Working on a redesign, need some input

**wiggsfly** · Apr 11, 2008 17:37

A few of ya'll were nice enough to look at the current version of my website about a week ago and the ideas got me thinking it was time for a redesign.

I've got a basic template complete. There is no content yey as I'm deciding how to focus things a little better, but I'm hungry for some feedback on the layout. Please take a look at http://wwwtest.chriswiegman.us and let me know what you thing.

**thebeta1** · Apr 12, 2008 13:20

Originally Posted by wiggsfly

A few of ya'll were nice enough to look at the current version of my website about a week ago and the ideas got me thinking it was time for a redesign.

I've got a basic template complete. There is no content yey as I'm deciding how to focus things a little better, but I'm hungry for some feedback on the layout. Please take a look at http://wwwtest.chriswiegman.us and let me know what you thing.

Dead links

**RandyKougher** · Apr 12, 2008 18:39

I think its an attractive clean design, though its hard to review with no content since we can't see what the actual pages will look like and how they are laid out. The links are all dead and I'm not sure you need the W3C images at the bottom. Overall, the design is good though.

**wiggsfly** · Apr 12, 2008 19:32

Thanks, I realize the content isn't there yet. I'm still figuring out how and what I want to put on there. My biggest concern right now is the general look and feel including colors,etc.

I wasn't sure I liked the W3C images either, but for now I'm going with them as they are but one indication that I live up to the standards I claim to know.

**dbr** · Apr 13, 2008 03:50

I personally like the w3c validation images at the bottom. I like a smaller, less conspicuous size though. Once your page is filled with content, they should not stick out as bad. But, like you said it lets others know you're coding to standards and they make it convenient to check that fact.

Did w3c provide the faded icons or did you post process them? If you post processed them, you might also try sizing them down some.

Overall your template looks clean and appealing to me.

**wiggsfly** · Apr 13, 2008 07:51

Thanks, I toned them down. I think you're right about shrinking them though and I'll update that soon.

Originally Posted by dbr

I personally like the w3c validation images at the bottom. I like a smaller, less conspicuous size though. Once your page is filled with content, they should not stick out as bad. But, like you said it lets others know you're coding to standards and they make it convenient to check that fact.

Did w3c provide the faded icons or did you post process them? If you post processed them, you might also try sizing them down some.

Overall your template looks clean and appealing to me.

**hsmurfit** · Apr 13, 2008 11:13

I think the background color should be changed.. it is too strong for the eyes!

**sydneyaus** · Apr 14, 2008 02:29

I would go for a lighter background colour.

**crhayes** · Apr 14, 2008 23:09

I agree about the background colour. Also, the effects you have on the header text and links (bevel or emboss I think?) make it look blurred. I think if you got rid of those effects it would make the text much more crisp and attractive.

**Animatronx** · Apr 15, 2008 05:44

I would either change the background color or that blue header color, they don't play well together.

**wiggsfly** · Apr 15, 2008 09:17

Thanks all for the input so far. Based largely on the input from this thread I've reworked the header quite extensively. Keep it coming!

**187skillz** · Apr 16, 2008 01:52

Hey Chris,

You know the content bg sticks out (right/left) past the header, you should consider making this pixel perfect.

I don't think you need the beveled header, having it flat might look better. It makes your website look like an "old style"

Do you care for your logo? It could be way better than what it is right now, I think the colour should blend with your website colour theme, right now it just looks like something of an after thought "oh let me stick my logo, before I forget"

Goodluck.

**wiggsfly** · Apr 16, 2008 05:41

Actually the content bg width was intentional. I do agree on the logo though. I was thinking that it didn't quite fit myself, and hearing it from elsewhere confirms it.