[mega01man]

Hello

I have been asked to re-design of a friend of mine.

This is what his old website looks like, link removed.

And this I what I have came up, link removed.
I designed it on chrome, it would look weird on other browsers.

He said that he liked the whole design, but I want second opinions about it.

The buttons are all in java since I haven't wrote down the codes for them to actually do something.

I think that it would be better to take one step at a time.

Like fixing the design of the whole site, then adding the interactivity or server side scriptings or even java, and tweaking the measurement for other browsers.

Thank you very much for your understanding and helpfulness.

More power to dreamincode

mod edit: removed links at user request

[modi123_1]

It's odd that if I am on a menu button's edge it turns the whole box orange, but if I move a bit internal I can see the text. I think you have an event out of order there.

The stretched out logo looks like poop. Bring back the old one and just center it.

Sweet jesus "artist's bio" - make that damn music optional.

The new site is slow.. really slow.

In gallery the equipments and events are the same images.

Also the plural of equipment is just equipement. No s.

The home page with blocks of images looks.. odd.I am not sure what home page I am on or waht the site is about. A bit of text there.

Why is there a cart?

Over all super basic, and I am not sure if I even like it over the old design.

[mega01man]

thank you for the critic modi123_1

do you mean on music optional is - not to play the music automatically?

i'll research on how to make a site load fast.

the pictures there are just for samples that is why they are the same. i'll update my original post to include this info.

the home page is suppose to show news and events going for the artist and his group.

the cart is there because he said he would like to sell his music. i'll also make note of the songs i put there, there are just for samples only. he sings gospel songs and i haven't been given a sample of it.

thank you very much again for your critic.

UPDATE:

I could no longer change my first post.

I will write it here instead.

Notes:

The images are the same because they are just samples.
So as the songs, since I haven't been given samples of his songs yet.

This post has been edited by mega01man: 12 October 2011 - 09:27 AM

[modi123_1]

Quote

do you mean on music optional is - not to play the music automatically?

Yes... nothing rubs me the wrong way than unexpectedly hearing some crap song blare on my speakers or headphones.

[sbromley]

One way you could make the site load faster is by making the images the size you see on the site. So it looks like you are manipulating the size of the image with css, which there is nothing wrong with, but the site has to load all these images and the actual image being loaded on the page is much bigger.

To see what I'm talking about copy the url of one of the images on your site and open it in a different tab. The picture will be much bigger than it is on the site.

So if you resize the photos with photo shop or GIMP and then use the small images the page won't have quite as much info to load.

Also check out using .pngs, if you're changing the images anyway putting it in a .png format will help with size of images as well.

[JacksonD]

Too basic, It was hard to look at. I didn't like either. I thought the first one was better, to much pages on the second. Both headers were to large and looked stretched, Sorry. But thats my opinion.

[mega01man]

sbromley, on 25 October 2011 - 03:33 PM, said:

One way you could make the site load faster is by making the images the size you see on the site. So it looks like you are manipulating the size of the image with css, which there is nothing wrong with, but the site has to load all these images and the actual image being loaded on the page is much bigger.

To see what I'm talking about copy the url of one of the images on your site and open it in a different tab. The picture will be much bigger than it is on the site.

So if you resize the photos with photo shop or GIMP and then use the small images the page won't have quite as much info to load.

Also check out using .pngs, if you're changing the images anyway putting it in a .png format will help with size of images as well.

Thank you very much for the advice
I'll do that.

JacksonD, on 26 October 2011 - 03:04 AM, said:

Too basic, It was hard to look at. I didn't like either. I thought the first one was better, to much pages on the second. Both headers were to large and looked stretched, Sorry. But thats my opinion.

Thank you for your critique.
I will try to reduce the content pages.

[bennyb]

[quote name='mega01man' date='27 October 2011 - 06:05 AM' timestamp='1319720726' post='1471366']
[quote name='sbromley' date='25 October 2011 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1319582024' post='1469906']
One way you could make the site load faster is by making the images the size you see on the site. So it looks like you are manipulating the size of the image with css, which there is nothing wrong with, but the site has to load all these images and the actual image being loaded on the page is much bigger.

Sounds like a plan - good luck!