An Overwhelming Response

I cannot believe the reaction the redesign has received. Do this many people even use the internet during the summer months? There are some questions to answer, some niggles to address and some facts to get straight (pun intended). Since the previous post already has 82 comments it’s probably a good idea to start fresh here:

Shaun just called me from a gay bar to give me his ftp info so that I could launch his site.

Nice one Stan, except it was a gay cafe. Gahd! I’m in San Francisco on business and you know what they say, “When in Rome.”

Might just be me, but all of the italic text is giving me a headache

A number of people have commented or emailed about the italics (sorry Joshua et al). Unfortunately I can’t seem to find any browser combination on any platform that renders the site in italics. Can I trouble someone who is experiencing the issue to post a screenshot to their server and link it up here (or just email me a link and browser/platform info) so I can try to diagnose the problem?

it might look too big on one of my 1024x768 computer

Someone else made a similar comment. What browser and OS? Are there horizontal scrollbars or is it simply that my logo is being cropped? If that’s it, then is it really “too big” for 1024x768?

Don’t you people get it? The small type is an implicit mechanism to filter out all non-designers from reading the site.

Ah, Mike. Always the Outspoken Advocate. He’s partly right.

For me, relationships and relative proportions are everything in a design. It’s very hard to control those relationships on the web (I still struggle with it—obviously). I haven’t been able to create my button treatments on the same scale as larger type without them looking horsey and awkward or rising in the hierarchy. I’m not entirely satisfied either but you need to move on at some point. As some of you who have been poking around in my source noticed I have a feature planned to improve readability by increasing contrast and type size and storing that preference in a cookie. Wait for it.

Shaun, I believe it’s “Goodlett” with two t’s.

Ouch, and I’m always the one complaining about those people who link me as “Sean Inman” but spell the domain correctly. Thanks Hans.

Finally I’m going to quote myself here:

Please report site errors though my contact form.

And now onto the emails. A handful of people have reported issues with Movable Type dropping the ball on the feed and search pages. I’ve even experienced the issue. While I do appreciate the effort, I don’t need anymore emails or comments (see above) about this particular issue. I hope to have it resolved shortly, thanks for your patience.

A number of people have been asking me to help them with ShortStat. I’ve written an appropriately short answer to this popular question and even gone so far as to link it from the contact page. Please read it. It’s generally a good idea to read FAQs and any text that appears above a form. Save a little face (and both our time).

I am aware that with JavaScript off the navigation is at the bottom of the page. Clicking the navigation button at the top of the page will drop you down to the anchor at the bottom. This is a consideration for people viewing the site on alternative devices. It is not a mistake or broken.

All that said, I really excited about, pleased by, and grateful for all the kind words and helpful criticism everyone has shared. I plan on adding more info to the about page (mostly colophon info) and documenting some of the more interesting things I’ve done with Movable Type in the near future.

Previous
About the Author (circa 2006)
Next
Enhancing Form Labels
Author
Shaun Inman
Posted
June 13th, 2005 at 11:52 pm
Categories
The Site
Comments
070 (Now closed)

070 Comments

001

Shaun, I have to agree about the small text. I’ve gotten used to 12pt on my own site and some other sites around the web. I find that i have to squint to read your content when I sit back in my chair. The small text looks great design-wise but it hinders usability. My two cents.

Author
Mike Steinbaugh
Posted
Jun 13th, 2005 11:15 pm
002

Shaun, you humble bastard :P I mean come on, the site is well organized and designed. And how long have you been working it for, a month? well, If I were you, I’d be expecting 50 million hits. :)

Author
tom
Posted
Jun 13th, 2005 11:16 pm
003

I quite like what happens without javascript. It’s a neat idea. And for the small type, you pull it off quite well. I like it a lot.

Author
Jeff Wheeler
Posted
Jun 13th, 2005 11:19 pm
004

Hey I’m on to you! You just redesigned to see if MINT scales well! You needed those hits for the greater good!

Author
Tinus
Posted
Jun 13th, 2005 11:22 pm
005

Awesome redesign. Really dig the navigate / Search feature!

And customizable feeds? Man, you have way to much time on your hands Shaun!

