addictive", even now. (Drag the thing, if it's not obvious)
[QUOTE=thejjokerr;45361203]I like how it works on my phone and got to 500. Wouldnt call it addictive just yet though, there's no real challenge and no reward. I was left unsatisfied.[/QUOTE] We have a roadmap that we'll be following, which includes challenges and rewards. This was, more or less, just to learn how to use createjs's utilities. Dunno if I'll update the linked directory, or if I'll provision a little server for it.
Finally decided to learn Bootstrap, but I can't deciide how I feel about it. Really simple to learn and prototype with, but requires so much HTML to get the job done.
Anyone got a good guide on how to animate vectors? (Preferable SVG) I want to change an icons appearance on hover. Like going from a X to an arrow.
[QUOTE=HarryG321;45366116]Finally decided to learn Bootstrap, but I can't deciide how I feel about it. Really simple to learn and prototype with, but requires so much HTML to get the job done.[/QUOTE] What do you mean by "so much html"? Would you rather write more JS or just less of anything?
I wrote my website in Markdown, and it just "recompiles" the entire set of pages. Basically it has a "header" and "footer" file, then it parses all markdown files from {file}.md to {file}.html, and that leaves the entire writing of pages to just write simple markdown files. It's beautiful. Am I the only one doing this for static pages?
[QUOTE=mastersrp;45366769]I wrote my website in Markdown, and it just "recompiles" the entire set of pages. Basically it has a "header" and "footer" file, then it parses all markdown files from {file}.md to {file}.html, and that leaves the entire writing of pages to just write simple markdown files. It's beautiful. Am I the only one doing this for static pages?[/QUOTE] Why not just write html? [editline]12th July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=xmariusx;45366166]Anyone got a good guide on how to animate vectors? (Preferable SVG) I want to change an icons appearance on hover. Like going from a X to an arrow.[/QUOTE] Answering myself here: D3 seems like it would be of great help here. What do you guys think? [url]http://d3js.org/[/url] 51kb .min.js
[QUOTE=xmariusx;45366795]Why not just write html? [/QUOTE] Markdown takes up less space, and is easy to look at when you're writing it. Makes for a simpler view of the code, and less bloat to mind. It does require more dependencies to maintain, but it is easier to read in the longer run I think. I prefer to think of it as a compilation process like C to native code (although that's a bad analogy).
[QUOTE=mastersrp;45366769]I wrote my website in Markdown, and it just "recompiles" the entire set of pages. Basically it has a "header" and "footer" file, then it parses all markdown files from {file}.md to {file}.html, and that leaves the entire writing of pages to just write simple markdown files. It's beautiful. Am I the only one doing this for static pages?[/QUOTE] Nope, I use it as well. Well I use DocPad which uses markdown
[QUOTE=mastersrp;45366872]Markdown takes up less space, and is easy to look at when you're writing it. Makes for a simpler view of the code, and less bloat to mind. It does require more dependencies to maintain, but it is easier to read in the longer run I think. I prefer to think of it as a compilation process like C to native code (although that's a bad analogy).[/QUOTE] Personally I like knowing exactly what I'm looking at without having to reference anything but that's just me. I never took any classes or anything like that for HTML, it's so easy to read. I can see that <b> means bold. ** isn't as straight forward. Neither is **** as being equivalent to <h1>. That's just me though. I find it rubbish to read whereas I find HTML extremely straight forward and quick to read
[QUOTE=Banana Lord.;45366922]Personally I like knowing exactly what I'm looking at without having to reference anything but that's just me. I never took any classes or anything like that for HTML, it's so easy to read. I can see that <b> means bold. ** isn't as straight forward. Neither is **** as being equivalent to <h1>. That's just me though. I find it rubbish to read whereas I find HTML extremely straight forward and quick to read[/QUOTE] When a page get's slightly complicated with ul/li and divs and classes and links and all kinds of fancy shit, I find it easier to do with Markdown, but that's just me. It is of course a matter of personal preference, however I doubt that one could write the same amount of HTML code for a page, that a Markdown page of the same would correspond to. Plus, if you know the simple syntax and specifications of Markdown (there's not a lot to it, really), then writing Markdown you know exactly what kind of HTML code you'll get. I mean, one could easily write the whole thing in HTML and live happy for a long time, but if time is money for you and you find yourself more productive writing less (as I do), then Markdown can aid in that area.
I find Sublime Text 3's tag auto complete lets me write code pretty quickly. But yes, to each his own
I love-hate auto-complete because it screws me all the time when I want to add tags to existing things, so I need to remove the auto-generated end tag and write it again at the actual end of the thing :v:
[QUOTE=Coment;45367009]I love-hate auto-complete because it screws me all the time when I want to add tags to existing things, so I need to remove the auto-generated end tag and write it again at the actual end of the thing :v:[/QUOTE] Heh, remember having the same problem when I used ST2. Using brackets now, where that isn't a problem at all, or I've just found a way around it without knowing it.
[QUOTE=AndrewPH;45360143][url=http://hypertext.ml/collect/]The first prototype of this thing I'm working on[/url] It's been described as "addictive", even now. (Drag the thing, if it's not obvious)[/QUOTE] [t]http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/633291Sanstitre1.png[/t] p.s.: got my fps droped :/
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.