DesignBySLS

I listen to a bit of everything. I have 36 hours of music that includes everything including Squeeze by Tempted straight through to bag rock by the Red Hot Chili Pipers (no type there though I love the RHCPeppers too!). I have Storm Large intermingled with Diana Crawl. I honestly just like music. No music... no work... or slower work. P.S. Kinda like not having to worry if a thread is "closed". I posted this tongue in cheek about the all work and no play part... I do agree though that this thread could be a monster laden with singular posts. It is a fun type of thread too... Going to have to ponder how to have the best of both without the negative as it can be a very fun community thread.

LMAO! I have to say that from my perspective... The "not getting that it was a joke" was more funny than having chuckled at it when I read the comment. :lol:

Time for a mini-thread-jack! Ok... You guys just totally stunned me... I was like... What? Then I googled... All I have to say is: How did I miss this? I mean... I was on the phone with someone at the time whom I use to know from when I had a functional portfolio (ironically she still does a lot of print work, etc. herself but I do not) and I was totally stuck on silly for not having paid attention and realized who you are outside of this before. Truthfully I focused on you skill set here, and never questioned the "before". I find I do this often... I also know that there are some interesting and diverse past histories and backgrounds around here. Eric... From my own perspective I would say - Go back to it. There is a market for a variety of looks as you well know but right now they seem to be having talent issues. Either they have the look and can't work with the camera, or they can work with the camera and don't have the look. I know the hours it involves, and the time and energy it involves all too well but if you can... Then do. Truthfully I was suppose to be rebuilding my own portfolio again because I didn't have to be able to code or create graphics to pose... But as of Dec. 12th that is on hold again. I'm lucky my face is mostly back to where it was but for photos... Not even close. I was never main stream like you but there is good money in it if you fill a niche and I did/do. S

I see your point and I agree with you to a point. I'd like to say I think it could be a positive thing but in truth I know that once burned, twice shy so what about all those clients who need a new design after getting shafted and don't want to deal with any of us? Again... It justifies the more skilled designers higher rates should they want to charge them but it also means that clients will get burned and think less of the industry as a whole.

So Kyle is right then and I should hire a Gigolo? Just to do my part? ABSOLUTELY! But only if you write a review! ;) *kidding* Well... ok... not about the review. Those are fun to read!

The adult industry is suffering across the board. With the exception of a number of designers out there who are getting a ton of requests. Apparently people feel that it might be a viable way to supplement their income and some on the design end may well use that and take advantage of it to a degree. I wouldn't be surprised to see an influx of new entertainers trying their hand at things... The problem is that they don't realize that those currently working in the industry are already struggling in various ways. And this might really seem trivial to many but I am going to put this in perspective: Client/Consumer spends money on Adult industry. Entertainer spends income on: Food Shelter (rent/mortgage) Clothing (Often amounts most would never fathom and in all types of clothing from more risqu? to every day clothing) Electronics (Phones, Computers, Hand held devices, Entertainment Systems, Digital Media) Transportation (Cars, Transit, Taxis, Planes, Trains, Etc.) Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Then comes the advertising and marketing dollars which in turn affect thousands of designers, a huge number of office/administrative staff, account managers with advertising resources, etc. And those people in turn would have spent the money they made on: Food Shelter (rent/mortgage) Clothing (Often amounts most would never fathom and in all types of clothing from more risqu? to every day clothing) Electronics (Phones, Computers, Hand held devices, Entertainment Systems, Digital Media) Transportation (Cars, Transit, Taxis, Planes, Trains, Etc.) Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. And then you need to look at the retail staff who worked on commissions, or even a base fixed pay... The money is not being spent by the entertainers, the money is not being spent by those in the advertising and marketing industries... The income will not justify having 6 employees (arbitrary number) but rather only being able to provide hours for 4... So there are 2 jobs lost. And what might those 2 people do? If they are female, and remotely reasonable looking someone might just suggest they turn around and possibly supplement their income and while that might only happen for 1 in every 200-400 people... That is a lot of people who are considering the industry... Which brings us back to issue 1: The adult industry is suffering across the board. With the exception of a number of designers out there who are getting a ton of requests. Apparently people feel that it might be a viable way to supplement their income and some on the design end may well use that and take advantage of it to a degree. I wouldn't be surprised to see an influx of new entertainers trying their hand at things... The worst part is that it will become worse by way of the prolific profiteering, and rate cutting that the designers who deal with more adult content already face. So those nickel and dime proposals, and badly coded sites will pepper the net... So in the end we all suffer. Just some additional perspective.