Author
JBagley
Posted
Jun 13th, 2005 11:28 pm
006

I’ve been scaling the text up one in Firefox on this site now to read the content, Just can’t read it at all. guess it’s my bad vision and glasses :(

Author
SteveC
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 12:11 am
007

I cannot believe the reaction either.

I mean its nice and clean, but its also pale and bleak, has no real content, has way too small letter size and that red - well that red has no character, its safe red. Safe is boring.

Thanks

Author
Jani
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 12:27 am
008

Hey, this site is designed for designers, isn’t it? So designers should know how to read it. I just increased the font-size with the browser and it is readable even for me…

Author
Markus
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 1:28 am
009

Great design as always, but I have to agree with some of the other commenters here. The text is way too small.

Wouldn’t be a problem at work, where I site quite close to a couple of good monitors, but at home I site at arms’ length of an El Cheapo 15” LCD and an old 21” CRT, and the text is painfully small. And too low-contrast.

Yay Firefox for ctrl-mouse wheel :)

That said, I’m struggling with text size issues too—I’m looking forward to your solution.

Author
Michel Vuijlsteke
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 2:44 am
010

Yes, you can resize it if you want to, but that means that every single other site will be resized as well. So I’ll be scrolling up for shauninman.com, and then scrolling down when leaving it.

I agree with Jani on what he said - it’s all just too pale and white.

Author
Leszek Swirski
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 2:48 am
011

How do you hinder a designer away if I’m already getting this much pleasure by squinting while still loving the design. drool I wish had even 100k of hits. :P

Anyway, looking forwrad to more fresh looks and share the thought if it comes. I’m worried another change like this might gimme a heart attack in the future.

Cheers.

Author
dannyFoo
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 4:03 am
012

“I mean its nice and clean, but its also pale and bleak, has no real content, has way too small letter size and that red - well that red has no character”

Jani, I’m curious as to what your solution would be for this pale, bleak, and boring site? What would you have done differently? I’m sure we’re all waiting to hear your brilliant solution.

Author
Justin Goodlett
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 4:40 am
013

I love how you continue taunting us with more and more screenshots (and resources) to follow the progress of Mint. The jealousy that minty green has inspired is becoming known across the web. But really Shaun, great re-design.

Author
Patrick Kelley
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 4:42 am
014

I have to say that I’m not a fan of the “click to open the navigation” idea. I think the main nav should always be visible. Hiding the search is ok I guess, I just don’t understand why you are hiding the important stuff.

Author
qrayg
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 4:49 am
015

The site looks nice, but like lots of others have said, the text is too small. Yes, I could scale it up with ctrl + wheel, but then all of the other sites I view are off. IMHO, web design is about creating beautiful and usable websites. You’ve got the beautiful part down, but the text size is tripping you up on the usable part.

Author
geeky
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:11 am
016

Loving the redesign! One thing - on the colophon page, are the links to books supposed to be to the Japanese Amazon? Just wondering…

Author
David
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:27 am
017

Shaun I grabbed a screenshot and uploaded it to my site, just click the url button and it should take you to: http://kendallstudios.com/BranchedOut/inman.jpg

I had to set the compression rate to 48 or else it would ot taken quite a while to download. But it still appears just as it does on my screen when I visit your site. Maybe it’s the font…what font are you using for the comments, and main text?

Author
Joshua Kendall
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:32 am
018

Aha! Another screenshot!

Author
Hans
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:34 am
019

Interesting when I clicked the link it popped up a “403 Forbidden” error page. The second time it worked though. If you get the error page, just click in the location bar and hit enter.

Author
Joshua Kendall
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:34 am
020

Guess it would help if I posted the browser info huh?

Browser: Firerox Version: 1.0.4 OS: Win XP Home

and I am using the basic page style, instead of my own.

Author
Joshua Kendall
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:39 am
021

Ok, Shaun, remember how it’s called Cascading Stylesheets? Well, I think your visited-link style is cascading down to everything, inlcluding the buttons. For example, if I click on one of the “PAST” buttons to go to, say, the link archives, a straight, horizontal line of red begins from the middle of the left side of the button and extends left, presumably going on forever. That said, I ain’t going in no archives ‘til that line stops scarin’ me!

