Finally was able to re-design our OWN site…what do you think?

[Luminated]

Some of you might have remembered what our site looks like before. If not, still open to any and all feedback you might have!

http://goodchee.com

[Kermet]

I really love the design!

However, the site looks really bad in IE8, but i guess you already knew that? :)

[Luminated]

@Kermet Not all all! I checked in IE8 and I don’t see any problems on any pages. What are you seeing?

[Luminated]

@karlpcrowley thanks for the feedback. I’ll think about the NDA thing.

Was the site slow loading for you? I ran it through http://gtmetrix.com and got 89% with a page load time of 1.64 seconds which is pretty speedy. It can always be faster though, so I will look into that, as well.

[Kermet]

@Luminated my bad, i thought i had IE 8 on my VM (running osx), but i have IE 6 still…

..i guess it’s enough if any site loads at all on that one… :)

[TheDoc]

Looks good! I’m generally not a fan of sticky footers, but I think it would work perfectly with this design.

[Luminated]

@TheDoc…Same here. I thought I could sneak by without needing to use one since most of the pages are fairly long…but sounds like there’s some pages where it edges up a bit?

Also, this is the first mobile-friendly site we’ve done using @media queries. Fun stuff!

[tobeeornot]

I think it looks great and is easy to navigate.

Just wondering what strategy you adopted for keeping the bandwidth low for images when decreasing the responsive design?

[Luminated]

@tobeeornot Actually still working on that quite a bit. As of now, its just a lot of display:none, which isn’t ideal. But with 4G networks going to be the standard soon, not sure if it matters as much.

It was our first real attempt at a responsive design, so still strategizing what the best solution will be, short of re-directing to a completely separate but mobile site (which I’d rather not do).

[tobeeornot]

@luminated – I’m still struggling with that issue which is why I asked. Even with 4G becoming available, I think it would be great to find a solution as it to some extent undermines the point of responsive design. What do you think?

[wolfcry911]

for the NDA, why not use the more appropriate abbr element?

[chrisburton]

@luminated. Do you think the two menus (especially the footer) is necessary? The scrolling is extremely minimal.

Also, the textured background does not seem to fit the design very well. I would personally go with something lighter.

I really like what you’ve done with the services page. Very nicely done.

[Luminated]

@ChristopherBurton We wanted the double nav to emulate the curves of our logo (its as if its the curve of the edge of a zoomed in “chee” logo). Beyond that, most pages have a quite a bit of scrolling actually, like the Portfolio, About and Blog.

We played with texture a whole lot but this one still felt the most unique. We really love all the dots (rather than lines). I could see it being a bit lighter, but I’d be curious to see what others think.

[chrisburton]

As a suggestion – If you’re strict on keeping the bottom one, I would take the information, remove the blue bar and apply it inside the curve. The second menu really serves no purpose.

My opinion on texture is that most use too much. You have a nice clean design without it and I think the background makes it look entirely dirty. I would lighten the color of the background and lower the opacity of the texture.

[TheDoc]

I hadn’t actually noticed before that it was a duplication of the main nav. I would agree with @ChristopherBurton on that one, the menu being duplicated doesn’t particularly serve a purpose to the user. Perhaps you could replace it with a more subtle tagline.

[Author]

Posts