New version of my business website

[beowuuf]

Sorry, I've had little sleep in two days and it's already late tonday, I meant width wise. 1600 wide seems quite large to me, why choose that?

[Gambit37]

It'll actually be a maximum of 2000 wide -- to fill up the browser, regardless of screen res. You just see less off the background going out to the sides if you're using a smaller screen.

[Gambit37]

OK, I made a few minor refinements -- toned the wallpaper down a bit and compressed the header to pull everything up a bit. I think it's there! Now to do all the other page designs!

http://friskdesign.com/v/?p=fd20-red3.jpg

[Gambit37]

I changed the homepage a bit and simplified the footer. I've also done the Portfolio index page and a lower portfolio page. The idea, as with my old site, is that people can get an overview of my stuff quickly, or can drill down to more detail if they choose. At the bottom of the page, I'm not sure which "More from the Portfolio" I prefer -- the text version on the Index, or the thumbnails on the Single portfolio page. You?

http://friskdesign.com/v/?p=fd20-home.jpg
http://friskdesign.com/v/?p=fd20-folio-index.jpg
http://friskdesign.com/v/?p=fd20-folio-single.jpg

Also, I'm a bit concerned that the white on peachy red is hard to read when there's a lot of it. It's not the best colour combination for easy readability. I'll be doing black on white for "normal" long text pages -- but I wanted to do the portfolio a little different. Do you think it's OK?

[beowuuf]

I think it looks fine, nothing is really standing out as bad

[Jan]

What can I say? It's just perfect. You could do whatever you can, but it won't be more perfect than perfect. I mean - it's not possible to design a most perfect homepage - but your designs are perfect enough.

thumbnails on the Single portfolio page. You?

Definitely this one. The pictures attract my attention much better. I tend to skip the text.

Also, I'm a bit concerned that the white on peachy red is hard to read when there's a lot of it.

That's true. On the other hand, as I said before, my eyes tend to get tired when reading too much black on white. Honestly - I don't know. Have you tried slightly bigger font?

(interestingly, the pink on red "Websites give better results when they ar designed too" is quite well readable)

[ian_scho]

I really like the papery feel to the header and other parts... The sound of copy/paste will be heard from across Spain if you ever finalise on that design!

Just to be critical= This one : http://friskdesign.com/v/?p=fd20-folio-single.jpg -> has a ghostly line above "More from the portfolio" that had me shifting my head around the screen thinking I've overdone the squinting again. It's beneath the second image as well, now I realise.

[zoom]

just a hint:
Gambit, I would recommend to get that site up and running ASAP. Any one of them.
Each second ! you miss out presenting the new looks of your site is potentially killing customers.

you should really decide quicker. Imagine you would take as long for sites of someone else.(keep emotions out of it)
And it is not only the time that is lost. Each design change means the previous designs are for the trash bin.
time loss PLUS work done for nothing(learning how to do it, and maybe fun doing it set aside)
I really think you must learn to decide and get the once chosen work all the way to the finish.
these were all reasonably good designed pages, all but one are trash now! THis cannot be and should not be!!!

hope this is not put too drastically, really I thought to mention it.

[Gambit37]

@Zoom you're absolutely right; unfortunately I'm an indecisive perfectionist!

I'm really rather annoyed too. The fancy heading typeface I want to use ("Brighton") is going to cost me over £200 to licence for dynamic web use. I can't justify that. This now means I either have to stick to boring old web-safe fonts or select something else that is either cheaper or free. So far, I have not been able to find any alternative that has the feel I'm looking for.

Another alternative is to use technology that renders the headings as an image: but this isn't accessible and has lots of other issues -- and as an advocate of usable, accessible web design it would be a mistake for me to use a technique I don't believe in.

Bloody hell. So near and yet so far!

[zoom]

hmm, maybe check out dafont for typeface If you did not already. Some of them are free.
(at first I thought all but see search for brighton :/
http://www.dafont.com/
http://www.dafont.com/search.php?psize=m&q=Brighton

[Sophia]

Another alternative is to use technology that renders the headings as an image: but this isn't accessible

Alt="Insert accessible text here!"

[beowuuf]

Hmm, might be sending the wrong message not using 'boring' fonts. After all, you are trying to show how easy, accessable websites can be built, and apparently to look like your own one a customer's suddenly gunna find an extra yearly fee lumped onto their own site for the font!

[Gambit37]

Simple and accessible doesn't = cheap!

[beowuuf]

True, but in uninitiated minds, it would probably equate to that. You have enough of a job convincing them its not, without throwing in paying for letters I would imagine.

[cowsmanaut]

did I ever share with you the saying I learned in school? "You have Cheap, fast, and good. but you can only pick 2" So it can be good and fast but it won't be cheap, or good and cheap but it won't be fast, or fast and cheap but it won't be good

[Gambit37]

It's my mantra

Although these days, I prefer the Red Adair quote: "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur."

[Gambit37]

He he he, so much for all that! I've now definitely decided to return to fulltime employment; when all was said and done I realised that I'm not enjoying working for myself anymore, and trying to force it wouldn't make things any better.