Here’s my USER_AGENT string: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 Firefox/1.0.4

Author
Hans
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 5:55 am
022

Just one comment… the color you use for links is or the same as the color for normal text, or the difference is just not big enough for colorblind people to pick out the links. I (as a colorblind) have to hover over all the text to pick out the links… quite irritating!

Author
Ronald
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 6:33 am
023

The small type looks great. I’m sitting about 2 feet away from ths old Dell 15” CRT @ 1024x768 which isn’t great for much and I can still read the text just fine.

I also have a 17” Apple Studio Display (The old CRT ones, they’re a thing of beauty!) running at 1280x1024 and it’s still perfectly readable from the same distance.

Small text makes it all look good, if it was bumped up I feel it wouldn’t look the same, it’d be huge and look bloated. The site looks great small, I say keep it.

Author
Casey
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 6:37 am
024

Hans, that’s probably because Shaun did some negative indent image replacement on an anchor and forgot to kill the underline. It doesn’t show on Safari, so that could explain it…

Author
Rob Mientjes
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 6:52 am
025

Text is fine with me

Author
Kim Siever
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 6:56 am
026

Love the fresh interpretation of what was already a great design. To call your site pale, bleak, boring, devoid of content, and safe — well, I can’t say I agree in any way. The polish and attention to detail is impressive, and to do that while retaining an almost minimalist look is laudable. And, as always, the code is tip-top.

With regard to the font size, well, maybe I’m just spoiled by my PowerBook, but I don’t have any trouble reading the text. With just one font size larger, the design begins to suffer — the narrow columns force too much content too far down the page, and you begin to lose the sharp, focused look that you currently have. I can’t say I would have done anything different. Well, except that I would have released Mint at the same time. You know, to satisfy the eager masses ;)

Author
B.J. Schaefer
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:01 am
027

Is the graphic at the top is a screenshot of the next version of ShortStat?

Author
Brian Sweeting
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:04 am
028

For Justin Goodlett (and, with all respect, why not to Shaun, too)

Here are two links for you, I hope they answer your question. To my eye, they have nice, clear, bold look: makikoitoh.com http://interllectual.com

Both sites by women, btw, look and learn gents!

Author
Jani
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:11 am
029

My personal feeling (as if you care) about the text size is that it’s a trademark of this site (and maybe your design style, overall?), and I think the site would lose some of it’s identity without it. Certainly one can make a case that it is too small and has too little contrast for great readability, but frankly, it’s nice to see someone say, once in a while, “damn it, I like the way this looks, so I’m doing it anyway!” As we all know, there is a difference between designing a corporate site for a mass, general audience and designing your own personal playground (which is exactly what are blogs are, for many of us). I think you should be granted more liberty to do what you like in a setting like this.

One of the great things about this redesign is how you managed to totally rework the site and add all sorts of new features and things to look at, but at the same time keep it feeling like the ShaunInman.com we’ve all come to know — and typography is a big, big part of how you did that.

I wouldn’t change a thing, if I were you.

Author
Jeff Croft
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:14 am
030

“Here are two links for you, I hope they answer your question. To my eye, they have nice, clear, bold look:”

http://www.makikoitoh.com http://interllectual.com

Jani - while both sites are fine, I dont see the nice, clear and bold look you speak of. The former is very stark and not in the least bit bold - it does nothing for me. The second is overloaded with color, a bit hard to navigate and a little cliche. Sorry - try again.

Author
Justin Goodlett
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:57 am
031

Justin

Thanks for your comments.

No, I wont try again. Its just you need to cultivate your tastes…

(I’m jokin of course)

Author
Jani
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 8:08 am
032

And right on time… Yes, it may be /sandbox/, but it sure looks like he/she is planning to incorporate some elements into a future design…

Author
Hans
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 8:11 am
033

Jani - I realize what you’re talking about is readability, but other factors must be weighed.

The first site is overly simplified, with little character to define it as unique. Obviously less is more to most designers, but this has too little and does not grab my attention.

The second site, at least in my opinion, is too busy and too diversely colored to focus on any real content. The way the site is laid out, I’m not really sure where to begin.

And as Croft said, this isn’t a corporate site that needs to be 100% accessable to all possible audiences. Like most webdesigners, their blog is where they test their ideas.

