HTML Idiot check/Critique

[Doctor Eric]

Hi all, the idea with this thread is to provide a specific place for performers to have their websites critiqued and, more importantly, "Idiot Checked" for things like spelling errors, buggy code, etc. I have noticed that alot of us are new to HTML, and our sites are a bit buggy because of it. P.Net is a great place to have everyone take a look and let people know about errors, and aesthetics (for instance, my old site was an all out attack on the senses, 100% visual vomit, I wish someone had told me sooner...)

It seems to me that I am probably not the first to think of this, so if this thread already exists somewhere please let me know.

and of course

Check out www.knownothingfamily.org and let me know what you think.

[ 05-04-2002: Message edited by: Doctor Eric ]</p>

[Steven Ragatz]

This may be presumptuous of me. I seem to remember something in the bible about casting stones without looking at your own guilt, etc. My own site breaks all sorts of good-web-housekeeping rules, so take my suggestions for what you will. I don't know much about web layout, but I have had some experience with interface design and multimedia programming

Structural things:

Given today's monitor resolutions, I would say that it is a safe, conservative assumption that the viewer should be able to view your site at 800X600. Any more, any you may loose people. (According to a statistic I read on the Macromedia site, greater than 75% of displays today have an 800X600 resolution or larger, so the old 640X480 size can be expanded.) At 800X600, your header graphic takes up one third of the content space, and the last navigation button was not viewable. Since your header contains only the brand mark and a half dozen buttons, you could shrink that down dramatically. With it at the size it is, most of the pictures can't be fully viewed in the limited content space.

Text that is center justified can be difficult to read. Left justify the large text bodies, saving center justification for titles or picture labels. The centered text doesn't work with the bullets either.

If this site is a point of contact for clients, you might reconsider posting links to other performers who do similar shows, unless you get some residual kickback for click-throughs. If you just want to be generous, then more power to you, but it would be a drag to loose a gig because a potential client went with another act that they got through your site.

Aesthetic opinion:

The Courier font would not be my first choice. It reads well, but gives a sterile feel to the text. Perhaps that is the feel you are going with. If it is a choice, then I would make it a strong choice and integrate it into the page design. Otherwise, I would look at one of the other font families that doesn't have such a blocky line.

I like the brand logo in the header, but am not crazy about the man/woman/fakir image. (It may just be my prudish upbringing, but I keep finding myself looking at that right boobie.) It is interesting, and I think that it should be prominently displayed, but I wouldn't put it as a background wallpaper for every page. Just my opinion.

Steve

[Doctor Eric]

Thank you Steven...

Your words help, although I should mention that 800x600 is on the way out from what I hear... My Stepdad just 'graduated' web-design school and told me that those statistics are actually quite old, most people (especially those with money, like clubs, colleges, and corporate clients) have a higher res these days. But, I was not aware that my image didn't fit, I thought it worked in 800x600, so thanx for letting me know.

A word about the links, my Zirkus/Zideshow doesn't ever play corporate gigs, it is way too edgy, and our goal is not to beat the 'competition', but to bring variety entertainment back from it's grave (wouldn't it be nice to be able to tour a vaudeville circuit?).
All of those groups/people are friends and their shows are drastically different than ours, but that is good advice for someone aiming their site at corporate clients. I mention all this because I personally do private/corporate gigs and I have www.knownothingfamily.org/doctoreric printed on my buisiness cards, this will load my page without the frames, and the other members will do the same when their pages are finished, I'm thinking this will be a good way to go for us since we are killing the proverbial two birds with one stone, but I would like some feedback in that area also.

Anyway, thanks Steven, and other folks out there, please feel free to utilize this thread to proofcheck your own site.

Oh yeah, and I'm in the middle of fixing that centering problem...

[ 05-04-2002: Message edited by: Doctor Eric ]</p>

[Steven Ragatz]

Perhaps 800X600 is too restrictive these days. Base displays on notebooks have had better resolution than that for five years, so that may well be the case. But, just because the hardware supports it, isn't a guarantee that users will use it. Resolutions of greater than 1024 on 17" displays makes text pretty small for many users.

Maybe a more reasonable argument would be to consider the amount of information that you are trying to deliver. If the site is simply a point of contact that answers the 5 W's about your show, then you should be able to frame that using limited real estate and not require the user to have to scroll about to see everything.

