I did not like the scroll on the scroll bar of the information, about us pages. for some reason it did not stop at the places I expected it to stop.

Other than that it looks really good, excellent job! I don't mind flash sites as long as it is presented well, and is easy (ish) to navigate and the content keeps me interested.

Ed

John,

That is a very nice site... it has a great feel to match the movie... it is attractive and interesting without being distracting from the point.. many kudos... I love the actor video clips with the name... it is a really nice presentation of the data...

I agree with Ed on the scroll bar issue... you have a dampened movement there which is attractive, and works well on the shorter text, but on the longer ones it is misleading... you move the scroll bar until the text is showing what you want, and then the text keeps going becuase it is catching up... you could dapen the motion less, or base it on the length of the text ....

The only other thing for me was that when the actor information was open, it is positioned such that we can still see the other actor shots... That being the case, I would like to be able to click on one of them to bring them up... it is a hair cumbersome to have to close the window and choose another...

Looks great, keep it up.

I definitely agree with Barry. I had just read his post and I still tried to click on the actors pictures rather than close the window first. It wasn't a big distraction though. I like the site overall. Yes, it's a flashy Flash site, but it works to create the mood. As longs as it's helping you communicate then be as flashy as you want.

Great feedback! Thanks a lot, guys!

Robert - I'm mulling over how to redo the "replay intro/close window" buttons now. Using a target comes to mind, but I'm worried that might be overdoing it with targets. I'll have to chew on that one a bit. As for the bullseye thing...that's originally what I'd planned on doing...making it more like a real game. I haven't had any luck figuring out how to do that, so finally I'd just given up and left it as is. I thought that it probably wouldn't matter to anyone. Then...first comment I receive...you mention it. Doh! I'm determined to figure it out now.

Ed - Good point about the longer scroll pages having a bit too much play in the scroller. Barry, you hit the nail on the head as to why that's happening. I'll work on that today, too.

Barry & Kris - You've also hit an issue that I tried to deal with. I also wanted people to be able to go from one actor to another without hitting the "Close Window"...but the way I set it up (the wrong way) made that impossible. I have an idea how to do it to fix that, but it'll take a whole different approach to what I have now. The fact that two of you have mentioned it tell me that I have to roll up my sleeves and just do it.

Again...thanks a million! I've got some work to do now.

John, I think it looks great... of course it's 10:35pm right now so maybe you made changes.

I can see how some people are bothered by Flash, but when you don't have a ton of information to convey I say "why not". Sure there are sites with SO much to see/read that Flash would be a pain in the ass, but for a site that basically wants to showcase a few works or ideas I think Flash only gives surfers one more reason to take the whole site in.

That Chipotle site kept me busy for 10 minutes. Had it been just a text and photos site I never would have unintentionally learned everything about Chipotle.

I like websites for a variety of reasons... a good "blog" site is great, news sites can be good, and Flash is just in another category.

This thread has sold yet one more copy of MX 2004 for Macromedia... I'll get some crap on my site in the next few days... but once the Flash get's here I'm gonna' see what I can do.

You guys are giving me some good inspiration. It's fun to be able to appreciate the nuances of a Flash design. Barry and John you guys ought to be happy that more people (at least ME) are appreciating your attention to detail.

"I'm mulling over how to redo the 'replay intro'/'close window' buttons now. Using a target comes to mind, but I'm worried that might be overdoing it with targets."

Don't misunderstand me, I don't think anything's wrong with the buttons, it's the sound that plays when you mouseover them that strikes me as a tad gauche.

Ahh...I see. You struck a nerve since I'd been debating about using the text "<<<" arrows. My thinking was that they're a bit bland. Thought that was what you meant. The sound, eh? Hadn't thought of that...but now that you mention it, it doesn't really match, does it?

Matt...thanks a lot. I haven't had time to fix anything yet (still the work day over here). I agree with you completely... if it's simply a "show off" site, then show off. Sites that are heavy with information, though, should keep the use of Flash light...if needed at all. Take DVInfo.net for example... I love the fact that it's basically just text. Fast-loading. No nonsense. Just the facts.

