What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
20 Comments
- eagles7977, on 04/25/2009, -1/+12Great designs, I'm always amazed by the creative of designers these days. Glad we're moving out of the web 2.0 look and feel, it's getting boring.
- annjay, on 04/25/2009, -0/+7They are simply beautiful and inspiring. Good work guys!
- blcarson, on 04/26/2009, -0/+6I run the first site on the list, Agami Creative. File size and load times was one of our main concerns when we were originally coming up with the idea of doing a watercolor-based site. We managed to keep the whole thing to around 300kb, which still isn't dial up friendly, but doesn't sound too bad based on what you found out. On a plus note, 56k users comprise about 4% of our overall visitors so you kind of have to weigh that against the benefits of the design.
- Arsenard, on 04/25/2009, -2/+7Very artsy! Not for my web site, please!
- skenliv, on 04/26/2009, -0/+5Thank you for commenting! I agree, 300kb for that site really is acceptable. The site is well built! I am in the building of a hugely graphic intense site, and i just targeted 250kb including JS, css, and html. But it started on 640kb before optimization, and involved changing 6 javascripts and remaking 12 pictures.
It is hard, but i think the benefit of great design is huge when executed well enough. - xCIone, on 04/25/2009, -0/+5Nice list for Inspiration.Good job
- blcarson, on 04/26/2009, -0/+3Thanks for the compliment. I'm actually really glad you brought up that issue - I ran the site through the Web Page Analyzer (http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyz ... and it looks like we can save about 75kb by optimizing our css and js a bit more. Will definitely be doing that this weekend...
- soogy, on 04/26/2009, -0/+3Has nothing to do with the style, just the ignorance of the designer. A 100% JPEG would be less than half the size of that same PNG-24 image (206KB). Sure, in some cases PNG-24 is more optimized or even necessary for alpha transparency, but not here.
On that same page, he has a HUGE 1.2MB background GIF. Ridiculous! Again, a 100% JPEG would have been half the size (and would have been able to contain more than 256 colors as well). - skenliv, on 04/26/2009, -0/+3Thanks for the link! I didn't know about web page analyzer!
- skenliv, on 04/26/2009, -0/+3Agree, perhaps the site maker runs the server too and charges per excessive megabyte ;-)
- inactive, on 04/26/2009, -1/+3Good lord, in a day and age with people streaming 15 megabyte youtube videos only a smarmy code-obsessed programmer would worry about whether a site takes an extra 10 seconds to load
- stef686, on 04/26/2009, -0/+1Nice designs!
- skenliv, on 04/26/2009, -3/+4You have to be f-ing kidding me, most sites are over a megabyte big!
http://www.crushlovely.com/
The top background @ main site is about 500kb!
Watercolor may look good, but it sure aint good to your server wallet and slow-band visitors! - TrnsltLife, on 04/26/2009, -0/+1Go Biola! Nice to see my alma mater in the list.
- nixda, on 04/26/2009, -1/+1This is getting boring already.
- psdeluxer, on 05/09/2009, -0/+0Very interesting collection. Thanks for sharing;)
- imagesplace, on 06/25/2009, -0/+0It's about making your site stand out from crowd nowdays. Would like to see some 3d rendering in the websites.
http://www.design2work.net - soogy, on 04/26/2009, -4/+3Most of this is grunge, not watercolor.
- biblebelter, on 04/26/2009, -2/+1useful info.
- skenliv, on 04/26/2009, -6/+1I do not agree, using this much graphic is slow and heavy.
Combining web 2.0 and graphics in a fair amount, would be a good balance.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is