One added bonus, if you frame your pages so that all of the information is displayed on a single screen, it makes translating that page design to Flash, or some other web deliverable medium, trivial.

That said, I confess that my own site design suffers from the same dilemma of requiring the user to scroll to view all of the information. It is something that I will have to have fixed when I get someone who really knows how to do web design work on the site for me.

Having links to other peoples web sites is just fine, I was simply being the devil's advocate.

Hope I was helpful. Best of luck.

Steve

[Steven Ragatz]

I was thinking about your site theme this AM. If it were me, I would try to capitalize on the name. I like the "know-nothing" moniker and the way it scans. Also, you have a question mark theme started with the face painting, so why not carry that through the web site? Bloody question mark icons instead of buttons. Since you are trying to deliver information to the user, I think it would be clever to do so by incorporating the know-nothing theme.

There isn't much information about the show on the site currently. You say that you do a full performance, but there are few pictures and very limited descriptions of the acts. How about structuring the site like a quiz that the user must take? The home page could be an aggressive challenge to the viewer to take the "know-nothing-quiz" if they dare. Do it in html without true scoring, just a question page that leads to an answer page that leads to the next question page and so on. The ten or so questions would take the user to various aspects of your show, and the answers would each have a photo associated with them that demonstrates one act. For example:

Q: How many calories in the average 60 Watt light bulb?
A: 32 (And there would be a photo of you eating a lightbulb)

Q: How often are you supposed to have a tetanus shot?
A: Every 10 years (And there would be a photo of your back after lying on a bed of nails)

Q: How many different known species of beetles are there in South America?
A: 1,645,037 (And a picture of you eating bugs)

etc.

(I don't actually know the answers - do some research or just make them sound plausible...)

I don't know the specific acts you do, but the structure could be applied to any act. It seems to lend itself to freak shows because there is the punch of switching to the answer page and having some really gross picture jump at you! Maybe the answers are serious, maybe they are humorous. Either way, I think it could be a very interactive way that the user could be enticed to learn about your show.

Steve

[Scot Free]

Hey Stephen you had some good suggestions for Dr. Eric, would you (or anyone else)kindly provide some suggestions for my site. It's a flash site and being new to programing flash (my friend is doing most of the actual programing)I know there are a lot of bugs in my site. If you could point out the important ones and give feedback to the look of the site it would be greatly appreciated. thanks.
my site

[Steven Ragatz]

Scott,

I'm flattered to be asked. I find it is always easier to tell someone else what there problem is than to fix one's own...

First thing I would do is to offer the user an html option. Flash offers some nice freedom for the developer to be creative, but it doesn't come without a price. Not everyone is Flash enabled (though most are), nor is everyone on a fast connection. At 400k+ for the initial load, I waited several minutes on my dialup connection. Then there was an additional wait when I wanted to view the picture page. I didn't even bother to attempt the 8.2MB video...

That said, I think that if you wish to do a Flash version, you should take advantage of it. With the exception of the devil-scrollbar, the site could be implemented in html. Flash is a great tool, but unless the features that it offers are used, then it just adds to the file size.

From my view, having never seen your show, the devil head is very intimidating. It does not fit with the feel of the show images. I could see many viewers being turned off by the horned-one staring at them all the time. The iconic scroll bar is nice, but I would replace the icon with something else other than Satan-Scott. (You can leave Satan-Scott as the rollover of the static icon in the header if you wish. It's a nice Easter egg...)

I would change the behavior of the scroll bar arrow buttons so that they always shift the page down to predetermined points on each page. Then, arrange your photos so that they can be fully viewed at these points. If the user wishes to manually scroll up and down, they may, but if they use the arrows, they should be able to see each page of photos without any cropped images or lost captions.

I love the bio. Go with that feel throughout the site. On the other pages, I would cut down on the amount of text. The font has a good feel to it, but is somewhat difficult to read in long blocks. Your pictures say more than your text in my opinion.

As far as design ideas, you have an interesting name. You could play off of the "free" aspect. How about an opening banner that reads something like "Click here to win something absolutely FREE!", or "Click here for FREE CHAINSAW!", etc. Each banner could be designed with a specific trick in mind. (Click here for FREE SEX! You wish...)

