Webmaster Forums

animgirl · 02-05-2003, 01:28 PM

No, I just said maybe not italisized. Not about capitalization.

DCElliott · 02-05-2003, 01:50 PM

Here is an example with a moss texture to the left and a topo-map texture to the right.

I'll email you the textures separately as well in *.gif format

DE

Redcap · 02-05-2003, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by animgirl
No, I just said maybe not italisized. Not about capitalization.

D'OH. Sorry about that! Long day at work, and a brain-dead me = misunderstanding and not reading the post correctly!

Hmm. I'll play around with the text a bit, and see what I think.

Redcap · 02-05-2003, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DCElliott
Here is an example with a moss texture to the left and a topo-map texture to the right.

Damn, I like that - I like that a *LOT*!

Quote:

I'll email you the textures separately as well in *.gif format

DE

Got them, and many thanks, mate - Now to see if I can reproduce it, LOL!

Redcap · 02-05-2003, 10:18 PM

OK, given the background imagery, I think the first stage of the site re-design, will be to make a decision on screen width. With the above in mind, I'm going for a page width of 800 pixels. So, here's the first reverse engineered graphic, based on eveything thus far - and I *know* there's an odd blank mid-top; I'll be working on that this evening (UK time)!

I looked at Animgirl's point about italicisation, and played with it, but, personally, still feel that italics is the way to go.

I also looked at the capitalisation point raised earlier, and think the points are good to go, so the word 'Practical' has been sentence-cased, rather than capitalised.

I've also lengthened the right trail to the 'bb', so accomodate the length of the graphic, and stretch out the words, to match.

DC - looking at your version, and mine, and the contours, how did you achieve the final result - did you layer several contours atop each other?

Thoughts and impressions, please?

Zero Angel · 02-05-2003, 11:20 PM

My guess is that he didnt have the source file and just used a 'cut' tool to erase the green background, then antialiased it and added a diff background.

DCElliott · 02-06-2003, 02:12 AM

The contour tool is a might bit touchy and uses a random seed so that you can't reproduce it exactly. There are parameters I can play with to increase the density of lines. I then overlaid the two layers and did a transparency fade in the middle third. I had previously masked your original and did a little trimming and feathering (lost too much glow on the aiming red dot, I'm afraid) and layered that on top. Exported to jpeg at about 80% quality.

I can fire off some more contours if you like. Alternatively, you might scan in an actual map and do the fade to that. It is all a matter of the final effect you are looking for. (and sometimes you only know what it is when you see it, right?)

DE

DCElliott · 02-06-2003, 02:33 AM

Just thought of sumpin' else.

You might consider CSS layering - it can be very effective. Animgirl and I came up with a really neat effect on a site she has been doing for a vocal group. The masthead has 4 layers counting from back:
#1 background
#2 text with faint glow effect
#3 R-side picture
#4 L-side graphic text

These layers slide together as the page is resized. You can see it
[URL=http://www.alliancemusic.org]here.[/URL]

You could do a similar thing if you had practical and the reticule on one side and Airsoft on the right and the mid-part of the horizontal line as a background with an x-repeat that would stretch with resizing.

Confused yet?

Oh, why do I bother - yer gonna make one of those rigid table-based monstrosities anyhow instead of embracing the mind-boggleing simplicity and elegance of CSS liquid design.

DE (Just another cheeky colonial

)

animgirl · 02-06-2003, 06:29 AM

Quote:

You could do a similar thing if you had practical and the reticule on one side and Airsoft on the right and the mid-part of the horizontal line as a background with an x-repeat that would stretch with resizing.

Oh, that would be cool, and the design would work so well!

Redcap · 02-06-2003, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DCElliott
The contour tool is a might bit touchy and uses a random seed so that you can't reproduce it exactly. There are parameters I can play with to increase the density of lines. I then overlaid the two layers and did a transparency fade in the middle third. I had previously masked your original and did a little trimming and feathering (lost too much glow on the aiming red dot, I'm afraid) and layered that on top. Exported to jpeg at about 80% quality.

OK, gotcha. Thanks. I used JPEG at 80%, as it happens. I completely re-did the layers in the Fireworks file, having two bitmap layers for the two different backgrounds, masking them within their specific layers on a graduated fade, to achieve a similar result to yours. The lettering went on yet another layer, and the reticule, pipper, bb and long line on another.

Layer order (topmost first):
#1 Vector lines
#2 Lettering
#3 Moss background
#4 Contour background

Quote:

I can fire off some more contours if you like.

If it's not too much trouble, that'd be good, thanks!

Quote:

Alternatively, you might scan in an actual map and do the fade to that. It is all a matter of the final effect you are looking for. (and sometimes you only know what it is when you see it, right?)