Author
Vladimir
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 8:12 am
034

I think the font size is fine, it’s just the italics that I see. It could be the font though. Maybe I should take a peek at the stylesheet and see what the font famil is.

Author
Joshua Kendall
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 8:33 am
035

That’s why the small fonts.. But even for designers, I’d like to think that they’d rather read larger text than smaller ones don’t you think? After all, if you are aiming at the designers, why not satisfy them rather than pushing away the others.

Author
Oliver
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 9:47 am
036

Nice. One word though. Contrast.

Author
Brian
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 10:27 am
037

I like the redesign (well, really, just a re-org :D), except for one thing. The top nav widget doesnt really fit. You have a ton of whitespace up top that could easily be used to rid the site of the “hidden navigation”, while keeping the white space simplicity.

Overall though, the design of the site has maintained the same “Shaun Inman” look and feel, which to this day, amazes me. As for the “small font” comments, it WOULD be a problem if you didn’t use leading and kerning to a perfection. It’s easy on the eyes, and useable. Congrats.

Author
Josh Dura
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 10:46 am
038

the fact that the cool navigation/search slideout is accessible from the top AND bottom of the page — brilliant! Love the small type - even if accessibility be damned. And the colors - in keeping with the old design - very soothing and inviting. Still a fan(boy)…

Author
Brian Tully
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 11:04 am
039

It’s beautiful, don’t change a thing. I don’t have a hard time reading at all, and if it was bigger that would totally ruin the design, IMHO.

Also, what’s this about italics? I don’t see any italics… are other people? If so, I don’t know why. I’m using Firefox 1.0.4 on Windows XP Pro.

Author
Daniel Groot
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 1:40 pm
040

When I saw the Mint screenshot at the top, I expected at least some more news, if not the release of Mint. But no, hardly even a mention. What a tease!! Any chance you are still looking for beta testers?

Author
Josh Jarmin
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 1:50 pm
041

I’m on Safari 2 via OS X 10.4 Powerbook at 1024x768 and your page looks fine. No horizontal scrollers, and the window isn’t even full size.

Author
Reed
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 4:57 pm
042

Shaun, is the image you displayed a new shortstat? :P If so err can i get! Lovely site again and you deserve more than that many visits. The site is well ordered and attractive. Bring on your many other websites

Author
Dave
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 6:42 pm
043

Wow… this looks incredible! Nice update.

Author
Rob
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:36 pm
044

Viewing at 1024x760@106dpi and everything looks gret. Kudos.

Author
Tom von Schwerdtner
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 7:37 pm
045

I was hoping you’d admit that this design was implemented to weed out all non-hackers (Windozers) who don’t pack the gear (OS X) to serve in our beloved Corps (Net). Isn’t it funny how people seemingly ignore the ability to resize text or disable CSS? Always looking for a free ride. Must have it all handed to them.

Author
praetorian
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 9:42 pm
046

Hey Shaun - we know the truth.

“We” as in the team over at 9rules and you will have nowhere to hide. You know it’s the truth :)

And we have no problem making our own acceptance speech thankyouverymuch.

Author
Mike Rundle
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 10:51 pm
047

1st of all - Shaun asked for my opinion. I did share mine.

No amount of argumentation or ‘your facts’ will make me change mine, with over a decade of (web)design under my belt…

2ndly - If you dont appreciate the deceivingly simple, bold, yet peaceful layout (mmm my eyes love you Maki) @ makikoitoh.com ,you.. uhh I simply dont know what to say.

Hehe thanks Shaun, you should start a design forum where designers can argue on which site looks best and which site is crap - lol - HUGE advertising income awaits ya!!

Author
Jani
Posted
Jun 14th, 2005 11:52 pm
048

To hell with all of the “small type” comment crap. You people aren’t considering the primary audience, let alone Shaun’s personal preference. Good lord, can’t a designer exercise some typographic freedom these days without the bloody typesize inquisition?!?! Your arguments are both tired and boring.

Nice work, Inman.

Author
Fatty B
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 2:30 am
049

Oh, one more thing. The logo isn’t obvious enough - I’ve found myself nearly clicking on the (MT) thing too many times, simply because of its placement.

The thing is, the design looks good as a piece of art - but, to me, it just doesn’t look good as a website with content that I want to be able to read wtihout squinting.

