|
Post by peterh on Jan 18, 2009 3:39:27 GMT
For me simplicity is the key to creating a good message board - and the new changes fail in that. A message board background should never overshadow the primary content otherwise you'll lessen usability which, inarguably, is the most important thing on Chaos. The colors are so strong that my eye constantly wander to the background - and that is not ideal. In addition the use of pictures/patterns as a background (indeed, it looks like a repeat picture) is distracting and it even makes me a bit dizzy when I scroll. I'm sure the intention was to create a harmonic background but it doesn't work. The two scheme post background doesn't work. The beige is too reminiscent of white and it hurts readability because of the black letters. I'm not overly fond of the teal either but at least it's readable - and hence I can live with it. Regarding the letter color - is the black value set to the prime #000000? If so you might want to lessen since using absolute black is hard on the eye. My suggestions: - A soft single color background with no pictures. You might find them boring but it'll help usability tremendously - and hopefully we agree that's what's important. - Drop the two color post scheme. It's an irritating irregularity and the colors doesn't work together. I can live with the teal post background but the beige combined with black letters is overly hard on the eye. Might have more later - too tired now
|
|
|
Post by LaFille on Jan 18, 2009 4:49:41 GMT
Agreed with Peter here; I don't like the patterned background and the beige-green alternating posts/columns. Soft blue/green and soft yellow make a nice match, but if you want to alternate colors on the boards you better do it with two very subtly different tones of the same color.
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jan 18, 2009 6:39:14 GMT
Agreed with Peter here; I don't like the patterned background and the beige-green alternating posts/columns. Soft blue/green and soft yellow make a nice match, but if you want to alternate colors on the boards you better do it with two very subtly different tones of the same color. Agreed - the sudden change in color distracts the reading. I don't see the point for the alternate colors. The intention might be variety but on a message board "less is more" applies. Just look at the quote - that is hard on the eyes...
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jan 18, 2009 6:49:09 GMT
Agreed with Peter here; I don't like the patterned background and the beige-green alternating posts/columns. Soft blue/green and soft yellow make a nice match, but if you want to alternate colors on the boards you better do it with two very subtly different tones of the same color. Agreed - the sudden change in color distracts the reading. I don't see the point for the alternate colors. The intention might be variety but on a message board "less is more" applies. And this solution, honestly, it seems a bit teeny bopper kewl to me.. Edit: Look at the quote - the change is hard on the eyes! And on the teal background the beige doesn't shown- it's much nicer to read. Would people really prefer the color combo of the previous post over this? Btw, I am not trying to be condescending. I'm just illustrating why I don't like the color scheme.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 18, 2009 9:11:24 GMT
ROFL@ Cat! ;D *** Ah, excellent! Complaints & people hating it! NOW I recognise my board! ;D Interesting that for some of us it's a great look, whilst others dislike it entirely... Keep up the discussing, please, people
|
|
|
Post by janggut on Jan 18, 2009 10:15:07 GMT
agreed with Pete & Fille on the black text on biege. maybe black text on light grey? blue/black text on grey may not be too bad. if possible, avoid green altogether.
should u want green, well u can have dark green text on very light green background.
i have no complaint on the background. as what xrevengex said, at least it's not green. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Flix on Jan 18, 2009 10:21:23 GMT
I don't get the black-on-beige complaint at all. White is harshest, beige-is-mellower, and even easier on my eyes than reading the black on teal. I also like the alternating colors between posts, it distinguishes each post better. The teal doesn't match all that well with the blue background, though, so maybe a different shade of blue?
Btw I also really like the background. The old look was bland and I don't see how the new background could really be considered distracting; it's just some gentle white and blue abstract pattern.
No accounting for taste I suppose.
Oh, but I do agree, the navigation links blend too well with the background. One or the other should probably change.
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Jan 18, 2009 10:27:57 GMT
It may not be ideal - but it's the ONLY layout so far that no-one actually hates completely and most actually like, so I'm quite loathe to tamper TOO much ;D I don't hate it completely because I don't hate. I acually like the old layout (with the teal and green background, which looks bad) better than this one. This one has vastly higher potential though. Otherwise I agree with Peter (more or less). Not on the black on beige (don't get that complaint either) but on the rest. Übereil
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 18, 2009 10:33:39 GMT
I agree with Flix on the black-on-yellow thing. I think it's clearer and cleaner than on the blue.
Ditto the alternating colours, which I think look great. Different shades of the same colour would kinda defeat the point - not to mention that one would have to be noticeably darker than the other, meaning the text would be less readable.
