Louise of Un-Ordinary.net’s review:

Presentation

As you know, I’ve already seen this layout of yours a few times, and it has always given me the impression of being rather dull. It seemed as if you deliberately tried to simplify something that in all actuality is quite complex. Simplicity is good, but shouldn’t be exaggerated: dull is not something visitors find entertaining.

I believe you did do some changes since the first time you’ve put this layout up, right? The text, in the content area seems to have a smaller width. That’s very good, especially for larger resolutions. Nevertheless, on the whole the layout is still not appealing enough, though it should be.

At a first glance there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong with the layout. This is why, I wasn’t particularly certain why I disliked it. Taken from an entirely clinical point of view, you do keep in mind all generic suggestion as far as layout design goes. Your colors don’t clash, you have a little something to make the layout simple rather than bare (see: Simple vs Plain). So then why does it still say plain to me? It took me some time (there’s my excuse!) until I realized this: you don’t put the “eye candy” to good use.

The girl appears to be sitting, but there’s nothing there which would appear to actually serve as a seat to her. Even the site title is a good few pixels lower than her hand. PI get the feeling that someone stole the chair from beneath her. Next, the bubbles (which I later found out were actually flowers), are not well placed. There is already a decorative image in that corner (the girl). You’re attracting undue attention to that particular corner. There’s no text there; the links are in the opposite corner and the main content starts a good 50 pixels lower. So WHAT exactly am I supposed to see there?

Another sore point of this layout are the blue colored links. WHERE do you use blue? Your layout is made up of various shades of brown, black and lilac. So that shade of blue (much too close to the default link color for comfort) makes me thing that you have some errors in your stylesheet. Out of curiosity, I checked the validation of your stylesheet and sophie.css throws the following error:

Servlet has thrown exception:javax.servlet.ServletException: Timed out.

It’s the IE hack for the #content that is causing it. Direct input of the CSS information, actually showed the syntax error’s place. More on this, in the coding section.

Trying to describe a whole new layout, is quite difficult, therefore I ended up sketching one in Photoshop. It’s by no means perfect, and the link colors need some adjusting, as does the large space above the main menu. I apologize if it resembles my own personal one too much. The girl and the flowers are better emphasized this way, thus adding to the layout’s aesthetic appeal. The list model is ZDnet Emulation. Click on the image below for a larger version:

Take that as a starting point, and rethink the placement of the decorative images. Your layout has all the right components which can easily make it into an aesthetically pleasing one. However, just the ingredients alone are not enough, they need to be appropriately placed.

Content

=Blog=

The main, archive and feed links have no place being placed at the bottom of each blog page. I understand the “Powered by FanUpdate” link, but the rest should go on the sidebar. Since you have a dynamically changing one, you should put all related pages there. Speaking of which, you archives area is already linked there. I don’t see a need to do so twice on the same page.

=Portfolio=

Your meta description says that this is your personal website, so the About Me section should take precedence over the Portfolio. After all, the former is of a more personal nature.

There’s already a list of links for this section on the sidebar, so why have a special page for this? Just choose one page which you would deem the most representative for said section as the “default” page. There’s no need to repeat this information. Also, you need a bit more space between the images and the description at the bottom.

You must respect this fact

That is not the best phrasing, as respect is earned: you can’t demand it from others. Least of all from perfect strangers. If the images are copyrighted to you, that implies that others have to have your permission to use them. When specifying terms of use, it’s best to make things as brief and straightforward as possible.

Images and characters are copyrighted to myself and their respective owners. You may not use any of these images without asking for my permission.

I suggest you make use of the form above. Respect and recognition of your hard work are all subjective facts. I’m not saying that your work is not good, but these are just fancy words used to impress the visitor. It works on a number of visitors, however in the end a clear and brief sentence is more likely to be remembered.

These typically begin with a rough pencil sketch, then are scanned, outlined and rendered using Adobe Photoshop

The pictures begin? As in the top part of them are just rough pencil sketches? Try the form below:

These typically start out with a rough pencil sketch, then are scanned, outlined and rendered using Adobe Photoshop.

For the pictures gallery page, why are the instructions of use at the bottom of the page? This information should be easiest to find. My current resolution is 1280×1024px, and I have my browser window maximized. The text I’m referring to, is at the bottom of the page. So users with smaller resolutions will have to scroll to get to these instructions? Put them above the images.

You may not use or display any of these images without asking for my permission.

Is yet again, not a good phrasing. Displaying these images means that the person is using them.