Author
Leszek Swirski
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 4:18 am
050

“*No amount of argumentation or ‘your facts’ will make me change mine, with over a decade of (web)design under my belt

2ndly - If you dont appreciate the deceivingly simple, bold, yet peaceful layout (mmm my eyes love you Maki) @ http://www.makikoitoh.com/ ,you.. uhh I simply dont know what to say.*”

Really unbelievable!

Author
Justin Goodlett
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 4:57 am
051

Maybe bit of a silly question to ask at this time, but do you have any idea of the release date of, Mint, and will it be free or would you have to pay for it?

If you have to pay for it, would it be a mounthly thing or not?

Author
flump
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 5:06 am
052

Shawn,

Why do you use the Flash text replacement instead of a simple dynamic page? The Flash text often looks washed out, and, I feel, if you used actual text, it would look much better.

I do realize that the font is not a system font, and you can’t expect to have everyone have that specific font; however, can you expect to have everone to have Flash, or expect them to put up with less-than -optimal font quality?

That’s my only complaint. The other text size is fine, no matter what others may say.

Author
Zachary Lewis
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 6:16 am
053

And right on time. Yes, it may be /sandbox/, but it sure looks like he/she is planning to incorporate some elements into a future design

Haha, no you’ve got the wrong end of the stick fella. Was just a response to some discusion going on over at designers talk

I’m not intending to steal anything, just didn’t like the clunky scrollout. And though I’d try and demonstrate something else.

But that’s the only place I posted the link, so you’d know that anyway.

Author
George
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 7:41 am
054

Zachary: You might want to check out this link to see about Flash’s widespread usage.

Flash is on 98% of Internet-enabled computers and various other applications. It’s safe to say that most people do have Flash installed on their computers.

Author
Casey
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 7:45 am
055

i’m a non-designer, a part-time visitor. i’m 33, don’t wear glasses. this text is dang dang dang tiny and hard to read. i’ll visit a little more part timey, until i get on my 1024x768 ibook.

fwiw i’m on 1600x1200 so maybe i’m particuarly hosed.

thanks for listening :)

Author
jon
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 9:06 am
056

Small text, bah. The majority of Shaun’s users are designers and programmers who know how to wield their way across the web as well as know their web browser (and most likely not using IE). Is it really that hard to press CTRL and + or CTRL and your mouse button up for PC users?

Author
Lea
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 12:33 pm
057

It’s down in FF. I don’t know what was going on with the Italics, I started to upload my new design to a temp folder, when I checked it out on my Desktop (which is what I use to access the internet) it was in italics, just as this site was. All other sites seemed fine, and I know I didn’t code my site in italics. I went under options on the Tools menu of FF, and set it to use my fonts, but not colors, and all sites seem fine, and look the same, just this site, and my temp site look normal.

I even poked around for a good half-hour looking under options to see if there was some checkbox marked “italics” and never found one.

Author
Joshua Kendall
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 12:45 pm
058

ABOUT style: this is FINE art, love the FONT / size / color.

IT works just great - even on a 23” Apple HD Cinema Display with 1920 x 1200 resolution.

YES, I wear glasses (35y - I feel young) ;o)

Author
Christian Irmler
Posted
Jun 15th, 2005 2:51 pm
059

Lea remarks: “Small text, bah. The majority of Shaun’s users are designers and programmers who know how to wield their way across the web as well as know their web browser (and most likely not using IE). Is it really that hard to press CTRL and + or CTRL and your mouse button up for PC users?”

Umm no. Majority seems to be young people and students who are on the fringes of design and web-developement with A LOT to learn.

Try the keyword ‘accessibility’ in google, for instance.

A designer who uses a tiny font? Oh please, thats no designer at all. Learn to make your layouts work with a reasonable font sizes please. Tiny is plain silly, and it looks silly, too.

And it is not only silly, in a ‘I’m-a-90’s flash-coder-kiddo-wanna-be-designer’-sort of a way, but it is also pissing on all the millions of people who have limited visual faculties (YES there are lots of programmers and designers in this group, too). http://9rules.com is very nice, IMHO, another site ith clear legible font size and handsome layout.