As for purchasing Flash MX 2004... Barry will have to verify this...but I think that the scripting help functions found in MX have been removed in the 2004 version. Is that right, Barry? I use MX, so I'm not entirely sure. But I've heard something to that effect, and if that's the case, I'll warn you that Flash actionscripting isn't as straightforward and easy to do as you might think. No problem with the basic stuff...but when you get into the advanced scripting, look out. I'd be lost without the scripting help function.

John: I think flash can definitely be an asset, only not as the
main navigation due to usually a bad use of screenspace or just
to show off.

In my mind it can definitely add to things like what you are
using it for. I once saw a link here on DVi to a site that also
used flash as a sort of fast trailer for the movie. That can be
very handy.

I usually just don't like sites that are 100% flash or have used
it in places that I think: why? what does it add.

Anyway, I didn't like some of the loops you used on the actors.
They basically where jump cuts and it looked very jarring to my
eye. I would probably either when hitting the end go 100% in
reverse to get back at the beginning or fade out / in or fade
through to another scene. The skipping annoyed me <g>

RKS, Barry, and Kris,

I put in fixes for the things you mentioned. Also added a "spinning reel" effect to the preloader based on a suggestion. Still working on a couple of other things.

Rob...you know...I like the jump cuts for some reason. Chalk it up to bizarre taste. ;)

Flash can be good and bad. For people on dialup connections ,which is still a large number of people, sitting and waiting for a flash page to load can take very long! It's better to have the option of a HTML or a Flash page on the main screen so the users can select which one they would like.

you can check out my website...

www.motuspictures.com

For some reason on my friend's computer, the images are all cut up, but on mine, it works fine... not sure how it will look for you. i know nothing about HTML or web design, so be patient with it. I'm still trying to figure out how to use Adobe GoLive.

If you know anybody who has a passion for website design and will help out on one for free, let me know. i need help!

You might also want to check this thread out:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?threadid=11374&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

Gino,

I think you did a good job. It's simple, has a sort of retro art deco-ish or 60s look to it. Don't be so hard on yourself. I like it.

The first thing I noticed though is that you are using a large graphic for the background image. I don't know if you know this, but you can tile a small background in a table as well. That would make your page load faster.

Keep at it...you've got a good start.

I want to second Jason's point about knowing what connection speeds your viewers have. You don't necessarily have to play to the lowest common denominator, but it's easier to know how much you want to accommodate them if you know how many of them there are. I recently went through all sorts of hoops with assorted IT folks to get a breakdown of my viewers' connection speeds to find that my percentage of broadband users was depressing, though not surprising and actually not all that bad compared to rumors I've heard about the larger world out there.

one of the best sites i have ever come across was
www.delpadre.com

no relation to myself (my usual online nickname is Padre)

www.rbravo.com

Nothing fancy, just some cool stuff and a whole lot of great memories!

I hope to have it completed within the next week or so.

RB

New additions, including links to DVInfo, if anyone cares!

www.rbravo.com

I'll be adding a wider variety of links and some video clips in the near future.

RB

hehe...heres my shameless plug :)

http://www.john-garcia.com

John,

I really liked your site. Very visual with good graphic design. It had me wanting to see more.

Regards,

Mark

hey thanks mark...i appreciate the comment! :D

dunno if someone's mentioned this yet but:

http://2advanced.com

mine's under construction...

agencyb.com

but is fun in the meantime... don't get caught.

it should be fairly weird in a couple of weeks.

<<<-- Originally posted by Yi Fong Yu : dunno if someone's mentioned this yet but:

http://2advanced.com -->>>

WOW! Thats a pretty pimp site, nice portfolio too.

I updated mine!! :)

http://www.john-garcia.com

=)

here's mine

http://www.terraform.tv/

Nice site Corey, but the pop ups are a bad idea. My pop-up blocker pretty much makes you're site un-viewable. With the blocker off, it just becomes a big mess of browser windows.

Nice site though, I like the graphic design.

Really nice site, Corey...design and content-wise.

