need some experienced eyes....

[specific]

to check out this portfolio I recently finished. After a five year hiadus from all web design, I've decided to try it again, and that is why there is only a few past projects on there.

its a bit light on the content but it will eventually fill up. i hope.

http://www.spfstudios.com

[ogri]

nice sites i like them. good work. wish i had some of your talent.

[hGraf Design]

nice work there...
don't know if the coffee cup really goes, though...

[specific]

Thanks I hope it gets me somewhere this time. Seems like you have to know someone or pay for one of those design schools to really get hooked up in this industry.

Yeah the coffee cup is a result of my fiendish caffiene addiction. Now that you mention it, that actually does seem a little out of place.

[rg_22uk]

A minor thing but I noticed that when loading the Murray Middleman site the % loader increases but not the file size (it stayed at 1kb)

[spudwick]

Wow... great work!

At first I was a bit iffy on the whole "low-budget site" category in your portfolio, but then again, I think it's important the client knows that they have an option over how much they want to spend (and more importantly, what the difference will be). I'm curious about what other people think about this.

Also, since it is a portfolio site, I'll point out that the "chocolate fountain" page has a broken link, and it looks like the layer with "links:" isn't where it should be, it over laps the text underneath of it.

[specific]

thx....

yeah "low-budget" has a negative connotation to it.

I was messin around with that site last night, switched the hosting over to another place and forgot to immediately ftp everything to the new space.


thanks for all the input this really helps me get a fresh opinion on it.

[spudwick]

I created a thread in the boardroom about the whole low-budget thing.

thread

Edit: I resolved the thread. It wasn't taking the course I'd hope it'd take.

[specific]

Yeah I'm probably going to try to change that title to something else. neg. connotation and all..

[gasbag15]

The transition effects are well done but you need to work on the graphics side of it. Things like the font need to be changed and maybe the color scheme needs some work. Like I said, the effects are good but it just doesn't all come together at the end.

PM me if you don't understand what I mean by this comment.

[specific]

yeah I think I was trying to be OG with not even having a color scheme that remains contstant on all the pages, but now I realize that it just doesnt work, even though its a cool concept.

fonts.hmmm, all the downloaded ones that I have seem too techy, so I ended up using stock stuff..

can you tell I just got my copy of flash a few months ago??

BTW this is all really helping me a great deal keep it coming guys!!

[hc4tu]

the type and color irks me a bit, but the choreography of the animations is excellent, perhaps just slow it down a bit for those folks that were still around for the advent of motion graphics.
thx
f-
http://www.freak.freightgraff.com/ciscov2

[rabbitkiller]

Good stufff.
Seems alittle heavy though... for what I saw it should not be so heavy...

[specific]

mr. killer of rabbits...
If you mean size wise, that is probably because of the after effects stuff I imported, 20+ frames of individual bitmaps can get a bit heavy.

This is cool, nobody told me that I totally suck. My self esteem is still intact.

Originally posted by hc4tu
the type and color irks me a bit, but the choreography of the animations is excellent, perhaps just slow it down a bit for those folks that were still around for the advent of motion graphics.
thx
f-
http://www.freak.freightgraff.com/ciscov2

For that I just figured that people don't like to sit around and wait for things to come together. And hey, I was around for the advent of motion graphics, I was still crapping my pants but I was there. Still dealing with that problem btw.

edit: I like your designs man, u in the bay area? Maybe when I actually make some money I'll have you do an identity/logo for me.

[Tdenault]

just a tip on how your clients may perceive you ---

on your portfolio section, dont' call the HTML sites (or low content ones i.e. no flash) LOW BUDGET...this could potentially upset a client, so that when then cruise to your site they see that they are catagorized as LOW BUDGET...

just food for thought....

Maybe something like Low Bandwidth and High Bandwidth...or something along those lines....

Maybe Big and Flashy and Small and Sweet....blah blah...whatever you get the point...

T.

[specific]

I think I'll go with... hoity toity and cutesy wootsy

[spudwick]

Originally posted by Tdenault
just a tip on how your clients may perceive you ---

on your portfolio section, dont' call the HTML sites (or low content ones i.e. no flash) LOW BUDGET...this could potentially upset a client, so that when then cruise to your site they see that they are catagorized as LOW BUDGET...

just food for thought....

Maybe something like Low Bandwidth and High Bandwidth...or something along those lines....

Maybe Big and Flashy and Small and Sweet....blah blah...whatever you get the point...

T.

.. or even calling the low budget stuff "mini sites", or something along those lines would work.

[Johnny Meerkat]

for describing the smaller projects we do, be they all-flash or not, we tend to use the word 'microsites', which tends to suggest small, compact, but built for a purpose.

personally i hate the whole psychology of media babble. in fact, from now on, i'm going to stop calling them 'microsites' and start calling them 'barncakes'.