***
Jang - grey will NEVER happen! Psychologically speaking, it's the colour of blandness and depression: not conducive to a good board at all!
|
|
|
Post by janggut on Jan 18, 2009 11:19:39 GMT
u should consider grey, EK. psychologically it might be just u who feel that it represents blandness & depression. ;D there are many ways to make grey look cool. it has a lot to do with blending it with either other colours or different tones of itself. i think i better make some examples for u to see.
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jan 18, 2009 11:20:38 GMT
It may not be ideal - but it's the ONLY layout so far that no-one actually hates completely and most actually like, so I'm quite loathe to tamper TOO much ;D I don't hate it completely because I don't hate. I acually like the old layout (with the teal and green background, which looks bad) better than this one. This one has vastly higher potential though. Otherwise I agree with Peter (more or less). Not on the black on beige (don't get that complaint either) but on the rest. Übereil I also prefer the old layout compared to this. That said, I'm not opposed to a change at all because the old layout wasn't all that either. But I vehemently dislike the new background. It's so bright it overpowers the more muted colors in the MB and takes the attention away from the actual content. And that's not really the purpose of a mb background. My problem with the black on beige is that the letters, imo, are too glaring which is why I recommended a softer black.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 18, 2009 18:36:48 GMT
While we're at complaining - I've a 'complaint' I've been holding back for a while - the size of signatures!
I find signatures that are larger than most posts irritating and disturbing in the continuous reading of several posts (like just now).
Also, with signatures as some have now - why alternate colors? You have some 'post-breakers'!
(Oh - And I don't like moving avatars - they distract the eye...)
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Jan 18, 2009 19:05:55 GMT
I agree. Peter's avatar picture is greatly irritating me for months now ...
|
|
|
Post by Gray Lensman on Jan 18, 2009 19:06:35 GMT
I like the blue background as an individual feature, it's a nice touch. Unfortunately, it's not a harmonious blend of colors. I have to agree with Peter and Fille about the alternating colors; I really don't think it works. I'm not fond of the beige in particular; I find it clashes too much with the blue, and it's distracting. The teal would work better on its own, I think. I also have to agree with Peter on the blue links and the question of functionality. The rest is a cosmetic question (which is largely subjective), but I'd ideally prefer a layout that people can use without too much difficulty. That's just me, though.
|
|
|
Post by Hildor on Jan 18, 2009 19:21:36 GMT
I like it, but I also agree on the distracting thing. Although I wouldn't like to see the old flashy green back again. So this one may be kept for me (yes I know that all didn't sense)
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 18, 2009 20:02:55 GMT
Glance, I'm not sure anyone here HAS really big signature banners right now... Usually they've been kept within bounds...
Who were you thinking of?
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Jan 18, 2009 20:29:14 GMT
@ Glance If you are referring to my signature, I know it's quite big. I could make it smaller though, i'm just afraid you wont be able to see the text anymore. Which is the reason why I got this sig in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 19, 2009 0:01:25 GMT
Glance, I'm not sure anyone here HAS really big signature banners right now... Usually they've been kept within bounds... Who were you thinking of? Well YOU, for instance! What did you think? The heigth is again higher than your post. I know they're within bounds - I happen to think the bounds are too wide. Mind you - most of your signatures are really beautiful, I do not deny that. What I mean is that in a row of posts, they break the fluidity of reading. With such breakers/interruptions - what's the use of alternating colors? The sigs separate widely! I'm not against artful things, but in something that is basically textbased, and where I value the content more than the decoration, it is a nuisance (for me, very personnally) (And then, in case of the multi-posters among us - it becomes very repetitive... Think of the many threads we have with mainly 1 - 3 line posts. You have 90% (repetitive) signature and 10 % (original) content on display)
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 19, 2009 0:21:24 GMT
Which leads me to think whether I should start a thread on the psychology of signature banners...
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 19, 2009 0:37:08 GMT
By all means, do! They certainly DO say a lot about those who use them - if you know how to interpret what you see... I've always felt that banners add a certain level of additional attractiveness to the board, in that they are often interesting and a good indication of the interests (At the very least) of the person to whom they belong. As long as they are kept to a reasonable size (And I've seen boards where they got completely out of control - not a pretty sight at all!) I see no reason to restrict the freedom of expression of boardies. Allowing people to express themselves is rarely a bad idea - and certainly not when you have such a great bunch of boardies as I do
|
|