I have a couple more weeks of project work, then I'm taking July off as both a break and also for job hunting. I don't really want to continue with web design (totally bored of it actually, another big factor in my decision) but I recognise that I will probably need to still do a web job in the short term as those are my only skills. But I'm also going to be applying for other types of jobs to see if someone will have faith in me give me a chance to transfer my skills and experience to something new.

Fingers crossed

[Trantor]

It takes a lot of strength to make such a decision Gambit, and you seem happy about it, so I'm happy for you! It's good you have the motivation to keep changing and experience something new. Hope it will all work out for you!

[Jan]

Congratulations for making the final decision, Gambit, and fingers crossed for finding a good job!

[Gambit37]

Goodness, back in June I said I was going back to fulltime work. Well, that didn't happen -- I got a couple of nice little projects that have kept me busy recently. But now I'm done with those and really, absolutely and definitely have decided to get a full time job. I can't believe it took me over a year to really properly make that decision, but I think I needed to be 100% sure about it, and I finally am.

I hope to have a new job before Christmas. That's unlikely though, so I'm aiming to have one by end of January. (I was going to just say "end of Jan" but with an esteemed forum member of that name, it might have sounded weird...

[Jan]

Good luck!

[Gambit37]

Thanks

I'd forgotten how tiresome this job hunting malarkey is though. Too many job specs asking for unattainable "kitchen sink" skillsets -- you have to read between the lines. I know I'm skilled and talented in lots of areas and would be a great asset -- but when I read these specs, it makes me think I know nothing and am unemployable!

[beowuuf]

Huh, I think I've seen you commenting on this in many places, and because of that I've not actually commented on any of them! Silly, isn't it!

Anywya, at least you gave it a darn good run, and are chosing to go back ot the job market because of preference rather than not being able to make it on your own terms. Good luck!

Remember to be a politician when you answer job ads! "That's a very good question," and then answer the quetsion you wanted them to ask </yesprimeminister as a shout out to Jan >

[Jan]

a shout out to Jan

But it's Nov now. Anyway, don't try to make me go off-topic again. You've got

Spoiler

almost

no chance.

[Trantor]

Yeah, companies always look for the "egg-laying woolmilksow", as the Germans say. Just keep in mind that the companies know full well that they will not get somebody who meets all the so-called "requirements". Play to your strengths and show the will to learn new stuff, and most of all, be yourself. Good luck with everything!

[ian_scho]

And as you can't fulfil their bloated requirements, they think that won't have to pay you full whack.

[Gambit37]

Feeling low. Finding it really hard to know how to market myself. And recruitment agencies suck.

I look at job specs asking for a "creative web designer" and see what they want, and I know that I'm not that imaginative or creative.

I look at job specs asking for a "front end coder" and see that they want strong Javascript or jQuery, and I know that's not me either.

I'm not a programmer, so I'm not going to apply for "Strong PHP web developer" roles.

I have good knowledge of all these areas. And lots of other areas too. But I'm no specialist. I guess I'm a "web generalist". This makes it hard to feel comfortable about applying for specific jobs that want a more specialist role. The buzz word at the moment is "user experience" -- which is a bullshit phrase involving lots of different jobs, depending who you talk to. I'm not going to market myself as a user-experience designer; to me, that's just part of being a good web designer, and it would feel like I'm riding the bullshit buzz.

I think I've been a generalist for too long and have shot myself in the foot. Am I unemployable!?

[cowsmanaut]

I doubt you've shot yourself in the foot here, I think you're perhaps understating your skills. I imagine a large number of people applying for and getting the job categories you speak of above are people who actually have mid level skills in those areas and expect to "learn on the job" ie they know enough to get by the interview and then just build skill as they work in that area. Those looking for creative people are often not creative themselves, so whatever comes out of your bum is pretty cool. However there are those with the "unknown vision" who can be a pain in your bum instead.. the ones that say "no, can you make it look more cool"? and you say "ok, can you give me an example" .. and they say "well, not ~that~ (points at your work) just cooler.. you know?"... or claim they have a picture in their mind but can't describe it to you... Those people will never be happy even with the most talented and creative designer around..

So I guess what i mean to say is to not underestimate your abilities in comparison to the people filling the job market. I know a lot of people working in my industry who shouldn't be there, they neither care to get better and don't do good work.. yet they're still employed..

[ian_scho]

Have you ever thought of managing people and projects, Gambit?

Anyways, your "Websites that work" motto is the best thing to say to a manager or potential client who doesn't know all the jargon terms. I rather like it.

[Gambit37]

I'm beginning to wonder if maybe project management is where I should be headed... I'm not very organised though!

I ditched "Websites that Work" some time ago. I started using "Simpler websites. Better results" when I was going to relaunch my biz -- but then of course I ditched that idea. Anyway, my current site will be disappearing soon and I'll have a new one that's just a basic folio, history and blog. I won't need a salesy type site once I'm working fulltime again.

@Cows: thanks for the words of wisdom I do have a habit of underselling myself!