If you are wanting to utilize Flash in an interesting way, why not include a daredevil game. If you checked out the passing the hat diddy I did for Jim, you could do that but have the things that are falling be chainsaws. The objective is to catch the saws that are falling handle first, and avoid the saws that are falling blade first. After each bad catch, a finger is chopped off, so the player gets five misses before they loose. The saws fall faster as the game progresses.

Just some thoughts...

Steve

PS. It's all free advice, and worth every penny!

[Stephon]

Ok, I'll throw my site into the ring for Steve and anyone else to critique. I'm particularly interested to know if it takes too long to load for dial-up users.

Eric pointed out some problems to me (Eric, I was able to see what you meant when I used a friends computer), and I think I've fixed them, as well as making some additional changes.

Thanks.

[Scot Free]

Thankyou Steven, I appreciate your input. The HTML version is on it's way. As to loading time for slower connections I remember laughing with my friend that if a potential client doesn't have a brodband connection then f*** 'em they probably could'nt afford to hire me. This was a joke of course and loading time was a concern, thats why we broke it into 2 movies (seperate one for the gallery page)Your point is valid and it is a concern for me to have my site accessable to everyone.

The freeeeeking devil head again..........
My mom had the same input and I blew her off as being lame. I love the devil head scroll bar but you (and my mom) may be right, I don't want to turn off potential clients. I would appreciate input from anyone else on this matter (not that I don't trust you Steven or Mom)
but I'd like a few more view-points. Hey Lynne could I get a producer's perspective please?

I love the Daredevil game idea-I could'nt find Jims pass the hat game????

Thanks again.

BTW Steven I like the look of your site but I also don't like too much text and I honestly didn't read very much of the text on your site. My attention span likes pictures and graphics on the web I don't really like to spend too much time on reading. (I do however prefer text to pictures when reading books)\
I really like the ripped paper thing, your site looks slick and corporate as I imagine it was intended to.

[Steven Ragatz]

Why don't you just replace the devil-head image on the slider with a chainsaw image? The slider bounds (now a red box), could be a graphic of something being cut (wood or an arm?) as the saw scrolls up and down the screen. I think that the chainsaw would be a better iconic representation of your work than the word play on the dare-"devil" image.

If you were selling yourself to the tech market, lets say as a multimedia developer, then I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a high bandwidth connection. But, I would imagine, though I don't know it for a fact, that many venues in the arts, such as festival planners, and the sorts that book buskers, would not necessarily have a fast connection. Also remember that if you are selling yourself internationally, the standards over seas may differ from those in North America.

[quote]
I love the Daredevil game idea-I could'nt find Jims pass the hat game????
<hr></blockquote>

I think it's at: http://www.performers.net/games/pass.html. It's a simple little shockwave app that could be used as a frame for just about anything. Additionally there's http://www.performers.net/games/invaders.html. The level of prgramming for these sorts of games is very basic, so if your friend is learning Flash, then this sort of thing would be a good exercise. I did these in an evening in Shockwave, but they could have been implimented in Flash as well.

[quote]
Thanks again.

BTW Steven I like the look of your site but I also don't like too much text and I honestly didn't read very much of the text on your site. My attention span likes pictures and graphics on the web I don't really like to spend too much time on reading. (I do however prefer text to pictures when reading books)\
I really like the ripped paper thing, your site looks slick and corporate as I imagine it was intended to.
<hr></blockquote>

Didn't read the text, huh? Didn't miss much. I wrote it, and I didn't read it either. If I really wanted to get work from it I would nix all of the text and get some photos that instill curiosity in the viewer.

As for my site, I should probably just take it off line until I have the time to learn something about web delivery and finish it. I can think of dozens of problems with the structure and implementation, but considering I have only done four gigs in the last two years, and none of those required anything other than a "sure, I'll do it", having a web site has not been a priority. Hell, the act that I want to sell isn't even finished yet, so even if I did get a good show, I wouldn't know what to do! I threw images at it just so I could put it on line to do stilts at a corporate gig last February. (That was the penguin gig that got all screwed up, blah - blah - blah. But, being the big man that I am, I'm still a bit bitter about it.)

