A small favor to ask

[kjohnson]

Ya, I'll convert to to jpeg format on the images. At the moment, the site is hosted at home so the website is sharing with all my other usage. Once all the photos are in jpeg, I'll see if I'll be able to fit everything on my ISP allotment of web space, or search out a decent cost effective (read:free) host.


Joe: I like the XS750 as well. It is the one that gets the most looks as well as brings on the most confused questions. About 90% of the people think it sounds "almost like a twin but not quite" the remainder feel it sounds " like a 4 banger missing on one cylinder". It is definitely the meanest sounding of all my bikes.

[TopCatGr58]

Hey Kevin,

More feedback. Like Phil said, the actual full sized pix take waaaaaay too long to load up, even though we are on high speed cable access, YOUR ISP and web server may not provide that fast of a bandwidth!?

Your full images are only 1500 x 1000 pixels, but they are in PNG format, not JPG format, and UNLESS you wanted someone to be able to print the images....like family shots for relatives, then you'll want to RESIZE them down a bit....ie. 1024 x 768 max, and use JPG format, with about 75% quality, or is that 75% compression?? Anyways, you shoudl be able to get those down to a few hundred K bytes in file size vs. the 2+ MB that they are now!

Keep at it, looking better every day!
T.C.

[bikerphil]

Internet Exploder 8, Vista, Comcrap hi-speed over here. Site seems to work properly. Clicking on thumbnail pics, large pics take a while to load.

[webbcraft2150]

I have IE7 with Win XP, and all I get is a black page with some red letters. All the links to the left seem to work though.

Tod

I have a black thumbnail and what I think is a a zit behind my left ear, its red anyway. I don't have XP but I know I have an XS. Is this a oil thread?

[joceiphus]

Good lookin' site, and good lookin' bikes!
My favorite is the xs750. It judt looks cool.

Joe

[kjohnson]

some pics of each bike now up for those that are interested.

[kjohnson]

I'm on windows xp and there's a big problem. There's all these bikes listed, but no pictures. Fix that and you'll have yourself somethin'!

Joe

Workin on that. Sifting through 2GB of photos to find the few I do have.

[joceiphus]

I'm on windows xp and there's a big problem. There's all these bikes listed, but no pictures. Fix that and you'll have yourself somethin'!

Joe

[kjohnson]

<snip> Good Luck, hope this helps in your future designing process.
T.C.

Thanks for all the comments. I'll make an adjustment to the width of the layout. I forget that some people may not have a large screen or wide screen. I myself have not used a screen with less than 1280 pixel width in a very long time. Not quite as long as it's been since I made my last web site from scratch (the BLINK tag had just come on the scene), but still a long time. I even have my parents set up with 1280x1024, but I did increase the font and icon size. But since it appears that approx 37% of internet users are still using 1024x768, I will make the change. I will put in some sort of border to mark the transition between sections and brighten the text up.

[TopCatGr58]

Hey there Kevin,

I'm an old"er" fart as well, not as old as Fredintoon though!

I'm also a little bit of a geek as well. I'm also a certified ophthalmic technician with over 25 year experience, so I know a little bit about eyes and vision.

The stats, IE7 on XP SP3, on laptop 14" screen at 1024 x 768 res. I have an old 21" CRT on my desktop but it's also set to 1024x768. The top banner text scrolls off beyond my screen and induces a little side scrolling to see it. In the old internet days and early computers, the standard res screens were 640 x 480. Several years ago it went to 800 x 600, and then recently 1024 x 768. The new HD standard is 1920 x 1080. I've got my browser set to show MEDIUM sized fonts. So far with most web pages I view I don't have to sidescroll to see the whole page, but a few pages do require that.

Your red font on black background provides a modest amount of contrast, but the red is rather dark, and so it does make it a bit more difficult to see compared to a brighter color against the darker background.....or using a darker color on a lighter background....similar to a regular printed page.

Also, using some tables, or graphics to better isolate or enhance the separate sections of the page, like the menu on the left, etc., can help folks to direct their attention towards those features to make navigation around the page more intuitive.

As you've seen from the comments here, different OS's, different browsers, and no telling what variety of types of monitors are being used, some folks may still have their little 14" desktop CRT monitors, whereas others may have monstrous 25" HD flat panels. Some folks don't know how to adjust or set their monitors to different pixel resolution settings, so they may have them set too low or too high which causes the fonts to appear quite small independent of what they have their browser VIEW FONT size settings to!

Humans and men specifically are visually stimulated animals, but it's a fine line between variety in the format and one that's too BUSY! Good Luck, hope this helps in your future designing process.
T.C.

[Bigfoot]

IE8 on Vista. Looks fine.

[trbig]

LMAO...


"CAN YOU MAKE THE FONT BIGGER PLEASE?"

You could set the site up for strictly the geriatric?? lol..

I jest.. yet it's me in a couple years that will be made fun of. I can tell my eyes are going a little each year.


Tod

[Rasputin]

Yup the pics do the thing they are sposed to. i would prefer bigger font myself, but I am old ya know

[kjohnson]

Ok, font size is bigger across the board. Anyone want it bigger still?

And if ya click on the little pictures, the should become bigger.

[XJOK2PLAY]

*Applause..* You have now made the graduation to TRI-focals...


Tod

It's just so frustrating.... I don't know what people are thinking when they write or type things lately... the print just keeps getting smaller!!!!