
This concept is a new version of an older concept. View Old Version

This concept is a new version of an older concept. View Old Version
My choices come to 2,3 & 5. 2 & 3 can be used interchangably, when the main image is dark, you can use transparent white area to put the text on to it. no 5, if you can use probably light blue or dark blue colur instead of yellow for the current page
really great design!
I love how big the main image is.
the dropdown is lovely and it's very different from conservation.org so that's okay. it's not like you copy pasted it exactly! so every designer borrows in the way you have. no crime.
only thing that might be nice is to add either a "go" button after the search field some people may not know they can just press enter and it will work?! this is real minor as its hard to find something bad about this site!
maybe you can think of something catchier to say than "welcome". me personally I never want to say "welcome". again this is sooo minor and just imparting on you my ideology of what a site should be :) and for the 3 opening paragraphs I'd make the first paragraph bigger bolder maybe a diff. color then switch to the small verdana.
great work!
i feel your 6 thumbs was better placed then this in ur prev versions
Very nice site, I love it all together and design and originality, 1 and 3 version I like very much.
Thank you, Shane!
On the three first, I would change the colors of "TRUTH" and "HOPE", due to: to donate is to give hope, and the donate button is brown now, so the word "HOPE" should be brown too.
You might add "home page" to the menu, it is always clearer when it is there.
5) No you are not breaking any oath, they call that style "mega drop-down" here where there are also many other examples of it: http://www.smileycat.com/designelements/megadropdown_menus/
I like the transparent banner in 4 but preferred bottom placement of badges/banners as in original design. If indeed they are navigational then that would be the correct placement (as you have them now) however I would then question there size( to large IMO). Why is that an issue ? to many graphics can be a turn of if it takes to long to scan to main text.
The structure as it is now say to me that those elements are the most Important - if that was your intention it was successful.
Thanks Robert. What is IMO?
The links are navigational. You think they're too big? I'll think about that - possible alternatives...
IMO =In My Opinion (often wrong but with full heart)
If you can -scale them down .
If they are the most important leave them as they are .
Architecture must have hierarchy or at least the intent - we feel less lost that way more cozy.
i like this one if i were to change one thing it would be the 2 pixel dividers that you are using in the content area.
by either getting rid of them or changing it to a one pixel line instead
I looked around the existing site and the proposed design is outstandingly better. clear, fresh, and up to date. Colors are awesome and the pictures are touching while showing happy kids. Some bottom links would be good,
thanks for the bottom link idea. After I moved the 6 ministry buttons to just below the header, the bottom seems lonely and white. Thanks for the idea.
Great progress here, you should design more often :). I think the only thing I would change is adding some more padding and margins to the text area. Make it feel more spacious. It feels a bit tight right now. Great work!
Still would work on your typographic contrast. I really prefer the nav bar of the previous version how ever i would ahve reduced the font size as well.
I would use a serif font for this website, minion pro, georgia or something like that. The main content should be lowered to something more like 14-16. Adjust your line height if you switch to serif as it can be harder to read.
Your banner is beautiful but not when crowed with oversized font. Keep the banner the center and by lowering your font sizes the site will become more balanced.