Well, since everyone else is doing it - my new portfolio site!

[Lau]

I was just going to whore this out using my garish signature, but hell, why not post it too. I've made a new portfolio website, and welcome criticism and suggestions, as well as cash in brown envelopes.

http://www.laurabarnard.co.uk

I felt my old site needed an overhaul, and also took it as an opportunity to learn some CSS. It now also has a fab new "Image o' the day" where there will be a new illustration/photo/image as a front page every morning so hopefully getting more daily visitors, desperate to see what excitement awaits them each morning . I'll be archiving the images weekly on the site.

Thanks for looking.

 

[whocares]

I like the style: simple and effective.
I also like the font you used: same comment as above.

Haven't had time to look at the contents in detail, but that looks interesting too. Will look more tomorow, tis bed time now.

 

[Oryan]

I like how you can click the images to see a sample page. Looks great too!

 

[Aarow]

It's easy to navigate, that's the biggest thing for me+plus it loads fast.

I like the current image of the day .

 

[Lau]

Thanks. I'm really glad you all like it. I was trying to hit a point between stylish graphics and easy navigation with fast loading, so hopefully it's doing something along those lines.

 

[iGary]

I was just going to whore this out using my garish signature, but hell, why not post it too. I've made a new portfolio website, and welcome criticism and suggestions, as well as cash in brown envelopes.

http://www.laurabarnard.co.uk

I felt my old site needed an overhaul, and also took it as an opportunity to learn some CSS. It now also has a fab new "Image o' the day" where there will be a new illustration/photo/image as a front page every morning so hopefully getting more daily visitors, desperate to see what excitement awaits them each morning . I'll be archiving the images weekly on the site.

Thanks for looking.

I miss the staples.

 

[devilot]

I miss the staples.

Haha, I thought those were sooo neat, too. But everybody's got to grow, right?

 

[Lau]

I miss the staples.

Haha, I thought those were sooo neat, too. But everybody's got to grow, right?

I can send you both some staples.

Do either of you think it's missing the 3D-ness of the other site? The staples as navigation became a bit problematic - I could never remember where stuff was so I'm sure no-one else could. I also thought with iWeb doing a lot of the stuff that the old one had - 3D bits, paper edges to photos, etc. that it was going to look pretty unoriginal if I used it for the new site as well.

I'm open to suggestions. Although if you tell me to redesign the entire thing I will cry, and it will be your fault.

 

[devilot]

No, I think the concept and the actual appearance of the staples were really fresh and innovative. That said, I bet some less savvy people wouldn't have even 'discovered' them. It was an extra step to 'hover' over each staple to see what it would link to.

By the way, I got a huge kick out of the Trifle video... not sure what about it in particular.

As for 3D-ness... I dunno. Shrug. I'm not in graphic design or anything 'professional' so I don't think I can be of much help.

I do think that maybe, the old little matchbox/thingiemajig that 'opened' up feels more 3D than what I've seen on this revised version. But the way you photographed and displayed each 'book' or whatnot still feels 3D and the special touch of zooming in is nice.

 

[iGary]

I can send you both some staples.

Do either of you think it's missing the 3D-ness of the other site? The staples as navigation became a bit problematic - I could never remember where stuff was so I'm sure no-one else could. I also thought with iWeb doing a lot of the stuff that the old one had - 3D bits, paper edges to photos, etc. that it was going to look pretty unoriginal if I used it for the new site as well.

I'm open to suggestions. Although if you tell me to redesign the entire thing I will cry, and it will be your fault.

I like what you have done, but your old site had a lot of texture to it. I'm not sure I like the font, either, but I can't do a Web site anyway, soooo.

 

[devilot]

I like what you have done, but your old site had a lot of texture to it.

There we go. Thanks, Gary. I couldn't think of just what I missed about the previous one. That's it.

 

[Lau]

I like what you have done, but your old site had a lot of texture to it. I'm not sure I like the font, either, but I can't do a Web site anyway, soooo.

Hmm, I'll have a think about it. I do know what you both mean regarding the 3D-ness and texture. Maybe even a paper-like border on the images or putting the 'logo' on something might be just enough to get it inbetween the two sites. There's a designer called Daniel Eatock who's set up a site that is supposed to be kind of style-free, as in the work speaks for itself. Although I designed mine more than he did, the idea was that the work (and the daily image) would set the style to an extent. Having said that, i also liked the texture on my previous site, so maybe a mixture of the two would be pertinent.

As for the font, iGary - it's kinda gross in a good way, I reckon. If was doing, just for example, a more corporate site I'd use something else.

Devilot - the Trifle video was great fun to make as well.

Thanks for the input - it's good to know what people think comparing the 2 sites as well.


edit: Daniel Eatock has an image of the week - dammit! Must have subliminally picked up on that....

 

[Cybix]

I like it. the simplicity is great. I'm a big fan of very simple sites with easy navigation.

I like your designs, all done with mac?

load time is excellent too (important)

pretty cool!

 

[iSaint]

What everyone else said....I like it! Very cool!

 

[Lau]

Aaaargh!

I'm at college and the text looks all screwed up, both on my mate's PB and on the college eMacs in all the browsers. It's putting a huge space or a line return after every word. Still looks ok on my PB - even after emptying the cache.



Please could someone let me know if it looks like the "good" picture or the "bad" picture below on their computer?

 

[Blue Velvet]

Please could someone let me know if it looks like the "good" picture or the "bad" picture below on their computer?

Looks 'good' from here. Windows 2000, IE 6.0.26

I'll reserve the design crit until I've actually looked at the site in some detail.

 

[Mac Heretic]

Jumpy or not

>Please could someone let me know if it looks like the "good" picture or the "bad" >picture below on their computer?

I'm good. No jumps there now. And that is with Firefox 1.5 & XP.

 

[Lau]

Looks 'good' from here. Windows 2000, IE 6.0.26

I'll reserve the design crit until I've actually looked at the site in some detail.

I look forward to it - much respect on your opinion, as always.

Thanks, both of you, for checking it out - I'll have to work out what's sending it insane at college, but at least the rest of the world is seeing it on it's 'good' side.

 

[yellow5]

Good.

Safari 2.0

10.4

 

[eyeon]

Very nice work. The "10 things you didn't want to know about me" book is brilliant. What a fantastic idea... I'm now quite curious about the other 9 things...

 

[SpaceMagic]

Great site laura, its so neuvo riche (in a good way).

Love that ten things book... was wondering though, how do you publish these things/make them into books?

 

[etoiles]

Please could someone let me know if it looks like the "good" picture or the "bad" picture below on their computer?

text looks fine in Firefox 1.0.7 on XP (I know, I know)
cool portfolio !

 

[Dunepilot]

Ah, David Devant and His Spirit Wife - highly underrated. I once supported them with my old (pop/rock) band. They were wonderful.

Like the site in general. Simple is good as far as I'm concerned

 

[iPhil]

Good site Lau .. nice-n-simple site


Loads quick on X.4.5/2.0.3 safari system ..


wtf is Staples??

 

[devilot]

wtf is Staples??

Her previous site's links were images of staples... you had to click on the staples to go to the corresponding link. They were really neat.