Stefan... You sum it up perfectly! I am childless for once... And could easily have put out the money on an evening out... But it is just too much for me. Though we went out on Saturday instead as there were less people. We did 2 movies + dinner and were home by 11... Then on Sunday we were out to dinner with a friend and nearly made it home at 8... We went to the store and were home and in bed by 10 instead. Though I must say... The tea with chocolate and honey sounds like something to add to the evenings plans for this house. Happy New Years everyone!

I would like to thank you all for the chuckles. I unfortunately can not post the sites that come to mind on the open forum... breaking the link or not I am conscious of the age of the users and potential users. Though this said I can say one of the worst offenders industry wise are of a more "mature" content. On top of that one of the worst for still using frames, and accessibility issues that I have seen in a long time is a site I hit for medical resources. I have offered them a re-design and know they plan one... At some point. So I am going to be a good girl and not put them here.

If not yet then I think I have a link for a mod at home... More to add to my thread.

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and Seasons Greetings! Hope everyone has a lovely time, and a bit of fun! S

I'll never poke fun at splash pages... because I know there IS a use for them in some situations. Though that is for another thread at another time. Congrats on the A!

Spock that was what I hoped would happen. Feeling confused is absolutely brutal... And I know that more than most. I look forward to seeing the edited CSS should you still be having problems. Shelley P.S. Great memory JBall!

dragdan... If you could please post the full CSS in a new thread we can properly address it there and it will be much easier to figure out why it is missing. S Good Add JBall. Maybe I'll do a new thread or check if we have one to add it to with tidbits like my post and yours. I think this confuses many who are learning or even adapting. S

Please do not put your keywords and links in a greeting post. http://www.killersites.com/forums/topic/1/what-we-consider-spam/

