[eskepe]

http://www.eskepe.com

[Mik]

best viewed at 1400 X 1050 - strange dimension to state.

maybe overall the space could be utilised better. the elements seem strangely random.

[Bill Posters]

Indeed. "1400 X 1050" - WTF!?

As mik mentioned, the layout is all over the place which makes even less sense when you recommend a huge resolution and then leave space unused along the l/h side.

(default) Blue links on a black background?
(default) Blue links on a bright orange background?
Those combinations make the text barely readable.
I strongly recommend that you familiarise yourself with CSS, in particular 'pseudo-classes', and how they can be used to change link colours.
www.w3schools.com/css/css_pseudo_classes.asp


To be frank, the layout is so bad I'm wondering whether it's simply broken in my browser (which, if it is, is likely to be the result of bad code rather than a bad browser)


On a plus note - the header graphic is a nice shot, but it's loose placement shares the same lack of consideration that's effecting the rest of the layout.


(sorry)

[gray]

nice splash page though

[smallbeer]

WTS.

The layout's disjointed because you have the header centred but the everything else positioned absolutely. It might look "ok" on your machine but everyone else is thinking wtf!

Also those empty paragraphs above the the header make it look like it's sitting in the middle of the page for me...if you're gonna do it atleast use a margin value instead of the paragraphs...

<div align="center" style="margin: 40px 0 40px 0">*
<img src="header2.jpg" width="864" height="252">
</div>

*I'm not even gonna get into centring with css

Dreamweaver is evil. Some links...

--> http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tut...son/boxes.html
--> http://www.w3schools.com/css/default.asp

Hope this helps a little.

[hawken]

TBH it looks broken
Are your style sheets properly linked in?

(actually, just checked out the source code, no style sheets.)

Basically you have some fundimental problems that once fixed will enable your site to work. These problems are:

1. Illegability. The text is not readable
2. Functionality. There is no menu and the links are unreadable.
3. Unformatted. you require a bizzare aspect but don't make use of it. Try sticking to 800x600 scrolling vertical.

its 90% broken but 90% fixable, ok?

[spoofers]

1. 1400 X 1050 is a odd size to use. Mostly uses 800x600 or 1024x768 and i recommend 1024x768

2. Learn css and change ur links' colour or change your background colour. I don't think you even have to learn css, you can easily setup css using dreamweaver.

3. I'm little confuse where are your navigation at first.

I think with your resolution changed and a navigation clearly displayed your website is clean & simple

[chips]

is that a lomo shot on the splash page?
if so, good man

That header image is pretty good as well, and would work if it was along the top - possibly with the logo over it? (not keen on the logo though)

You've got some cracking photos hidden away there (the bowling ones are great..they've got to be lomos, right?), but at the moment the site doesn't do them justice.

It does look really random and badly organised...I think you should strip out all the elements you're using and get design the page to either 800x600 or 1024 x768 res as pointed out by others.

Then just keep it really simple with the photos being the main focus of each page. Possibly think about a border around each photo? often looks more proffesional

Also when you're browsing the pics you can go 'next' or'back' but no 'home'?
that's really annoying that you can't get back to the home page....

[eskepe]

wow, i can say. thanks for the tips, refreshing.

[eskepe]

How About Flash?

[Bill Posters]

Why?