I did learn a couple of things about web development that differ from CD development. First, full screen images are probably bad. The torn paper is a nice Photoshop effect, but it means that the majority of the time spend loading is spent loading fluff instead of content. On CD, full screen images like the ones I wanted to use are tirvial, but when downloading, they become cumbersome. I think I optimized it pretty well, by chopping it into tables and utilizing tiling wherever possible, but I don't know at what point a few larger files becomes faster to load than many little files (there is always some overhead to initiate every packet transfer, etc.)

Additionally, nothing beats a good photo. The framing graphics are important, but ultimately, the photo (and moreso, video) is going to be what will present your work. If the graphics suck, they will be noticed. If they are nice, they just won't hurt you.

Writing promotional text is difficult. I make no pretenses on being able to do so. A writer is in order.

Ultimately, if I cannot find the time to learn about web design, I will take the site and hand it off to someone who specializes in that sort of thing. I know that the investment is well worth it, particularly if you can present someone with a fleshed out concept that you want implemented in a professional context. If one wants to become a web developer, then by all means, learn the ins and outs. It is not hard, but you do have to invest some time and money. But, if you only want to produce one web site to promote yourself, then I expect it best to hire it out to someone with the experience.

Both Thom Britain and Martin Ewin have voiced that they are interested in doing web development. If they officially put out a marquee, I suspect that they could get some consulting work from P-Net readers. There is, of course, our illustrious leader, Jim, who would probably be interested in some development efforts as well.

Steve

[martin ewen]

I could immerse myself in HTML but would probably loose my love of humanity in the process.
The more I learn the less I know, small things end up taking a great deal of time and my site is riddled with learners mistakes.

http://www.anti-gravity.com.au

My site is also an indulgent obese piece of flatulance.
I've just finished what for me was a lot of work at

http://www.brendanoconnell.com/

Only to find that I've stuffed the size of the pages up and now have to resize many many many pages.
Each problem is an opportunity to learn something I tell myself (before turning to drink)

http://www.abominableshowman.com

(I marvel that I convinced karl/ Taxi to go with that name)
Is a really simple site done just about adequately.
But again a couple of months on i would now do it better.
(you can tell when people made their sites and what they used to make it and what their design preferences are quite quickly)
In cash terms I have earned $160 in total
(and a lot of free rent and goodwill)
I'm doing a site for an art gallery this week,
I'm cheap and primitive and sometimes dawdle.
But its all experience and if you already have lots of juicy content and just can't be bothered learning how to frame and upload it then I may be able to help you.
As pointed out good copy is something that gets you gigs.
That could be something I could attempt for people.
But I'd have to like you or as the nearest alternative you could try and make me pity you.
And people who designed web pages for an actual living would undoubtedly pity me.
Oh my god I’ve just marquue’d myself.

[Jim]

[quote]Originally posted by Steven Ragatz:
<strong> There is, of course, our illustrious leader, Jim, who would probably be interested in some development efforts as well.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thanks for the pitch Steven, but I'm trying to get out of the web development business... or should I say web development charity services. <img src="graemlins/square.gif" border="0" alt="[square smile]" />

I have noticed that most performers, when hiring someone to do promo development, will go with the lowest bidder or simpy get their girlfriend's little brother to do it.

I've been offering web design services on performers.net for years and still don't make enough money to cover server space. Performers are generally pretty cheap. There are very few of us out there who will spend top dollar on promo. Which is odd when you think about it. I remember Dan, or maybe it was Barry Raspyni once telling me, "You're never going to book a $5000 gig with a $300 video." If you want $5000 gigs and you have a $5000 act, you better spend $5000 on your video. It will show to the client.

Same thing goes for web sites... Your site will probably be the FIRST thing a client sees. I've been to several performer sites and been really turned off by their sites... even though I know the act is GOOD! Your promo has to feel like your show. If you can't do it yourself, HIRE someone to do it well.

[Stephon]

[quote]Originally posted by Stephon:
<strong>Ok, I'll throw my site into the ring for Steven and anyone else to critique. I'm particularly interested to know if it takes too long to load for dial-up users.

Thanks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Anyone? Anyone?

[Scot Free]

Stephon, don't worry, I don't think you're being snubbed.
I use my computer as a part of my home theatre system and when I loaded your page your sound effect nearly blew out my eardrums. For most users this won't be a problem though.