I'll start by saying I have done almost the exact same gallery on numerous occasions with slightly different code. Only once have I needed a conditional comment for it and that was background alignment specific, and I use a No JS version. If you would like to have an idea of the code variation I use check my graphics page (sadly neglected but the code is good), my Layout CSS, and for the colour/effect aspect any colour sheet I use. For anyone taking a peek... If you think 3 or even 6 style sheets is a lot... Throw in a style sheet changer. It is not necessarily "wrong" to have style sheets split. Often you will find that a site splits colour/overall look/theme from structural, and "special" pages have an additional one with IE modifications having their own as well. This is likely closer to what your teacher meant. I am going to try to take you back to the basics so you get less confused, and so editing your site design or layout or special pages becomes a faster and easier experience instead of trying to figure out which style sheet to change, and then again which one to adjust for IE, etc. I need to make sure you know this important piece of info: The LAST style sheet listed will OVERRIDE any before them. With one exception. If you used the "?important" attribute to change it. I am also going to make the assumption you know that a class (written as .classname) can be used as many times as you want on a HTML page, while an ID (written as #idname) is only used once on a HTML page BUT I am putting it here as others may stumble on this in future searches. That said... We'll begin: Firstly: The length of your CSS... The length of your CSS files will load top down. So if it is a background attribute or body attribute obviously it will be placed near the top. Image loading will also cause load times to vary so we keep them "smaller"... HOWEVER... Cascading Style Sheets purely that. Styling. The HTML code is NOT affected with regard to load time. So the code it's self should be loading, and would produce an unstyled version of your site before the page load would suffer drastically. If your code was heavy (meaning unused, extraneous code), or the images that are loading through the style sheet or in page are heavy file sizes then that would slow your site. From what I see you are using smaller file sizes so it is not an issue. I will also say I have a client with a site that has over 80 pages of content, and very specific needs. A good place to take a look at how long a style sheet could be without affecting load time adversely would be to go to a CMS like Drupal and look at a base theme like Zen. They are very long, well commented, and load fast as they are not file size heavy. Secondly: The conditional IE Style Sheets: You do not need full style sheets. You only need to add the CSS classes/IDs that you need to "adjust". Unless you are using the same name for a style on multiple style sheets you should only need 1 IE style sheet (version permitting). All of the adjustments should be done on the same style sheet to keep you from accidentally having contradicting code. An example of what I mean is (and I was copying from a site with a longer list of style sheets and editing to what you need): You can get version specific with multiple sheets for IE based on that but most times you do not need to with positioning issues if you can allow for a 4-8 pixel variance from my own experiences (IE 7 has changed some of that but if you are not already adjusting for that it is not needed). Honestly... At this point I can't even begin to back track which sheet is affecting which because there are duplications of code that are not needed, etc. and these can over ride things so one COULD end up fixingit in A, breaking it in B, fixing it in C and breaking it in D if they were listed in that order. I think this is causing confusion for you on your end as well. Now I will break this down for you: --- This is how your site looks unstyled if someone was to print it. This is where you turn off all images/backgrounds/colours, etc. etc. Often you would see things like this: .classname { color: #000; background-color: transparent !important; background-image: none !important; } Class name is often things like: .wrapper or .page or .content OR #wrapper or #page or #content And you would condense the style sheet with combining like styles as Eric said when he put this in: #home #whatever { color:#000; } This is where you define the font types, sizes, etc. This is where you would edit your p, h1, h2, h3 attributes... Not the colour per say. The sizing, text decoration, margins, etc. Because essentially these are the same for the whole site and when they are NOT the same they would have an individually styled class. Example: p{ margin: 10px; font-weight:bold;} And your code can be condensed with things like this: ul, ul ul, ul ol, ol ol, ol ul, { margin: 0; } - IF they share the same attribute. It should also contain the links in this order: a:link { text-decoration:none; color: #999999; } a:visited { text-decoration:none; color: #383636; } a:hover, a:focus { text-decoration:underline; color: #666666; } a:active {text-decoration:underline; color: #000000; } - Colour can be applied here for the site wide link colours and then if a new class/set of colours is needed for an exceptional circumstance it should be added to the "appearances" style sheet. Interesting quirks to note about HTML elements and which often solves IE issues: Almost all modern browsers use a 16px default font size. Specifying the font-size and line-height in ems (relative to the 16px default font) allows the user to resize the font in the browser and produces the most consistent results across different browsers. If you were running into problems you would apply the following attribute to the HTML elements page: body { font-size: 100%; /* Fixes exaggerated text resizing in IE6 and IE7 */ } http://www.alistapart.com/articles/howtosizetextincss - Font size information and rendering of browser information can be found here. This is where you put your CSS that pertains to your columns, and positioning of content on the page. If you want your menu in the left column, and floated there then this is where you do it. If you want to define your content width, or inner content width. This is where. Your gallery is a unique circumstance and would be suited to its own CSS so that would be here. It is exactly as you have it. This is where you apply your images, your colours, your special classes for links/text/html attributes, miscellaneous classes used through the site, etc. One style sheet. All modifications. Denote it by classes, and only put in the classes/modifications needed. If IE needs different positioning, margins, or padding then do it here but do not include classes you have not had to adjust as that is already read in the previous CSS. You are simply making an amendment to one browsers incorrect rendering. Yes... I know making the new blank CSS files and copying the code into the appropriate CSS files and then double checking against duplication will take you an hour or two but I promise... it is worth it. Your style sheets look like they have fairly clean code. They just need to be organized well for the hierarchy.

It has to do with the width of your image sizes. The one that "works" is a 1600px ? 950px file size. The one that is not working is a 1230px ? 828px file size, and has "sharp" edges to the image. You are not going to get any better than that unless you edit/recreate the image to fade out on the sides. Looking at the images them selves this is purely a design/image/graphics issue. The code is appropriate. http://lambofgod.webng.com/images/bg.jpg vs http://lambofgod.webng.com/bg.png Are these part of a template or from another site? S

I actually preferred the "2" roll outs but it is still better than IE. Then again I equated IE to having a nice table set for dinner and noticing there was something "unpleasant" left by the family puppy hidden by the edge of the table cloth.

Just so you understand why this is not generally done: Making it "open in a new window" would actually be contravening "best practises". It is up to the user to right click to open a new tab/window or to use the back button and it is generally considered to be the most user friendly.

Thanks Stefan!

*holds her hand up and waits to be noticed before saying...* Um... Ditto! I know I only had 541 posts but... ya know...