Quote Originally Posted by Flip ツ View Post
Well, that's just about the most in depth Crit I've ever received. Great stuff.
I feel I made an uneducated decision with the footer font, and alot of people have been getting on me about it.. It's a good point, and I will change it accordingly. At the time, I figured it was more of a copyright induced font.
Copyrights are copyrights are copyrights.


2 - The whitespace in the who am i and adjacent boxes are a little much, I think. I'm definately going to cut that down. as far as the 'whitespace' in the banner, I don't intend on cutting that down at all, to be honest. I'd personally prefer to keep it like that. Meanwhile, you do present good points.
It's just a personal preference for me. I do agree you should probably bring the width up for the 2 content sections.

I have a hard time trying to get width or horizontally places objects working in different browsers/resolutions. I just can't do it. Though, vertical doesn't seem to pose a threat to me as much...
Working with grids and relative positioning help make this a much simpler job. With fluid layouts, you have to account for so many things as opposed to a fixed width where alot of things are easy to predict. And even better, no matter the size, it looks the same.

I cant say im too sure I know what your talking about for the 'repeated cloud' I just opened the page up in a 1600x900 res monitor, and I couldn't see any problems actually. The only thing I noticed was a small blank space to the right of the page, enabling a horizontal scrollbar.

The idea I came up with (learned from IPB style headers) was I put the image of the clouds aligned to the right. then to the left, I put a 1px wide image of the sky's gradient on repeat, therefore making the banner expandable width-wise for all browsers and resolutions. If you look closely to the left of the banner, it is faintly noticeable. So far, I haven't found a wide monitor the banner doesnt look normal in in chrome/firefox. Let me know what your using..


It may show up the same for you, but it shows up clearly for me. A repeated image used to fill space works well if done correctly, but if you just take a 1px chop from a fairly complex image, you get a "stretched" appearance, and it's a little ugly. I was thinking a fixed image that could fit the div at a reasonable size would be a better alternative. I use a 1900x1200 monitor, and while I don't expect it to look perfect (not everyone surfs the web with 23" monitors), you should try to account for different resolutions.


5 - im confused by this, actually... either way, I refer to the repeated cloud up in point 3.



Hope that clears things up a little for ya.