DE

True, but, unlike the USGS, the HMOS (Her Majesty's Ordnance Survey) retains Crown Copyright on all maps - even those available to the public, so using an OS map contour would be a violation of HM Copyright, and since I'm a little picky on that score myself (I do my best to protect my own material as well), random contours would appear to be the best bet, darn it, even if I were the only one to know that I'd nicked one of H.M's maps!

Quote:

Just thought of sumpin' else.

You might consider CSS layering - it can be very effective. Animgirl and I came up with a really neat effect on a site she has been doing for a vocal group. The masthead has 4 layers counting from back:
#1 background
#2 text with faint glow effect
#3 R-side picture
#4 L-side graphic text

These layers slide together as the page is resized. You can see it
here.

And very nice it looks - and looking at the source confused the crap out of me

Quote:

You could do a similar thing if you had practical and the reticule on one side and Airsoft on the right and the mid-part of the horizontal line as a background with an x-repeat that would stretch with resizing.

If I get what you mean, that's confuse the hell out of a visitor - "So is the site called 'Practical' or 'Airsoft'?!" comes most immediately to mind, lol!

Still, a CSS site sounds interesting. HOWEVER.

Her's a few stats for you...

Browsers used to visit Practical Airsoft over the last year;

1. Microsoft....5,628.......94.64
2. Netscape......247.........4.15
3. Other..............72.........1.21
Total..............5,947.......100.00%

Browser versions used in that time:

1....MSIE 6.0.................3,418.....57.47
2....MSIE 5.5....................912.....15.34
3....MSIE 5.0....................745.....12.53
4....Netscape 6.0.............184.......3.09
5....MSIE 6.0 (AOL)..........174.......2.93
6....MSIE 5.5 (AOL)..........161.......2.71
7....Opera 6.x....................60.......1.01
8....MSIE 6.0 (MSN)...........59........0.99
9....MSIE 5.1.....................45........0.76
10..Netscape 4.7..............45........0.76
11..MSIE 5.0 (AOL)...........44........0.74
12..MSIE 4.0.....................28........0.47
13..MSIE 5.2.....................18........0.30
14..Opera 7.x...................11........0.18
15..Netscape 4.5................9........0.15
16..MSIE 5.5 (MSN).............6........0.10
17..MSIE 4.5.......................4........0.07
18..MSIE 5.5 (AOL) (MSN)...4........0.07
19..Netscape 4.0................4........0.07
20..Netscape 4.6................3........0.05
21..MSIE 4.0 (AOL).............2........0.03
22..MSIE 4.0 (MSN).............2........0.03
23..MSIE 5.0 (MSN).............2........0.03
24..MSIE 6.0 (AOL) (MSN)...2........0.03
25..MSIE 3.0.......................1........0.02
26..MSIE 5.0 (AOL) (MSN)...1........0.02
27..Netscape 3.0................1........0.02
28..Netscape 4.8................1........0.02
29..Opera 5.x.....................1........0.02
Total............................5,947....100.00%

As you can see, there are a fair few browsers there that don't, the the best of my knowledge, support CSS all that well. Your opinion would be useful in deciding one way or the other, by the way.

Quote:

Confused yet?

Somewhat.

Quote:

Oh, why do I bother - yer gonna make one of those rigid table-based monstrosities anyhow instead of embracing the mind-boggleing simplicity and elegance of CSS liquid design.

DE (Just another cheeky colonial )

Not neccessarily, lol

Oh, and you may be a colonial, but you have a damned nice country there, mate - I know, as I've visited there - we have family freinds in Richmond, Vancouver, BC!

animgirl · 02-06-2003, 10:48 AM

Quote:

If I get what you mean, that's confuse the hell out of a visitor -"So is the site called 'Practical' or 'Airsoft'?!" comes most immediately to mind, lol!

Yeah, I can see how at larger .res's it could be confusing.

Maybe you could have the reticule on the left, and the "Practical Airsoft" to the right, and a repeat-x green line to make up the middle.

Or, keep the whole logo to the left of the screen, and have the thingie that's on the end of the line, {don't know what it's called right now} far to the right and tile a repeat-x green line to connect the two.
And then, you could put your menu names inside the green line that's tiling in the middle maybe, if it was large enough (and if the drop-down menu's didn't look funny.)
'cuz I think you said you were gonna re-design the whole thing or something.

I dunno, I'm confusing myself now.

Redcap · 02-06-2003, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by animgirl

Yeah, I can see how at larger .res's it could be confusing.

Maybe you could have the reticule on the left, and the "Practical Airsoft" to the right, and a repeat-x green line to make up the middle.

Or the bulk of the logo/masthead on the left, with the 'bb' leading off to the right edge, which is also an option, of course!