I love the drawing of the animals, especially the coloring techniques you use. As far as the human drawings go, their hands are rather small. I’m mediocre at best at drawing, still the one thing I remember from art class was, that if a person opens his/her palm with fingers outstretched, the outline of it should roughly equal the size of the person’s face. I’m generally not one to comment on different styles, especially if I don’t like them, but proportions should be kept. Sure if your art is of the supra realist kind (like Dali’s) then things are different, but this is not an issue here.

I don’t like pixel art: at ALL. Your pixel images on the other hand, are is simply gorgeous. I’m totally in love with the yellow Bee from the Q-Bee related images. The information related to the origins of pixel art is very useful. I had no idea about all this.

In the flash games, you yet again place the usage instructions below the thumbnails. First tell me how to use them and only AFTER that show me the images. Besides, visitors are more likely to just click around aimlessly, looking for images. If they’re lost they will look above the images for more information, not below them.

Tee-hee, the pizza flash game is fun, I’ll have to return for more. The rest of your Flash presentation also looks nice. It makes me want to learn Flash myself (if only I had the necessary free time…).

I’m a sucker for 3D art, and your display doesn’t disappoint me. They’re (almost) all brilliant. The only one I’m not to fond of is the one named “Ruins on an island” from the Bryce category. Can’t you make some desktop wallpapers with these? I’m always on the lookout for such things.

Same as before: description above thumbnails. Surprisingly enough I actually like most of the website layouts. Considering this currently layout, I don’t understand how your current layout is so bland. You are capable of so much more. I’m assuming you wanted to try out something different.

Gohan with blue hair? Is that supposed to be Son Gohan from DragonballZ? It doesn’t really resemble him: too much of a pretty boy.

=About Me=

As I was clicking around before (the E-mail and Guestbook links), I noticed that when I am in a given section, the menu at the top doesn’t contain a link for said section. E.g. when I am in the About Me section, no matter how many times I click on the About Me text, it won’t bring me to the “default” page of this section.

In the portfolio section this wasn’t a big problem as the “default” page was actually a contents page, and the links from that could be found on the sidebar as well. In this case though, there is no link to the “default” page of this section on the sidebar either. Also, as far as I’m aware this information is not repeated elsewhere. So either make a link to this page on the sidebar, or leave the link for it on the main menu.

Site Realted should be Site Related. It’s quite a noticeable mistake, especially as the text is a heading. Or was this a test on whether or not I (as a reviewer) would notice it?

It’s main purpose is to demonstrate my creative work, an insight into my interests, plus provide a few nifty little resources.

It’s should be its: the domain’s main purpose is …

On the interests page, there is a link to “ball-jointed dolls”. The page there sports your previous layout but has no content. Some sort of mistake was made somewhere. Either the page (/omake) is not available anymore, or you still need to work on this page. Either way, don’t link it until you fix the page.

The projects page would be better placed in the portfolio section, especially considering the rather formal way you present these projects. For the Astraflora project’s subject, it might be a good idea to mention that the nursery is one of plants. At first I envisioned a kinder garden like setting… till I realized what nursery it actually was. Though for the sake of being as clear as possible I’d just say “client”.

Oh so this is the new page for Asian Ball-Jointed Dolls? Then fix the link in the interests page… Now please excuse me while I go droll over various ABJD. I’m really envious now, despite the fact that I haven’t played with dolls in over 10 years.

Why is there guest art in the personal section? Also, why does the sidebar change? Aren’t I supposed to be still in the About Me section? The top horizontal main menu does not mark my location either, so I’m a bit confused now. Same way, the Q*Bee Quilt gets me to a totally different page. You should either put these pages in a network type of page, or mention it in some way that they are different sites/sections.

All in all, I was quite disappointed in this section. It’s not personal at all, it actually feels like an extension of the portfolio. Ironically enough, it’s even more professional in some places than the portfolio. Either your site is a portfolio, or it’s personal one. I expected a personal one, especially since that’s what your meta information says, and yet the personal section looks more like a job application. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not bad, just not something I’d want to see on a personal site.

=Goodies=

Just as with the portfolio, you have a contents page and links to this section on the sidebar. Decide on one of them. Also, make sure that the sidebar has links to all sections, otherwise there’s no use in having a dynamic sidebar.

The link to Sims 2 Stuff is not working, not to mention that the URL seems to be pointing to a different site (as subdomain). Yet again, you don’t mention this.

