Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff AMASS Forum Software Talk 
Thread started 21 Jan 2015 (Wednesday) 05:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

A new look.....again.

 
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,011 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5842
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Jan 27, 2015 14:09 as a reply to  @ post 17399877 |  #46

But monitors utilize video drivers and display profiles, and some monitors do indeed come with emulation modes/profiles tailored for srgb vs adobergb. Then software itself can try to display colors using their own color profiles, like photoshop, etc. There are many layers to the color "onion", and you would have to step through those layers to really assess where the "blame" lies in rendering color, whether it's a browser issue, photo software issue, display driver/profile, or some monitor setting.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
HappySnapper90
Cream of the Crop
5,145 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Feb 14, 2015 06:45 |  #47

saea501 wrote in post #17392603 (external link)
So......just when I have gotten used to the new forum it gets yet another change, rearrange, update.....

Not sure I see any advantage to it other than making things hard to find. Is this going to be a monthly thing just to keep everyone guessing? I thought the other format was just fine especially having used it for a while. But hey.......who the hell am I?

Agreed. Things getting abbreviated and still all the different fonts on this site.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pekka
El General Moderator
Avatar
17,784 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 1542
Joined Mar 2001
Location: Hellsinki, Finland
     
Feb 14, 2015 08:50 |  #48

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #17431272 (external link)
Agreed. Things getting abbreviated

Which things exactly are getting abbreviated?

and still all the different fonts on this site.

All the different fonts?

On thread pages for example there are exactly three fonts used: Trebuchet MS Bold for username labels, Tahoma for some small text and Arial/sans-serif for 99% of other use (if two first mentioned are not found, Arial/sans-serif is used instead.

Script font is used for page headers, Title Fairy titles in member page only and on index page forum names (only in full view mode), else the whole site is 99% Arial/sans-serif.

For some vanilla member titles 'GoodDog Regular' web font is used, only on the member page.

Those are the facts. So, what is the actual problem with the fonts?


The Forum Boss, El General Moderator
AMASS 2.1 Changelog (installed here now)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jecottrell
Senior Member
324 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Tucson, AZ
     
Feb 16, 2015 15:11 |  #49

Pekka wrote in post #17431370 (external link)
So, what is the actual problem with the fonts?

Sizes, colors, reverse, bold, italics, CAPS... They are a mess, they are tough to look at and the eye/brain has an incredibly difficult time trying to figure out what to do with them. It is just a continuous visual circus with rounded corners, square corners, drop shadows, raised panels...

In general I think things are slowly getting better, but the busy-ness of any given element, let alone page continues to make it less than enjoyable to use the forum.

I have tremendous respect for the work that you have committed to the site. I offer my comments to be constructive and hope that they are taken that way, not as whining.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Intheswamp
Goldmember
1,421 posts
Gallery: 61 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 625
Joined Sep 2013
Location: South Alabama
     
Feb 16, 2015 21:41 |  #50

I guess I'm just not very attentive, but I honestly am not have issues with the new look. The biggest issue I have is that the "Search" button is way over in the upper right-hand corner and I keep looking for it over towards the left corner where most everything else is located. Other than that, I just read the posts and carry on. :lol:

Ed


www.beeweather.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,011 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5842
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 4 years ago by TeamSpeed. (3 edits in all)
     
Feb 17, 2015 12:09 |  #51

jecottrell wrote in post #17434682 (external link)
Sizes, colors, reverse, bold, italics, CAPS... They are a mess, they are tough to look at and the eye/brain has an incredibly difficult time trying to figure out what to do with them. It is just a continuous visual circus with rounded corners, square corners, drop shadows, raised panels...

In general I think things are slowly getting better, but the busy-ness of any given element, let alone page continues to make it less than enjoyable to use the forum.

I have tremendous respect for the work that you have committed to the site. I offer my comments to be constructive and hope that they are taken that way, not as whining.

Just about every interesting website uses different fonts and colors, so that cannot be an issue. Alot of mixed bold and italics can muddy up a design however. If you use 4 fonts on a website, then use different typesets like bold or italics, then you are now really using 12 different looking fonts in a general sense.

Also, not everyone processes pages the same way, so what one person finds at difficult, others may not have that issue. There is no one format that will satisfy all people, fortunately, otherwise life would be very bland.

We are only into the 2nd major round of changes since going live. I am quite sure the site will evolve into a very clean understandable format over time, it is well on its way just in its current form! :) Even the 3rd gen of Vbulletin wasn't nearly as clean in its function and form as this AMASS 1.1 is (some would even say the most recent version isn't also). ;)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jecottrell
Senior Member
324 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Nov 2012
Location: Tucson, AZ
     
Feb 17, 2015 14:08 |  #52

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17436003 (external link)
Just about every interesting website uses different fonts and colors, so that cannot be an issue.