Quote:

Or, keep the whole logo to the left of the screen, and have the thingie that's on the end of the line, {don't know what it's called right now} far to the right and tile a repeat-x green line to connect the two.

Aha - I see we're thinking along similar lines

Quote:

And then, you could put your menu names inside the green line that's tiling in the middle maybe, if it was large enough (and if the drop-down menu's didn't look funny.)

Interesting. Not sure that'd work off the top of my head, but it's worth a good look when I get to that point - thanks for the idea!

Quote:

'cuz I think you said you were gonna re-design the whole thing or something.

Yup. That's "The Plan"!

Quote:

I dunno, I'm confusing myself now.

You mean there's something that can completely stuff your brain up?!

animgirl · 02-06-2003, 01:14 PM

I just said that to make you feel good.

Redcap · 02-06-2003, 06:56 PM

LOL - naughty girl - had me going there!

OK, my day job shift today is gonna be a a b*tch - it's a 12 hour shift, a lot of which is on the road (I drive what's called a 'ferry bus', an 'internal' scheduled service to get the bus drivers around to where they need to be, for a local bus company. The run today isn't a difficult one, but the schedule is a real PITA!), so I don't think that there will be much here from me today - even so, I'll read this thread when I eventually get in from work, so please keep the ideas flowing!

OK, going back to the CSS side of things for a bit, I'm a little confused here: I may be getting well confused with XLM, but I thought that with a virtually fully CSS site, rather than a fully HTML with CSS on the side for style control, you had to develop a doctype for the CSS/XML to work (Now you know why I've used tables before - it's a damn sight easier on the brain to make a site that lots of browsers can see, lol)?

Now, if you have to develop a doctype, how the hell do you go about it, or are there some 'get you started' ones on the W3C site? I had a look, but got brain ache the minute I looked at their material on it - plain English it most definately is not

!

Edited for telling sperrors!

tmmoose · 02-06-2003, 08:15 PM

Try IT You Will Like It..

animgirl · 02-07-2003, 06:36 AM

Don't worry, red, no one's gonna leave ya!

I admit though, moose has me confused totally right now.

Quote:

OK, going back to the CSS side of things for a bit, I'm a little confused here: I may be getting well confused with XLM, but I thought that with a virtually fully CSS site, rather than a fully HTML with CSS on the side for style control, you had to develop a doctype for the CSS/XML to work (Now you know why I've used tables before - it's a damn sight easier on the brain to make a site that lots of browsers can see, lol)?

CSS and HTML/XHTML need to work together. There is no doctype CSS. CSS works within HTML/XHTML.

Quote:

Now, if you have to develop a doctype, how the hell do you go about it, or are there some 'get you started' ones on the W3C site? I had a look, but got brain ache the minute I looked at their material on it - plain English it most definately is not!

Did you look at
[URL=http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp]this page?[/URL]

DC and Zero, where are you?

This is kinda not starting to fit the graphics design category

DCElliott · 02-07-2003, 07:10 AM

Quote:

DC and Zero, where are you?

Just seeing how you can hold yer own. . . and yer not doin' bad.

If I can get into graphics, which is not my forte (like tables, eh?), then you can handle a few piddling misconceptions about CSS and XHTML, don't you think?

We're gonna have fun with this redcap guy, he's is sooo easy to tease.

And moosie, you belong on another forum I belong to. Regardless of what the original post is about, it always comes around to beer.

DE

animgirl · 02-07-2003, 08:40 AM

Quote:

If I can get into graphics, which is not my forte (like tables, eh?), then you can handle a few piddling misconceptions about CSS and XHTML, don't you think?

yah.

Quote:

Regardless of what the original post is about, it always comes around to beer.

Must be a guy thing.

Redcap · 02-07-2003, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tmmoose
Try IT You Will Like It..

LOL

Unfortunatley for the Carling Brewery, I prefer Wild Turkey!

Redcap · 02-07-2003, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by animgirl
Don't worry, red, no one's gonna leave ya!

Glad to hear it, lol!

Quote:

I admit though, moose has me confused totally right now.

Oh, I got it, never worry! He's making a joke association with my nickname here, my service with the Corps of Royal Military Police, and a certain brewery's product from way back when!

Quote:

CSS and HTML/XHTML need to work together. There is no doctype CSS. CSS works within HTML/XHTML.

Thank the stars for that - the moment doctype and XML come up, my brain - and eyes - glaze over!

Quote:

Did you look at
[URL=http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp]this page?[/URL]

Yes, thanks. I follow the point, but, until you explained the above, had XML confusion problems - and still have, to some degree. We'll need to continue this (CSS/XML/etc) elsewhere, I suspect, after the logo/design is finalised!

Quote:

DC and Zero, where are you?

This is kinda not starting to fit the graphics design category

Pint - er, point - taken