On your welcom page it would be cool if the black forground area with the text scrolled down rather then the whole page. (I only have a 15 inch monitor so I don't know if you need to scroll to get all the info on a larger screen.)

Your buttons are clear and functional but a bit bland and boring. Perhaps you could incorperate some theme from your show into cooler buttons.

The text on the welcome page is clear, discriptive and almost consice enough for my H.A.D.D. attention span.

I like the comic stlye photo gallery idea but I think fewer and bigger pictures would be more effective in this sequence. Instead of 6 per page maybe 4. Actual talk bubbles would be cool.

The multimedia page...
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
not sure what to make of that.
Whan I play the sample "What do you want?"
and then play the responce of what sound like a big group of children screaming "I want it bigger!"
I get creeped out.
I like the sound byte page it was fun for a couple of amusing seconds.

LInks are good but remember the advice that Steven gave Dr. Eric regarding links to other performers sites...however I think if these are are very good friends of yours and they provide a different type of act it works.

Your site is very functional and informitive but I like graphics and found your site to be a little hurtin' in the graphics dept. This is a personal bias but I think graphics make the site. For me it's about eye candy, what's fun to look at.

[ 05-09-2002: Message edited by: Scot Free ]</p>

[Steven Ragatz]

Stephon,

Scott's point about the graphics should be noted. With the availability of public domain web graphics these days, it isn't difficult to find a cohesive layout that includes boarders, buttons, banners and headers that all jive together. In a similar vein, make sure that there is some connection between the button and the content. Good interface design suggests that the user clearly able to identify a direct correlation between their actions and the software's response. If there is some visual connection between the button's selected, or down state, and the content frame, then that association is reinforced.

Since you seem to be pushing for Ren Faire type venues, I would suggest that you choose interface elements that convey that style. I would avoid the brushed metal buttons or the arrow buttons that have neon animations. Think leather and metal and earth tones with royal color highlights.

I had mentioned my rule of thumb about putting the competition's links on one's own site. I wish to elaborate on that, and modify my earlier thoughts. My new rule is: don't put links to other performer's sites if their site is nicer than yours. Not knowing anything other than the quality of the page layout, if I were shopping for a duo to do fire eating/variety at my Ren Faire, I would have given Todd a call, and you would only have gotten the $0.05 click through fee. As I said before, if this is something that you feel strongly about, then by all means, help your friends out. But, not putting their site on yours as a link can not be interpreted by anyone in the business as a selfish move.

If I were to think of an angle for your site design, I would start with the show strengths. Promote the whole "big magic" theme. You could do some great things with forced perspective photos. I could see the site opening with a series of stark, white text on black background screens done either in flash or html:

(screen 1)
How big is the show?

(screen 2)
Well, think of something really big. Picture it clearly in your mind. Got it?

(screen 3)
It's bigger than that.

On the first page I would have the most powerful images. I find that the sites that attract my attention and give me the impression of "professionalism" (whatever that means) are the ones with images that make me curious. I like the giant ball and cups pictures the best. In general, I like a picture that I look at and it makes me ask a question - a question like "How the hell are they going to do cups and balls with THAT?" Currently, you have the best images buried into the site. The blurred filtered background image isn't strong enough to warrant that much screen space. Most of the time, I don't like tiled background images because you (the designer) never have control over where the image is displayed, or how many are visible since it is a factor of the user's display size. I would consider a solid background or a discreet textured background that tiles seamlessly. (I still think leather...)

I would avoid repeating pictures. Your picture sets seem to be from two performances. Many of the shots are of some guy mugging something to the crowd, although they are different, I didn't think that they differed by much. I would keep one or two of those "zany action shots" and include one strong image from each of the acts that you do. Too many photos can be overwhelming the same way that too much text can.

I like the opening copy well enough, though I would take out the part about creating the show. The copy would benefit from being oriented on the screen in some other way than blocked center. Group like information together, then find an elegant way of displaying it.

My comments may sound overly negative, but most of the things that distracted me were cosmetic. I really think that your strong suit is the big magic angle. Start with that, and see how it could guide the site design.

Steve (who is not a web designer, but simply someone who types very fast.)