I would have to disagree, I believe it is very large contributor.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17436003 (external link)
Also, not everyone processes pages the same way, so what one person finds at difficult, others may not have that issue.

So, would you say that accepted web design practices and user interface standards are a waste of time because everyone processes visual information differently?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17436003 (external link)
There is no one format that will satisfy all people, fortunately, otherwise life would be very bland.

You're 100% correct. But, I am trying provide functional feedback and not aesthetic. When aesthetics hurt functionality, the designer hasn't succeeded.


Here is a quick, but highly critical look at the problems with something as simple as a quote.

1. It is a raised button format that implies clicking it will result in some action.
2. There are, essentially, three fonts in the first line: bold blue username, gray "wrote in" and gray-blue "post #XXXXXX"
3. The bold blue username connotes a hyperlink by web standards, but is not a hyperlink.
4. The post number hyperlink isn't "different" enough from the other text to be clearly perceived as a hyperlink.
5. There is new, site unique, graphic that denotes a hyperlink.

So, in the name of decoration and being different, the design has introduced ambiguity and confusion.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OhLook
Spiderwoman
Avatar
18,880 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6627
Joined Dec 2012
Location: California: SF Bay Area
     
Feb 17, 2015 14:20 |  #53

jecottrell wrote in post #17436135 (external link)
2. There are, essentially, three fonts in the first line: bold blue username, gray "wrote in" and gray-blue "post #XXXXXX"

Not three fonts, just three colors. All bold.

4. The post number hyperlink isn't "different" enough from the other text to be clearly perceived as a hyperlink.

Would you prefer it to be more different? You criticized the three text elements in that line for being too different.

I don't find the design of the line that introduces a quote ambiguous or confusing. It doesn't bother me at all. I'd only like the small links at tops and bottoms of pages to be styled more alike and, if possible, to be fewer.


PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | A FEW CORRECT SPELLINGS: lens, aperture, amateur, hobbyist, per se, raccoon, whoa, more so (2 wds.), shoo-in | IMAGE EDITING OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pekka
El General Moderator
Avatar
17,784 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 1542
Joined Mar 2001
Location: Hellsinki, Finland
     
Feb 17, 2015 15:05 |  #54

jecottrell wrote in post #17436135 (external link)
Here is a quick, but highly critical look at the problems with something as simple as a quote.

1. It is a raised button format that implies clicking it will result in some action.

Really, seriously? So you think people think a quote is a button and click it for no end: "why doesn't that button do anything!"?

2. There are, essentially, three fonts in the first line: bold blue username, gray "wrote in" and gray-blue "post #XXXXXX"
3. The bold blue username connotes a hyperlink by web standards, but is not a hyperlink.
4. The post number hyperlink isn't "different" enough from the other text to be clearly perceived as a hyperlink.
5. There is new, site unique, graphic that denotes a hyperlink.

So, in the name of decoration and being different, the design has introduced ambiguity and confusion.

Yes, that line could be simpler.

jecottrell wrote in post #17434682 (external link)
Pekka wrote in post #17431370 (external link)
So, what is the actual problem with the fonts?

Sizes, colors, reverse, bold, italics, CAPS... They are a mess, they are tough to look at and the eye/brain has an incredibly difficult time trying to figure out what to do with them.

I checked, and italics is used on exactly two places: username "by xxxx" under gallery thumbs, and gear listing "own/has owned.." section info.

Reverse buttons "FYEO" etc. denote functionality you get when you are logged in, they need to be visually different and they act also as notifications. There will be more of those, like marketplace alerts, announcement info etc.

It is just a continuous visual circus with rounded corners, square corners, drop shadows, raised panels...

But that has nothing to do with fonts. If you wish for a flat design site, it is not going to happen. If you wish all links get underline and #00f color you won't see it here. Only place I admit is a mess is the footer of page, else I do not see a mess.

In general I think things are slowly getting better, but the busy-ness of any given element, let alone page continues to make it less than enjoyable to use the forum.

I have tremendous respect for the work that you have committed to the site. I offer my comments to be constructive and hope that they are taken that way, not as whining.

Thanks for that.


The Forum Boss, El General Moderator
AMASS 2.1 Changelog (installed here now)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,960 views & 25 likes for this thread
A new look.....again.
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Official Stuff AMASS Forum Software Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is JenWorleyPhoto
1777 guests, 313 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.