I am now live!

[mailee]

My new website is now active www.alanwilley.co.uk I do need some more photos on it but they are still being workded on at the moment. Let me know what you guys think to it? Thanks.

 

[xy mosian]

My first thoughts, sorry negative
The web page is too wide for my screen, I don't like having to scroll sideways all the time. My screen is 'Old Style' 4:3 ratio.
I am not sure about the images stripped from their backgrounds, the edges are no longer clean.

These are intended as helpful points.

xy

 

[cambournepete]

Looks fine on my 4:3 1280x1024 screen, but not on my 1024 pixel-wide netbook.

Tis hopeless on my Iphone as it uses Flash...

I agree about the pictures though. If you erase the surroundings then I think the edges must be left smooth for best effect.

 

[xy mosian]

Just checked, my screen 1024x768 is 4:3
Sorry Pete your 1280x1024 screen is 5:4

I would not have thought that would have made a difference to the display width, perhaps it's down to pixel count.

xy

 

[gus3049]

Hi,

I'm with the negatives I'm afraid.

I too have to scroll around to navigate the page and find flash websites a right pain. OK so I'm a Mac user but flash is old technology now. Apple and Google are going a better route.

For some reason it also took ages to load.

Also, the use of flashy scripts just doesn't work for me. Typography should be about legibility and instant communication. Look around this site, its all sans serif, easy to read.

Work looks good though!

Don't like being negative but you did ask!

 

[cambournepete]

Just checked, my screen 1024x768 is 4:3
Sorry Pete your 1280x1024 screen is 5:4

Now why didn't I check that before I hit submit... I knew it didn't look right. :roll:

 

[xy mosian]

Here I go grumpy. Why couldn't they leave them all alone anyway?

xy

 

[Pond]

I like it and displays fine on my cheapo laptop (running something made by microsoft no doubt!).

Only thing, which has been said before on others' websites, Where are you? Unless someone knows every std code, it's impossible to tell!

Not sure about the shiplap shed, with pent roof, though! :?

 

[Halo Jones]

I really like the overall design of the webpage. Two comments that I hope are helpful:

1) You may want to optimise how the images are shown as a few showed an awful lot of "jaggies" on the edges which detracts. Is this a magic wand cropping tool issue in whatever photoshop style program you use? I also wanted to click on the images to get a more detailed picture.

2) I am rural and only get a 1.5 Mb/sec connection and the pages were really quite slow to load, and this wasn't just the images but some of the large text as well.

Another thing. I may be imagining things (and I may be with the little one keeping me sleep deprived) but was the hot-tub cover not featured in a national magazine? If it was I would somehow work that in.

I always feel hesitant to comment but as I say I liked the website and the above are just things that occurred to me.

Cheers,

Halo

 

[matt]

It says small business which is not a bad thing; however, I would reduce the number of font variance (faces, types, weights, sizes) across the site and switch the Comic sans for something better suited to the serif font used for (most) of the text - Ariel is a safe and timeless bet.

Agree re the photos (i.e. cutting out the background) - the at first glance the desk looked like a 1970s hall console fixed to the wall because it appeared to be floating. The aspect ratio of one of the kitchen shots was out too (assuming the oven was 600mm wide and not 450mm as it appeared in the pic).

Personally I would go for an altogether more basic design - still saying small business but in a simple, informative, easy to navigate design. Much more understated which, in turn, conveys to the customer that you are joinery, that's where your skill and integrity is focussed, and the web (website) is merely your nod toward reaching customers through today's channels. Someone round these parts is a handyman with just such a site - speaks volumes without actually having to spell it out.

Sorry - was tempted to just say nothing but it is just my opinion based on who I'd call first if presented with your site and one such as I've just described above. I wouldn't actively avoid your site, just gravitate to the other first which has already halved your chance of getting my business. No doubt there are numerous visitors who will go the other way.

 

[brianhabby]

Hi Alan,

I'm sure you are quite happy with the results of your efforts and the initial impression is quite attractive. However, in my opinion at least, most of the above negatives are relevant.

Page width is important and you should restrict the width of your pages to no more than 955 pixels, though even this will be too wide for some users. This will decrease the chances of people having to scroll sideways which can be quite annoying.

The script typeface is a dangerous thing to do on any webpage. If the person viewing it doesn't have an appropriate font installed it could really mess up your layout. As stated above, the purpose of your website should be to convey information as clearly as possible and it's been proven that san serif fonts work best on screen. By all means have a bit of script as a graphic for your logo or headline but leave it at that.

Information about where you are is also very important, I think you should include your address as well as your phone number, or at least the name of the town you are based in.

As for the photos I think they could be optimised for the web better. To take a couple of examples, the Kitchen page has two photos, The cutlery cabinet and the fitted kitchen. If you check the image properties in the browser they show their sizes as 389k and 43k respectively. I copied the images and optimised them in Photoshop and was able to reduce the files sizes down to 27k and 13k, a significant reduction I think you'll agree. Large photos are one of the reasons for slow loading websites.