Michael...I have to respectfully disagree with you. I'm all for blocking automated popups, but a popup window that's part of the site, holds content instead of ads, and is triggered only by a clicked link simply adds another dimension to the site. That's part of design, right? Operating outside the box?

Yeah, you're right, I'll give it a chance, it could just be my pre-conceived notions at work :-)

<<<-- Originally posted by John Locke : Really nice site, Corey...design and content-wise.

Michael...I have to respectfully disagree with you. I'm all for blocking automated popups, but a popup window that's part of the site, holds content instead of ads, and is triggered only by a clicked link simply adds another dimension to the site. That's part of design, right? Operating outside the box? -->>>

yes, thinking "out of the box", litterally, but if he wants to capture viewers utilizing pop-up blockers, it's really not a good idea to have your content pop-up in a new window.

it's all about best practices and accessibility. if youre willing to lose a few viewers due to inaccessibility, then so be it. id at least offer an alternative solution.

nonetheless, nice job.

It's just a matter of taste, John. Blocking all popups to me is like blocking all traffic on a street because some people speed. I'm looking forward to the next generation of the Net where we start developing not only in 2D, but in 3D (true 3D) and windows can be round, Apple-shaped, or whatever you want, show depth-of-field and perspective distortion, etc.

This current flat, catalogue-type Net will hopefully soon be a thing of the past.

Corey...opening a new "making of" thread about one or more of your favorite videos you've made would be an interesting read.

Agreed, John. I absolutely hate conforming to best practice rules and catering to restrictions to ensure the widest accessibility possible.

There will always be new innovations that make these obstacles much easier to defy. I am looking forward to seeing net technology advance in the near future as well.

After viewing Mr. MacGregor's site, I have to side with John (Garcia), and Michael on this one. Having two pages, one that's your website and one that gets you IN to the website, is like having two doors on the front of your house (no, I'm not counting storm doors here; they do something); it adds one more completely unnecessary step to a process that needs only one.

As much as I despise these "floating turd-dropper" websites ("floating" 'cause of the popup, and "turd-dropper" 'cause of the useless window it leaves behind, stinking up the background...not that I'd want that background window to be closed, mind you, I just rather it not happen in the first place), I hate it even more when someone else resizes my windows for me. They are MY browser windows, and I have them the way I want them for a reason. Matter of fact, I browse with everything maximized, so Corey's site made the window smaller.

"Blocking all popups to me is like blocking all traffic on a street because some people speed."

I disagree. I find that blocking all popups is like blocking all traffic on a street (that goes through a school zone) because the vast majority of people speed, and travel that particular street for no good reason, considering there's another, much better way to get where they want to go. Anything you want to say with a popup can be said much more effectively, much more quickly, and much less annoyingly with a standard layout.

A moot point, really, since every popup blocker I'm familiar with lets you override the blocking for certain websites. And I didn't even have to do that here; Firefox was able to see the popup wasn't a bad one, and let it through.

"It's just a matter of taste."

True, to a point. I had blue text on a black background on my site for the longest time, simply because it fit the color scheme. "My motif must remain consistent", I said. Eventually, however, common sense made me realize what a ridiculous idea it was to begin with, since my visitor couldn't read anything.

In the case of sites like Corey's, the design is hardly so intrusive. But it's still mostly hated (nothing personal, of course). It doesn't matter how many individuals find the Ford Gremlin, Pontiac Aztec, or GMC H2 to be stylish vehicles, they are still hideously ugly, and most people don't like them. Many found Daikatana an enjoyable computer game, but it still--pardon my French--sucked to high heaven, and most of us saw this. The list goes on and on.

Likewise, I don't care if you fancy yourself an artiste, if you expect people to visit your website, you must either stick to traditional means of construction, or implement your innovation in a way that isn't detrimental to viewers. The site is the MEANS to an end, not the end itself. It only exists to convey information to the viewers, and if you let the site become the focus, creating a visually stunning but boundlessly awkward layout with the excuse of "I like it", you're being a dink, frustrating those who try to find things on your site. Feel free to "change the rules" if you truly think it necessary, but don't complain when we stay away in droves.

