Wooden background - which one do you like better?

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by Vegantastic, Jan 13, 2015.

0
  1. #1
    Hi,

    I am designing the webpage for a vegan cooking box and I am struggling with the background image.

    I first created this version with a wooden background: http://www.vegantastic.de/

    Then I changed it up and came up with this darker wood background:

    http://2-dot-vegantastic0.appspot.com/

    I like it better but I am not sure if it is to dark now.

    What do you think? I would be happy about some opinions. Which one do you like better? Any suggestions how I could make the background more appealing?

    Thanks and best regards
    Jan
     
    Vegantastic, Jan 13, 2015 IP
  2. hdewantara

    hdewantara Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    47
    Best Answers:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    155
    #2
    It might be a little subjective, but I like the newer --> 2-dot-vegantastic0.appspot.com/
    Less appealing, but does give more appeal to the center, the true content.

    Hendra
     
    hdewantara, Jan 13, 2015 IP
  3. Vegantastic

    Vegantastic Active Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    #3
    Thank you for the response!
     
    Vegantastic, Jan 14, 2015 IP
  4. Mehrdad[

    Mehrdad[ Greenhorn

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    #4
    I do like darker BG when the content area is light (white). And in your case, defiantly the darker BG looks better, in my opinion.
    But the footer section doesn't look "good" because of it's color.
    ---------------
    Here is a simple way to give it a bit more contrast.
    qwerty.jpg
     
    Mehrdad[, Jan 14, 2015 IP
  5. Vegantastic

    Vegantastic Active Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    #5
    Thats good point. Thanks I will integrate that!
     
    Vegantastic, Jan 14, 2015 IP
  6. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,999
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #6
    Uhm... are there supposed to be websites at those url's? all I get is the word "Lade..."

    Though looking at the endless scripttardery, lack of media targets, static style in the markup and "Semantics, what's that" HTML... can't say I'm surprised it doesn't work here.

    -- edit -- looks like it loads in FF and nothing else here... and after seeing the scripttard "games" and total lack of graceful degradation, dicking around with a background image is the LEAST of your worries. I'd suggest pitching that entire MESS of how not to build a website in the trash and to start over.
     
    deathshadow, Jan 14, 2015 IP
  7. Vegantastic

    Vegantastic Active Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    #7
    Thank you for the feedback.

    Its true, the HTML-file needed some clean up. Should be a lot cleaner now!

    Regarding that the page was not loading for you: Did you use Opera to load the page (Which OS)? There seems to be a known issue with GWT and Opera. I could not reproduce it on a Mac with Opera, but I adjusted a setting and hopefully works now. Could you please test again?

    Regarding the javascript code: It's a single page AJAX application build with the Google Webtoolkit (A framework to convert java code to javascript). This has of course advantages and disadvantages. If it loads in every browser - and it should - I am very happy with it :). If there is no javascript enabled there is no degradation possible with this approach besides recreating everything. But thats ok, there is a message shown (if javascript is disabled) that javascript is required.
     
    Vegantastic, Jan 15, 2015 IP
  8. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,999
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #8
    See to me, that lack of graceful degradation, massive WASTE of bandwidth, and pissing away anything remotely resembling accessibility is why I would NEVER build a website with steaming piles of halfwit manure like Google Webtoolkit. It's garbage like that which is making the web less useful.

    ... and for me it doesn't work in REAL Opera (12), ChrOpera Dev, Chrome or IE. It ONLY loads in FF here.

    Admittedly I'm running a bunch of adblocks and other things to neuter scripts I don't trust -- and that's probably why throwing such rubbish scripting at piss simple pages is why it doesn't work here; another warning sign that the methods you have been duped into using just simply are not how a website should be built, and why my advice would be to throw that entire mess in the trash and start over from trash without the mouth-breaking nonsense like GWT.
     
    deathshadow, Jan 15, 2015 IP