For the Cork and Texture tutorial: why did the sidebar change? Why can’t it have remained the same? It’s not like it has more links. This time I’m thankful that there is a link back to Goodies. However, the top navigation, yet again doesn’t point to the current location. If you have decided to have a main navigation which points to the current location, please keep this up for the entire site.

As far as quality of tutorial goes, I’m not particularly good with Photoshop, so I can’t comment much. My only question is in regards to the images. All steps have images, though some have thumbnail for the pictures illustrating them, while others just have text links to these pictures? Why not have thumbnails for all images? It’s easier to follow such a tutorial, instead of having to go back and forth between pages.

For the web design articles I’m completely lost. The side navigation is changed radically. And yet again nothing is selected… you need to follow some sort of pattern when it comes to the internal navigation for the sections of your website. This changing navigation is part of the archives right? And these archives’ sidebar is made up of the articles filed under a given category… but as you link these from different pages, it can easily be quite confusing.

Still articles on web design always interest me so… itadakimasu *cue manic laughter*:

Web Issues Summary » You’ve misspelled the word necessary (i.e. where necissary).

You can’t necessarily copyright your work if it contains something made by someone else.

That doesn’t make sense. I’m assuming you meant to say that one can’t copyright items that contain others’ work(s). But the presence of necessarily, would imply that in such a case the author can choose not to copyright it.

Subject and Message - this sounds more like a brief rant on how some sites are bad. Try revising it a bit, to include more suggestions, and be less attacking… as far as actual content goes, this has been done lots of times. Just like your paragraph about the celebrity fan sites: make something better, something that can’t be found elsewhere.

Using Images & Media » it would be better if you dispensed of the ampersand and used “and” instead. The article itself is good, however there is so much more to say. Being an artist yourself, you should be able to emphasise the wrongness of using artwork without permission in a more convincing way. Make some analogies, exaggerate if you have to, but don’t just say “oh how can you be so heartless?”. Visitors don’t know you personally (most of the time), so they’re unlikely to interact, let alone care about you in any form. It’s not nice, but that’s just the way people are.

Using Fonts - this article is well written, though it could use some addition. What about suggesting to people to use images instead of specifying the font name using CSS/HTML ? By the way, you have an extra opening tag (<) in the link for the further reading at the bottom of the article.

Using Scripts - this could use a bit more explanation. It is highly likely that those who DO these things, don’t know why this is not advisable. So DO explain keylogging and history session, as well as cookies.

I realize that these articles are more than 2 years old, however if you still have these intended as tutorials make sure that you update them from time to time. Re-read them periodically, try to see if they still “make sense”, maybe there are places you can improve: make them easier to understand, conciser, clearer etc.

=Linkage=

Yet again, no link to the default page from the sidebar. In the Link me page, no donated buttons show up, though the text suggests there are. I disabled AdBlock Plus after which they showed up. Rename these to something other than button or banner as these things are generally considered spam by ad blocking scripts. In the credits page why is the link to Cumberland Fontworks differently aligned compared to the others? There is a considerable padding on the left. Incidentally the last paragraph should be part of a terms of use, rather than credits page.

Coding

Your XHTML is valid and correctly indented; you use clean and easy methods, just the way it should be.

Like I said before, your CSS generates an error due to an Internet Explorer hack. By the looks of it, I’m assuming it’s for maxwidth. I suggest you use, a conditional CSS statement for Internet Explorer, where you specify a fixed width for the content area

Though it may sound as if I’m trying to find excuses (which is partly true), I found your site very hard to review. It’s constantly giving me so many conflicting feelings. There are plenty of parts which encouraged me to browse more, delighted to find interesting things, however there was an almost equal number of pages which annoyed me with their seemingly elementary mistakes. You’re a seasoned webmaster who knows a lot of things better, but I’m assuming that revamping this whole site can be difficult (yeah, pot saying hello to Mr. kettle), nevertheless some things just plain say laziness.

Your layout was not to my taste at all, and I still find that it doesn’t do your art enough justice. My suggestion, though better, is still not good enough. It doesn’t make it boring at least. In the end, I had initially wanted to give you a 3/4 stars as your content is rather good on the most part. That is, until you navigation threw me off. I should NEVER feel lost on a site. Especially when you go as far as to provide a dynamic sidebar. That is why your final rating ended up being 2.5/4 stars. Your site is very good, but you must revise some usability aspects.

This entry was posted on Sunday, December 9th, 2007 at 1:55 pm and is filed under Reviews Vera. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.