Focus on the content, dammit! "Form follows function." Most of the best stories of all time have stuck to the standard three-act structure. Perhaps not intentionally (I've always seen it as something that arises naturally from the story's needs, rather than something that you must strive for), but the fact remains that tried and true methods can yield impressive results. I know many here, myself included, hate it when self-styled "auteur" filmmakers do things differently; changing the status quo simply because they can, and making so-called "experimental" films, later whining about how "you just don't get it" when the finished product is horrible. The same holds true for websites.

Before getting you TOO furious, Corey, I would like to point out that of all my comments, I took issue only with your use of a popup, and some window-resizing script. The actual design of the site, and the content thereof, was quite nice. The rest of my complaints are of a much more general nature, and not directed at any one particular site I've seen displayed here.

<<In the case of sites like Corey's, the design is hardly so intrusive. But it's still mostly hated>>

Corey... keep in mind that the opinions you'll hear most are the negative ones. There's always a silent group out there that like what you're doing but don't speak up.

Robert, if I'm making a site to sell something like home appliances, I'll make it in a no frills, functional, easily-recognizable, easy-to-navigate format. But Corey's is a creative site and is designed in the spirit of creative expression and freedom from rules. That's the same philosophy behind why the Guggenheim museum doesn't look like a Wal-Mart.

Good points, Robert. I too agree that accessibility and "form follows function" should be a priority when designing and developing Internet driven information vehicles.

It's all about using creativity and innovation to build something that not only meets the standards, but is truly unique.

All in all, to each their own. Keep up the great work.

"Most are negative ones."

Well, yeah. I find negative criticism helps me more than positive. As much as I may appreciate being praised, it's only when people complain that I have a chance to improve things. Of course, it's up to Corey to decide whether I'm right or wrong--if you feel people's critiques are off base, well, forget about 'em.

And when I said the design of his site was "mostly hated", I was incorrect, in a sense. The design is pretty cool, once you get in, it's just the WAY you get in that bugs a lot of visitors. That popup window style of website irks me, though I honestly can't tell you exactly why.

"Robert, if I'm making a site to sell something like home appliances, I'll make it in a no frills, functional, easily-recognizable, easy-to-navigate format."

You know, your site meets the mark for what I consider a no frills, functional, easily-recognizable, easy-to-naviagte format. While it is quite aesthetically appealing, I also find I have no trouble finding the things I need, and the different sections of the site load briskly (contrary to some Flash sites I've encountered).

In the end, my points boil down to this: unless you're creating a website AS a piece of art, I feel you should be making a concerted effort to encourage navigation friendly design. You are, after all, trying to show something to your fans. Whether it's home appliances that you need to move, or independent films you want to make famous, you're still trying to "sell" something, in various definitions of the word, to your audience.

Can't a site be artistically satisfying AND "transparent" (i.e. doesn't get in the way) at the same time?


I don't want to drag my comments out any longer than necessary, and get us too far off topic, so here's my site (http://www.gyroshot.com/), the model of no frills, functional, easy-to-navigate, bland, boring, uninspired, contentless design, for those interested parties.

I think cool may be different to other people, so I would hate to say that I have the coolest website around, but I probably do have the coolest website around here... not to sound like a dickhead, I must give credit to the guys that designed it with me.

my website http://www.jonathanlennard.com

the designers, and their other cool sites www.xxs.fr (they are French)

Jonathan, love it, that is a cool site! freakin' French :-p The trailer was very funny and I like the rest of your work.

Browsing for info is mostly very tireing and boring. I'd really like, as boring as it may seem.., a standarized format how a webpage should look like, where to find things et.c.

I'll give you an example for you to see what I mean. You want to fly from A to B and as cheap as possible. So, you start your search on the www to see where you can get the cheapest deal. The problem is that for every airline you enter you'll have to waste a considerable amount of time just to get used to their system and where they have put the info..
Makes me want to pick up the phone and ask the simple question for a quick answer.. Of course you can' do that anymore.. (Browsing the computer voices by phone is even more tireing..)

Enough rant.. (I get truly upset when I think about hours wasted in pursue of things..)