I also don't like Serif software as it produces very verbose code, further increasing file sizes and download time. If your potential customers experience slow loading pages, remember your competitors are only a click away. I personally would find software that can produce much cleaner code such as Dreamweaver although I appreciate it's pricy.

Just my thoughts which are given in good faith and meant to be helpful.

regards

Brian

 

[jimi43]

The problem with bespoke products on a website is that the actual product being superb must be reflected by the design of the site itself.

I am afraid that your work is superb but the site falls short of displaying it to its best.

I have to agree with the above but constructively suggest you follow some of the excellent suggestions given in the best possible way to be helpful to you. I used to design sites in the early days of pure HTML code with no packages available but the technology and skill have moved on so far I wouldn't dream of attempting it now!

I would however suggest a blog package like WORDPRESS which would enable you to construct quite clean presentations with no knowledge at all for free...and give you all the facilities you present on your site.

Just my view though...thanks for sharing!

Jim

 

[Hudson Carpentry]

Ill second Brians write up. 955px width is standard which caters or screen width resolution of 1024 and above, the other option is to have the page resize to the available window size.

 

[Blister]

Looks fine on my Apple Imac

 

[devonwoody]

More interesing url would be a.willey. :mrgreen:

 

[Eric The Viking]

I agree with the above, but I'd be even more conservative with the page width. 800px wide is fine -- give readers the option to see bigger images, but don't do it in the same window without text (see below). You can also serve a special version for mobiles, but to be honest this is somewhat unnecessary in this context (your potential customers will most probably be sitting at home).

Words about your projects -- what the challenges were, what the client wanted, what you're especially pleased with, and better pictures, will greatly help too. The outdoor stuff is fine, but I'd get some background roll and big lights and photograph furniture in controlled surroundings before it leaves you (I appreciate you can't do this with kitchens, but cutting out the rest of the room doesn't do it any favours). Always photograph glass at an odd angle, never 90deg, to avoid flash reflections. You can use a polarising filter on the front to get rid of unwanted background reflections (e.g. another room seen via bookcase glass), and the best thing is to get the flash off the camera altogether (or use a cheap slave flash).

Have you got a photographer friend who can help, for beer?

Here's a web site I made a while back for a friend: http://www.simonball.co.uk/. The projects page is a taster - it's all designed to load fast and you can click on an image to see a bigger version in a secondary window. There's no Flash. The text is a bit dated now (fine when it was written!), and it may be a bit wordy, but words do help too. Feel free to blag any code from there. I have to say though that the photography was several long days, mainly driving and lighting, but big rooms like swimming pools are always a challenge.

HTH,

E.

 

[petermillard]

Alan

Generally agree with the above comments - hope you're taking them as constructive critiques! Just to add my two-penneth; the design's a bit busy, with some real inconsistencies - drop shadows on some text boxes but not on others, for example. Personally, I'd also choose a less 'florid' font as the main masthead - it'd be fine in print if that's the 'look' you're going for, but on a screen the fine lines can't be resolved properly and just look jagged. I'd also be inclined to use fewer fonts and colours as they tend to distract from what you're trying to say.

From a purely practical standpoint using Flash for navigation elements is generally frowned upon, and is definitely a bad idea if you don't provide html links as an alternative - anyone without Flash, or with Flash turned off can still find your site, but won't be able to navigate around it.

From a technical point of view the photos don't always show your work in the best light; I was a photographer for 20-odd years before turning to the splintery side of things so I do understand how hard it can be to take a decent picture of the job when it's at the end of the working day, you've just cleared up and need to get home to empty the van and start on the paperwork, but you have to remember that after the job's been designed, made and installed the photos are all you'll have left to show people; they have to be as good as you can make them, and if that means arranging with the customer to make a return visit during daylight hours to take a couple of decent snaps, then that's what you have to do. I'd also suggest you to try and avoid taking pictures with direct flash as the specular highlight is not only distracting but it can make the finish on some work look patchy and inconsistent, even when it looks fine in real life. Not everyone can (or wants to be able to) take a decent picture - as ETV says above, can you rope in a mate who's a keen snapper to do some shots that reflect the quality of your work?

There's a couple of other little design things - you're listing a contact email address, but haven't put in a 'mailto:' link, yet you're using a form for customers to contact you which is usually what you do to avoid putting your email address on the site so it doesn't get harvested by spambots... Also, why an @ntlworld.com email addy instead of @alanwilley.co.uk? And no contact address? Pretty sure it's been a requirement since about 2001 for all commercial websites in the UK to have a full address listed somewhere on the site - doesn't have to be big, or in a bold font, but it's definitely supposed to be there.

Hope this helps, Pete.

 

[Losos]

My new website is now active http://www.alanwilley.co.uk I do need some more photos on it but they are still being workded on at the moment. Let me know what you guys think to it? Thanks.

Well I quite liked it Some points raised by people willI'm sure be known to you already and easily fixed.

I had to scroll sideways to read it all, if you could fix that it would be a great starting off point, good luck with the site and the business.