Eric York

Joined over 1 year ago

  • 0 stories
  • 8 comments
  • 1 upvote
  • Posted to Wondering if anyone can help me figure out how to build a layered image in HTML and CSS, Apr 28, 2019

    Hmmm. Not sure why you wouldn't just use the final image, since that seems to be the effect you want . . . .

    Anyhow, going the route of #1 need not be complicated. First, the background image doesn't need to be .svg—it could be any acceptable image format. Then, you'd use background-image: url(path/to/the/shield/image.png); in your css and put your avatar image in the html. That's all.

    For route #2, you can use the clip-path and z-index properties to achieve what you want.

    But, again, those seem like overkill. Why not just use the final image as you have it?

    Anyhow, best of luck.

    0 points
  • Posted to What's your criteria for a good portfolio , Mar 12, 2018

    I teach UX, so I rely on criteria a lot. Here are the five categories I use. If you rate each criterion on a 4-point scale, you could calculate a percentage score for each portfolio by adding up the total and multiplying it by five.

    Context: There is enough information for me to understand what I'm looking at. Things have titles and headings, with more details to be had. Project listings explain roles, time spent, links to outside content etc. All in all, I get the sense, when looking, that the person who made it thought about what I knew and didn't know and tried to help their readers.

    Substance: The quality of the text and visuals is high. Relevant projects are presented clearly and effectively. There are enough projects for me make a judgement about various skills. Other site content is high quality. All in all, I get the sense that the site has real substance: the things in it matter.

    Organization: The sequencing of the content makes sense for different kinds of readers. Pages/content bits are "close together. Each section has clear focus, and different sections cohere together. All in all, I get the sense that the content has been organized with the user in mind and that it all fits nicely together.

    Style: The design and writing strikes the right balance between formal and informal. There are no visible errors in writing or UX. Normal conventions are followed except with good reason. All in all, I get the sense that style is effortless and almost invisible unless I look for it.

    Delivery: The site makes the right moves in presenting itself to users. It is polished, performant, and lightweight. Code is largely clean and readable (behind the minification, if there is any). It works in different browsers and on different devices in different conditions. All in all, I get the sense that the site has been through its paces many times and knows the ropes.

    10 points
  • Posted to Designers, learn how to articulate your design decisions, in reply to Philip Lester , Feb 26, 2018

    hahahahahaha good one

    0 points
  • Posted to Inspect element > export changes - workflow? , Feb 26, 2018

    Just wondering from the folks who say dev people don't want to give access to the repo, what is the rationale they supply for that?

    0 points
  • Posted to What sucks about my website?, in reply to barry saunders , Feb 24, 2018

    hahahaha, phew

    0 points
  • Posted to What sucks about my website?, in reply to Rich Clominson , Feb 24, 2018

    Try a font pair that complements one another, rather than two that fill the same niche.

    1 point
  • Posted to What sucks about my website?, in reply to barry saunders , Feb 24, 2018

    That's a joke, right?

    0 points
  • Posted to What sucks about my website?, Feb 24, 2018

    Hi there. Brave of you to ask for feedback like this. Well, you are right there are issues. Certainly there are things to be happy about, but you asked, so here's my list. Overall, I'd say you have a start here, but need to keep iterating until you have an actual design. Remember, design is a process, not something you do once and be done with.

    Priorities, IMO

    • No clear identity, brand statement, etc. This is homepage material, top center. We need more than a single phrase to understand what this site contains and how to use it. Before jumping in, provide us with context. Related, there is no clear idea of who your audience is. (If you don't know what I mean by that, you should google about it).
    • Color palette is too aggressive, in my opinion. Fewer colors, easier on the eyes with more use of shading rather than different colors would be more to my taste and probably more effective at conveying information. Another, related problem, is the lack of color/design elements in many place. Use more design elements like backgrounds, shapes, borders, lines, points, etc. to break up the boring scroll through line after line of text. Don't just scatter these things in, of course, but use them as tools to create a cohesive design.
    • Typography is poor. Establish better visual hierarchy and use headings more effectively. Use font weight and position to convey relationships between information. Use font faces to convey identity.
    • Lack of visuals. Images if any are all small and don't play an integral role in communicating information. Strive to convey things visually. When you do use larger-sized visuals, currently, they are crammed into the middle column. Pull them out and make them big. Put words on top of them. Use them in some way.
    • Waaaaay too many words. Your site is filled with writing that no one will ever read. General advice from many online is to cut your number of words in half and then cut them in half again ;) I'd take this advice seriously and maybe even go for a third time. Strive wherever you can to present information through visual means. Tighten sentences so they act with purpose and focus. Mercilessly remove redundant and non-critical information (providing a way for readers to obtain secondary content if they want it).
    • Organize post content. For the articles themselves, no one is going to read undifferentiated content for long without giving up. Individual articles need much better internal organization/structure so that readers can skim (or raid) for the information they want, rather than having to read the whole piece and construct a mental map of where the content is. You are the writer, so it's your job to do that for them.

    Good luck and keep at it. You're not a bad designer, just need to keep iterating and iterating and iterating until you refine it. Look at models. Try on different ideas, even if you have no time and no budget. Strategize a way to get it done.

    (More on iteration: The ease with which we can change a design corresponds with our willingness to do so. That's why its essential we iterate with materials we can quickly manipulate, like post-it notes and paper sketches, so that we can iterate better and reach clarity faster.)

    13 points
Load more comments