Web Development

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Opinions

0 helpful
52 replies

by jaqui

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

which one looks better for a site banner?

http://jaqui-greenlees.net/images/banner-options.html

52 replies

by the scummy one

the R and the G somehow look wrong, like they should be a little bigger or something. Maybe its just me though.

by boxfiddler

and not out of sheer perversity either. ;)

I can read it easier - the spaces in the letters shows through more clearly to my eyes. While the color schemes appear the same, the darker scheme is less 'busy' in appearance.

HTH

by boxfiddler

for purposes of messing with people I don't like, opinions I don't like, attitudes I don't like, and really stupid questions.

This doesn't fit any of those.

Besides, I'm saving it up for someone else.

by jaqui

huh?
the top one the lettering extrudes from the block.
the bottom one it is a boolean difference, cutting them out of the block. :D

that is the only difference between the two. :D

by santeewelding

If it is, are you going to ask, this one or that one? Okay, now which version? And so on.

Otherwise, I think you have a conflict of form and function in the making.

by jaqui

it does look darker, and it is odd, since the top one has shadows from the letters all over it. :D

and what is even more odd, the women that have mentioned a preference [ here and on another site ] pick the bottom one.

men pick the top one.

and we ALL know women have better taste than men. ]:)

by Tammy.Cavadias

Sorry it must be my monitor but I'm actually having a hard time making out the letters for either - they both kinda blend too much into the back ground - but what do I know . Though I do like the woodish look.

-Tammy :-)

by jaqui

Runic-Hosting, my 100% owned website hosting company.
:D

woodish look?
odd, every "material" used for the render was stone. :D

I'm playing with materials for everything right now, but at 5:50 hours a render it's not quick to get a new one done.

by Tammy.Cavadias

whoops... I thought it said Runk - Hosting - and for the life of me I couldn't figure out what a Runk Hosting was my eye sight is worse than I thought.

Stone? Hmmm.... sorry Jaqui probably just my monitor then, as it really did have a woodish look - kinda like a piece of drift wood.

-Tammy :-)

by charliespencer

I posted my comments before I read anyone else's so I wouldn't be influenced by the early responders. I also had a hard time making out the letters.

by jaqui

that was the "Arizona Dessert" texture.

it's "supposed" to look like the mesas found in the Arizona desert, when on a landscape object.
[ putting it on a cube is going to change it's effect ]

lets see, currently the full image render is sitting at 7% complete and estimated 8:30 to finish.

with texture changes to make lettering clearer. :D

by Tammy.Cavadias

..and maybe a little lighter for the back ground to really make the words pop.

Then throw it up here again so we can all give our very opinionated opinions - after all thats what friends are for right? to give their honest opinions :-)

What program you using?

-Tammy :-)

by jaqui

the rendering engine is povray, of course.

the modeller?

{ inset text editor here ] :p

wavefront obj files are just plain text with the co-ordinates for the vertices, and the .mtl is the "normals" for texturing, also plain text. Though I tend to put the .mtl data after the object data in the obj.

I read the spec for the obj format, then read a few different obj files and figured out how to use a text editor to make models. :)

whichever text editor, doesn't matter, as long as it can save as plain old ascii text with iso-8859-1 encoding.

by the ref

The top one in the first post was better. As others have mentioned it is brighter but the bottom one looks like the shadows are too strong. even lightening the bottom one would not be as good as the second.

Comparing this to the newest one, the newest one would look good as a page on its own, but is too big for a title frame. So - the newest one looks better but I thinkl it is too big to be useful.

My vote for best looking: Newest one.
My vote for most useful: first of the originals.

by jaqui

the full image isn't good for a banner, but the image can be cropped to only the part with the wording.

by jaqui

interesting that you have the lettering raised instead of embedded.

this continues to support the findings, the men like protruding things, the women like it embedded. ]:)
[ personally, I like the embedded, so that personal "protrusions" can be utilised ;) ]

by charliespencer

I had no trouble distinguishing the characters immediately. Even though the same texture is used on both foreground and background, the shading around the characters makes them stand out clearly. Best of the bunch.

by charliespencer

It's much easier to distinguish between the letters and the background.

I still have the same issue with the characters' height-to-width ratio. They're just too tall to be easily readable. Can you stretch them horizontally about 35 to 50%?

Maybe lose some of the sky and flatten the dunes; overall it's a bit tall.

by boxfiddler

significantly easier to read, also easier on the eyes overall. I'm curious as to what it would look like without the 'banner background'. The graphic overall is cool enough that I don't think the banner is required - unless of course other things are going to be on the page also.
The deep color of the letters would really stand out against the sand.

Readability - latest.
Of the first two, I still say the bottom one.

My two cents, this time! ;)

by the scummy one

well, not really brutal. I like this better with a few changes.
First, it is easier to read, however can be mistaken as well, but that is something different.

I like the rock look, if it just stood out more. The banner on this is all right, however if you wanted more of a rock look, I think having it too 'perfect' takes away from it. Maybe if it looked like a chipped away rock on a small island in there, with the words inside, like it was chipped/carved.

by jaqui

I was thinking about using it for a ... "frame" around content.. well one similar at least.

by jaqui

bevel it the other direction, so the center of the letters look deeper into the block, and shadowing goes across the inset letters, not the face of the block.

by charliespencer

The letters pop out more.

Having said that, I find the font difficult to read. I think it's the way the 'grain' of the background continues across the letters, making it difficult for me to visually distinguish the foreground from the back ground. It may also be the height-to-width ratio of the characters. I have to visually scan up and down to recognize each one. I also had trouble quickly distinguishing between them, especially the adjacent 'I' and 'C'. The 'G' is just a flat-out unreadable character.

Edited - on fourth glance, there's too much texture on the bottom one. It really is hard to recognize the characters with so much going on. As my darling bride would say, "It's too busy."

Edited yet again - these comments obviously apply to the first link. I put them up before I saw the second sample.

by dumphrey

is to similar to the stone texture. It would be interesting to see either of the first 2 versions with a much smaller, finer texture on the lettering.

by charliespencer

The grain in the 'rock' runs horizontally while the letters are proportionally tall. It pulls the eye in perpendicular directions.

My, those are a lot of big words, boys and girls.

by jiminpa

I am partly color blind and I found them both a little difficult to read. Maybe a little more contrast between the lettering and the background?

by maecuff

I think they're both very difficult to read.

I'd think about a completely different one.

by delbertpgh

The things are difficult to read. Way difficult. They look like the sort of artwork submitted to a Lord of the Rings fan site. Unless that's exactly the sort of business you're proposing, this kind of banner will discourage people from taking you seriously. Don't waste your time trying to choose, and go back to the drawing board.

Black ink on a mottled cream background, to resemble parchment, if you must.

by fregeus

I like the first one and i too thought it was woodsy looking. I think its the background that is bark-like grayish color and the letters who are wood-like light brown in color.

If stone is what you are looking for, I would change the font for one that has bigger letters or more fine letter and put them an off-white or light gray in color.

TCB.

by av .

I think in both of them, though, the background is too prominent and needs to be toned down a bit so the letters stand out more.

AV

by charliespencer

What's "too many lagers?" The words make sense individually, but I can't parse the way you've assembled them. It must be one of those oxymoron things. :-)

This discussion is closed to new replies.