19 replies to this topic

[aquila]

i would greatly appreciate it if anyone could give me some feedback on my site. don't worry about being nice cos this is my very first website and if it's crap i wouldn't mind the least.


i would especially like to know what color green everyone is seeing. it's meant to be a very very dark green but since calibrating my monitor it has become a sickly olive green? so i'm not sure if i calibrated my monitor correctly. thanks for your input.

http://myminiaturepainting.com

[Voladilk]

Looks pretty decent to me. The green is a bit of an olive green on my monitor as well.

Dunno about the links at the bottom of the frame. Since you have them at the top you don't really need them at the bottom except for in your really long articles. I would suggest instead on the long articles to have a "Back to top" link. That might work a little bit better and prevent the duplication of the entirety of your links a the bottom of every page instead.

Other than that, looks pretty good.

[CuCulain42]

Looks dark olive on mine.

[aquila]

i think there was a reason for the links at the bottom. i have no idea what it was, something to do with the search engines.

olive green for you. hmmm.... looks like i will have to readjust all my pictures for brightness. bugger, i never thought about my monitor settings when building the site. :(

[armydillo978]

Glad to see you have Reaper and Rackham in the links.

The varghar in your galllery is really nice.

As for the total layout: Color was good. Layout was clean and not cluttered. The only quirk for me was that the text didn't wrap. It scrolled over to the right for about two screens worth. Otherwise, it was good. Some of the links didn't work for me, but I couldn't tell if it was my computer or not. Sorry.

Keep up the good work.

[kit]

I'd definitely call that olive drab.

http://myminiaturepa...ylicpaints.html gives me a 404 as of right now, too.

[aquila]

The only quirk for me was that the text didn't wrap. It scrolled over to the right for about two screens worth. Otherwise, it was good.

you must be viewing it in firefox cos i had a shock today when i opened up firefox to look at my site just out of curiosity. had to scroll horizontally!! it's all fine in explorer. i'm trying to get help so fix it. this web design thingy is a real pain in the arse cos what you see on your screen isn't always what other people are seeing. thanks for your input though

[aquila]

I'd definitely call that olive drab.

http://myminiaturepa...ylicpaints.html gives me a 404 as of right now, too.

the link is working, i think that might have been a glitch. site been off and on today because of server problem

[smokingwreckage]

It's been an age since I did any HTML, but it seems likely you've put in an absolute value where you should have used a proportional one. IE might simply be ignoring that tag while Firefox reads it correctly. Are you using an editor, or hand coding?

A valuable site: http://www.webmonkey.com/

Ok, in their kids section (which is where I personally would look if i were messing about with webpages again) I found this:

"You can tell the Web browser how wide you want your table to be inside the <table> tag. You can either say how many pixels wide it should be (a pixel is one little dot on a computer screen), or what percentage of the screen that the table should take up. So you can use <table width="50%"> so your table is always half the size of your visitor's screen, or you can use <table width="300"> to make sure that your table is always 300 pixels wide (which is about four inches)."

That's here: http://webmonkey.com...bles_page8.html

And in your page's code I found this: <table width="1003" border="0" cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2">

So, here's the possible situation: some component of some table is set to be 1003 pixes wide. There's no tags to tell the text that it needs to go to a new line, so it's just filling up all 1003 pixels of table open to it. In this case, firefox would actually be reading the page correctly.

[mattmcl]

The content on the site is excellent- your work is outstanding and the tips, articles and links are very helpful. I'll be going back for sure- nice work.

Regarding the design- it's simple yet it gets the job done. The site loads fast and I didn't find any errors, though I didn't click through everything either. I'm looking at it with Firefox at 1600X1200 and I still get the scroll bar, so the table width = 1003 isn't the problem as the page is extending past 1600, probably something like 2000. I can't pinpoint the problem though- but you do have two tables defined at 1003- one from the template and one at the bottom of the page of code.

Good choice with Dreamweaver, that's what I use professionally. If you want absolute control over what you're doing, learn CSS.

That's a great site though- nice work.

[aquila]

Are you using an editor, or hand coding?


And in your page's code I found this: <table width="1003" border="0" cellspacing="2" cellpadding="2">

So, here's the possible situation: some component of some table is set to be 1003 pixes wide. There's no tags to tell the text that it needs to go to a new line, so it's just filling up all 1003 pixels of table open to it. In this case, firefox would actually be reading the page correctly.

smoking wreckage i have absolutely no idea what you just said above.LOL . I'm really crap at this tech thingy and you would laughed if i told you how long it took me to finally get my site up! i did my site in dreamweaver 3 which i found out later that nobody uses it anymore. no wonder my book only cost me 2 bucks. i thought i had found a deal!

i think i understand this set width thingy. somebody at the dreamweaver forum told me that i had to set all my percentages to pixels and it should solve my problem. so i did that but firefox is not recognizing the change. some info is still showing in percentage. hopefully he's still around for me to ask hiw what to do next. i will go have a look at the kiddie site you gave me. thanks for your help

[aquila]

The content on the site is excellent- your work is outstanding and the tips, articles and links are very helpful. I'll be going back for sure- nice work.

I'm looking at it with Firefox at 1600X1200 and I still get the scroll bar, so the table width = 1003 isn't the problem as the page is extending past 1600, probably something like 2000. I can't pinpoint the problem though- but you do have two tables defined at 1003- one from the template and one at the bottom of the page of code.

Good choice with Dreamweaver, that's what I use professionally. If you want absolute control over what you're doing, learn CSS.

That's a great site though- nice work.

thank you for the kind words matt. it sure is a morale booster. i was hoping the site would be a good place especially for beginners to get lots of information to help them get started.

learn css. that sounds a bit too complicated at the moment .it took me so long to get the site up that if i don't do another site it won't be too soon!lol

[smokingwreckage]

Just so you know, I think the overall design and layout looks really good, apart from that text problem. It's easy to read, uncluttered, and easy to navigate.

Did the guy tell you to use pixels on a page that had pictures, and it was displaying the pictures all wonky?

"i did my site in dreamweaver 3 which i found out later that nobody uses it anymore. wacko.gif no wonder my book only cost me 2 bucks. i thought i had found a deal!"

As far as I know DW3 is quite functional. The only reason to STOP using it would be if it was holding you back.

[aquila]

Just so you know, I think the overall design and layout looks really good, apart from that text problem. It's easy to read, uncluttered, and easy to navigate.

Did the guy tell you to use pixels on a page that had pictures, and it was displaying the pictures all wonky?

"

oh dear i have wonky pictures now? yes he said to change everyting from percentage to pixels but now i don't know where he's gone!

looks like i'll have my hands full trying to fix this problem all part of the learning process i suppose. thanks for your input though

[eastman]

...
Did the guy tell you to use pixels on a page that had pictures, and it was displaying the pictures all wonky?
"

oh dear i have wonky pictures now? yes he said to change everyting from percentage to pixels but now i don't know where he's gone!

The pictures looked ok on Firefox (as of a few minutes ago). I don't think SW was saying there was a problem, I think he was trying to understand the logic behind the percentage to pixels switch in the coding. Of course, I don't really know webcoding, so I'm just trying to interpret the posts.