After many months I have finally completed the website. www.EuropeWord.com I need you to take a look and give me an honest review. I want more bad than good. I want you to take your best shot and find things that you don’t like. Tell me what would you change or how would you improve this website for SEO. Thank You !!!! If your review will be long and honest i post it on my websites blog - with your permission of course.
"sugest a site" on the footer should be "suggest a site" The rest of the website is pretty good, but I was abit confused to what the website was a about.
The problem with the suggest a site is that my website is not a directory (and i don't want it to make it look like one - people may recommend a site but the only way they will be on there is they get a lot of European traffic. i don't want to say the idea of the website yet - i want to see if other people will have the same problem. Thank you for your review
But, you might want to change the font or graphic that is your title/logo - the letters look a little low-rez, a little rough on the edges. On the plus side, you have a lot of content but it doesn't feel real cluttered. As far as what the site is - I don't think it is a concern. If people think it is a directory, I don't think that hurts, but I see it more as a general info page or web round-up kind of thing. I hope you get lots of traffic!
hey RealGumby, It looks different depending on what internet browser you use. what kind of font do you suggest ? I had a nice logo but decided to take it off because my website is already overloaded with pics (that add alot of loading time) so i decided to take it off and just leave it simple.. So what would you suggest ?
I like the font... just noticed the jaggies (but hey, I'm extra picky about jaggies because I am an animator and cinematographer - love hi-rez!). I was looking at it with IE7, and I do have clear fonts and all that junk activated. I know it is tough to get a good look in the font you want without going to a graphic/pic. I've had pretty good luck with making gif's that look hi-rez but are low data. The trick is to blur the graphic a little before you convert it to .gif. Start with hi-rez in photoshop or whatever, then do the 8 bit convert, then try "web pallete" first. If you don't like the result, try using a custom sample/color pallette, and apply that to the original when you save as gif. This trick may work better in After Effects than in Photoshop, but I use both to get a smooth gif at the lowest data possible. If you have to stay with a font generated by the browser, then unfortunately the smaller the type is the better the edges. Hope that helps, and don't pay too much attention to me - as I said, working in graphics/film/animation makes me extra picky. Please note no one else mentioned this, so maybe it isn't really an issue. Just how my eyes are oriented to visual stuff. Sometimes the "jaggies" are just unavoidable! Mainly, I like your layout as I said originally. Keep up the good work!
Change the background image so that it can repeat-y without tiling. Change the background colour to match the color of the bottom pixel of your background image. This will have a nice uniform effect no matter what the users screen size is. I'd prefer it if the actual content window was a white background. For what it's worth random clip art looks like random clip art, if you can try to harmonise the site.
Its a good theme, the color scheme could use a bit of help though. I'm not a big fan of the transparent sections. The background for my comp (xp, Opera, 1920x1200) was way outa wack. it was repeating, and cross repeating. i would make a background that would scale with the site, not matter who looks at it. Also for me the bottom bar seems to have a fixed location under the content of the body. besides those minor code flaws the site looks nice!
We all know that most backgrounds are white and its the best color for the website but i waned my site to be different from the rest. Something unique, something different and something that is darker but not to dark. i will keep the color. I can make my background look better i have the same pic in high resolution - this one is very low. i did it because my background pic lost half its size i did it for all the European visitors that still have 56. Its very hard choice - looks vs loading time. For you with a cable or even dsl its looks for other people waiting 2 min till websites loads its time. I will think about it. Thanks
lol i can image. But the fact is that only less than 1 % of the world has 1920x1200. Still number one resolution in the world... are you ready. 800x600 i could not believe myself. i did 1280x960 just to be save. No reaon to waist loading time on anything higher. 1920x1200 that's like 24" monitor. nice....
Now I see why you were debating generated text vs. graphic for your logo/title! If a large part of your audience is on dial-up, then you are correct to weigh each element for its load up time, of course. Along with the lower rez screen sizes still in use noted above, and dial-up land-line tech still in fairly wide use, now we have cell phones and PDAs with even smaller screens and slow connections! Talk about having to keep load times down... yikes!
It has a lot of content, but it looks janky to me. THere are all these crazy colors, and too much black and blue. Here's what to aim for. Go to csselite[dot]com and see the designs they showcasethere. If you only have time for one, check out 9rules com. There is also a famous blog post titled something like Web 2.0 Design Style Guide that is just awesome.
I would have the interior body as a white color or off-white..too much blue. the outside blue (exterior of border) is OK. lots of images loading too. are they all jpegs or gifs? how big is your page size? nice layout though. good job.
yes, all the pics are as small as possible. My dreamweaver says that my pages is 65 but google says its 73 - so i don't know. What is the average page size for a website, anyone knows ?