Author
Jani
Posted
Jun 20th, 2005 4:16 am
060

Alright, drop the small type talk already. I’ve mentioned that I’m in the process of addressing it. Further posts on the topic will be considered trolling and be deleted.

Author
Shaun Inman
Posted
Jun 20th, 2005 7:11 am
061

I love the design and the layout. I must also say that i totaly agree with styleboost.com:

“Shaun Inman has redesigned his website. The makeover takes the site to a whole new level with a great quick access navigation area. Shaun definitely is a master in his field, or should I say wizard? His standards compliant work shows how Flash is totally needless these days.”

Shaun got 94% out of 100 by the way.

All over the site looks great, easy-to-use, and with many funny/handy extra features.

Shaun, You may delete this: (and if im allowed to say something about the font size: I love it! I got no problems reading it at all. So if you DO make the text bigger, please do not make it default, but as a choice.)

Author
Jens
Posted
Jun 21st, 2005 12:34 pm
062

Never seen such a fantastic blog design as yours, my english is poor to say really what I think

Author
wendy
Posted
Jun 23rd, 2005 7:30 am
063

#comment-001947(mike)

you mean readability. it isn’t less usable. and always use px instead of pt. lol@me being a graphic&webdesigner-wiseass.

oh, and this is not a troll, shaun. never meant to. because i’d like to add that the lack of contrast here may harm readability too. just my 2cents

Author
deadvoid
Posted
Jun 30th, 2005 12:52 pm
064

maybe a suggestion: forgive me shaun …

you could use another icon that indicates to increase or decrease text-size. Not everyone knows the shortcut ctrl + or ctrl - but maybe it would be just too much and destroy the design.

I really think these people complaining about the text-size are too lazy to find out how to enlarge their textsize in the first place.

Only think I dont like is putting your picture on a site … or a silhouette for that matter. But that is my personal opinion

Author
Sensei
Posted
Jul 3rd, 2005 1:15 pm
065

Is there supposed to be an image at the top? (Someone mentioned a banner/image type thing). I can’t see anything but blank, however i do like the blank :p.

Author
Pete Hodges
Posted
Jul 6th, 2005 8:35 pm
066

I love how you basically re-invented the button here. The css/image/list combination is frickin perfect. And the navigate/search thing? Like… whoa. Is that even possible?

We use some of the same tricks, but now I feel pretty damn amateurish seeing how you’ve mastered them. I’m going to have a hard time not borrowing your button ideas. Genius. I’m so glad I did preview-as-you-type before I came here, otherwise I’d feel like a total mini-Shaun.

I’d never actually been to your site before apparently you redid it (so if you already had awesome buttons and that search feature, my bad). I wish I’d seen the changes. Yeah, and good luck 1-upping this one, it’s just about perfect.

Author
Aaron
Posted
Jul 12th, 2005 4:34 am
067

This site is among the best designed in the world. You are inventing the future of the web, my friend.

Love the dynamics you’ve applied here, including the custom made navigation.

Meticulously playing with pixels is something I’ve been doing since 1998, and I will soon be back on the web to show my most recent project.

Keep up the amazing work.

Author
Luc
Posted
Jul 15th, 2005 10:02 am
068

I appreciate the option to increase type size & contrast. It’s still rather on the small size.. how about offering font size based on age range? Current: up to 25 yrs; larger; up to 35 yrs; bigger yet: pushing 50; jumbo: god, 50 felt so young!

You young whippersnappers will be grousing like me after 20 years in front of a computer has completely wrecked your eyesight.

Author
AdrienneA
Posted
Aug 1st, 2005 1:54 pm
069

i want to know how you did that navigation/search feature, i did some designs a couple of years ago that looked very similar but being less a techy more creative i never actually got round implimenting it. It fantastic to see it working so well please tell all if only so we can go away and incorperate (ahem steal) the technique into new designs

Author
lukusdukus
Posted
Aug 2nd, 2005 11:21 am
070

good job shaun. i love almost every little things of this website. the colos scheme, the typography, layout, menu etc. its like you work on this in only 3 hour or less yet it come up really amazing. and i dont have any difficulties reading the text. if you plan on make it bigger, please make it as an option. 1 point means big difference aye?

Author
angga fuyuki
Posted
Oct 27th, 2005 6:32 pm