Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Review my E/N Graphics / Portfolio site!

    Wassup everyone. It's probley really annoying to get all these site reviews but at least there's a seperate forum for them!

    Site is:
    http://www.forcefx.net

  • #2
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,963
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Umm...Haven't you already put this site up for review twice already?
    And nothing's changed...It still builds itslef as it loads, it's still not valid html (attributes aren't quoted for starters)...
    What are you hoping for from a third review?

    I take no responsibility for the above nonsense.


    Left Justified

  • #3
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas
    Posts
    1,518
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    I thought that this looked familiar... I do have to say* that it has a very clean look to it, and yet I will have to agree with mindlessLemming.
    Last edited by Antoniohawk; 04-28-2004 at 06:02 PM.

  • #4
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I put this up for review before? I don't even remember lol.. sorry about that Well If i did it was a long time ago so most of the content is new, though.

  • #5

  • #6
    Regular Coder
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    400
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    lol. I think it looks nice, except it looks a bit screwed up in MOZ, and it takes way too long to load

    [EDIT]

    Never mind, after waiting a while (over 40 seconds is a while to me ), it fixed itself. But when the page first loaded, it looked streched out across the page

  • #7
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,963
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    I take no responsibility for the above nonsense.


    Left Justified

  • #8
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    2,469
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mindlessLemming
    LOL!
    Busted dude
    That's funny!! HA!
    // Art is what you can get away with. <-- Andy Warhol
    ...:.:::: bradyjfrey.com : htmldog : ::::.:...

  • #9
    Senior Coder
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas
    Posts
    1,518
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    What should his punishment be?

  • #10
    New Coder
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    CA, USA
    Posts
    27
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Antoniohawk
    What should his punishment be?
    ...a course in image optimization .

    It looks fine, but it is almost 500k- I am on DSL and the site is unbearably slow. You have some decent content in the tutorials, I won't comment on some of the other stuff.

    Issues:

    -Overall lack of forethought in optimization. The top graphic consists of 6 files- it is unecessarily large and has a weight of 65k. You should, with some work, be able to build this whole page for 65k. There doesn't seem to be much compression on anything, it is almost all jpgs that should be gifs. You could easily save big on the top graphic by splitting the green/grey navigation parts from the foggy/sun image. Make the green/grey navigation parts gifs, limit the number of colors to 32 (64 if you have to). Make the foggy/sun image jpgs and throw a little compression and a little blur on there, it will save you huge on file size.

    -The affiliates- zymicaff.gif is 62k all on its own. Personally, I don't think this whole section merits such weight, I would have 5 or 6K limit on these. They are supposed to be thumbnails, not print quality.

    Again, the look is fine, but just from a usability standpoint, you have to reduce the download time. Keep in mind that dialup downloads at about 5-10k/sec, so at an average of 7k/sec, you are looking at 70 sec. Even 10 seconds is a long time to wait unless the user knows what they are waiting for and why.
    Last edited by empiredesign; 04-29-2004 at 12:18 AM.


  •  

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •