opinion for site
 

hey, im making a site for my highschool history teacher, and im unsure about the web layout i want to make. i have some basic rough draft sketches of what i want to make and i would like some feed back on things :D.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4...123/folder.gif

A= flash animation frame;
b= banner frame;
n = nav frame;
nc = nav child frame;
f= footer;

i was looking as it for to be a basic folder with tabs. The tabs would be the nav child frame that would divide each page into more links. and the page would appear in the middle of the folder resulting a link opened from the nav or nav child. i was also thinking to get rid of the little animation in the corner and making the banner one flash.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d41/caseg123/ice.gif

b= banner frame;
n = nav frame;
ncw = nav child frame;
m = center main page frame;

the "things" in the nav are supposed to be icebergs(my teache rhas obsession with peguins and likes them to be incorporated) almost a flash animation floating there, and when you click on them, the main page will load, and also a nav child window will load up, each link would be a peguin to
click on as child pages. basic ideas, but think its good?

last one.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d4...g123/paper.gif


A= flash animation frame;
b= banner frame;
n = nav frame;
nc = nav child frame;
f= footer;

was leaning it towayds to be a generic lined piece of paper. banner would be the top blank spot, with animation in that square corner, same with the nav to the left. but if their is a nav child it would be like a heading or something. i know it looks like a generic frame but it's a piece of paper. lol.

but any feed back would help alot.

thanks.

If you don't have the graphics tools and abilities to produce those examples, you're fired.

well, for one that much animation will slow down the load times on your site, possibly to the point where people will get tired of waiting for it to load. Flash uses alot of bandwidth, so it's not wise to have lots of it on your site. Some of the things you want to do can be accomplished with other languages, such as CSS (a mouse over effect) that use far less bandwidth and load quickly.

I realize that your trying to imagine what the page looks like with these "ruff" drafts. In truth, i find it much easier to acually start designing something in a image editor like The GIMP or photoshop (i personally like GIMP better cause it's free and has the same functionality as photoshop). I work the image/design until i have my final product. If it doesn't look good, start over, with a different design or change the old one until you find something that works.

Personally, I'd recommend you go easy on Flash and frames. I get annoyed with sites that are basically one big Flash file, as it really limits things, and more often than not, they are slower than non-Flash sites (both in terms of load times, and response times). An animation or two is fine, particularly if it's for something that's not a critical part of the content, but beyond that, it often becomes counter-productive. An example of something that I find particularly frustrating is the Flash-based scrollable window. This aggravating little construct has a region full of text and/or graphics, with a custom Flash scrollbar at the side. Of course, the mouse scroll wheel doesn't work, the text isn't selectable, and browsers already have working scrolling windows, yet some idiot created these things anyways. Flash animations are likewise annoying to those who cannot view them for whatever reason.

Frame overuse is almost as bad. Dividing a page into two frames is okay if done properly, but more than that is usually a bad idea. Then there's the issue of viewing such pages in a small window or on a small screen. If you've ever tried viewing one of these pages with five or six frames on a PDA, with each frame getting its own set of horizontal and vertical scroll bars because it can't fit on the screen, you'll understand my pain. Remember, the whole idea of making it a web page is to make it as universally accessible as possible. If this weren't true, people would instead be exchanging documents in proprietary formats (not that they don't do this as well, but you get my point).

You might want to read this article on why frames are bad.

The fact that you are planning to use frames in your design--and for a footer, no less--indicates that you have no idea what you are doing. IMO, any competent web designer will avoid frames at all costs. How many websites do you visit regularly that use frames?

Learn CSS. It really gives you freedom with your design.

ouch. feeling owned but thanks for the help.
helping me out with these things progressively build on my experience, to
eventually grow out of my rookie skills.

thanks alot especially with the frames and flash.

Yeah. I have made the mistake of flash whoring my sites. It looks good if used as an intro or in small bits, but a lot of people underestimate a good .gif. Also, of the three you have, the first one looks best. The last two are just not my cuppa tea.

well frames are so 1995...

anyway, as a dial-up user (yeah i'm probably in the minority by now) i don't go to sites that have all that crap...i'll find the content elsewhere.

No Frames. Bad Idea. Not even going to explain why (the only thing I would use frames for would be a control panel or something of the sort). Wizard1988 recommended CSS. That's awesome if you can do it, but if you are still a rookie, and you haven't had any experience, let alone with CSS & layouts, don't try it, you are only going to confuse yourself. You need practice with it first. I know some people might disagree, but tables might not be a bad idea, personally i Never really use them for layouts. They just get really bad if you overdo it. But as Pizentios said, start designing some of it. You still need colours etc. Don't draw it out like a cartoon on a napkin... Honestly, I thought you pictures were a comic strip or something.... hehe

On another note:


Don't count yourself out quite yet. There is still a need too make sites small and fast loading. I truly realized this since I moved out and have my internet setup as wireless (with cable a modem). Honestly, pages can take for ever. It's funny how we can send waves through the air faster (or as fast as) than the phone line. I am just really far from the router. It tends to be on and off.