-
In terms of user experience, this is on first glance a fantastically designed section. Overall it works very well and the clear links make it easy to quickly drill down to the font needed. I think the broad idea of how it works functions well although I did have a few difficulties which I shall try to broadly outline below:
The six main sub sections
Separating out the fonts into Display, Script, Sans and Serif above the fold and Pro and picture below is perfect.
My only issue on this is that the main large images show fonts which aren't kerned correctly which for a typography site, is not great. The loose spacing between the 'a' and the 'n' in sans compared to the tighter 'S' and 'a' really jars for me. The same goes for the kerning on the Serif. The script and the Display are less jarring but could be improved.
Display
This is where the actual functionality starts to fail since a lot of the fonts listed under the various sub headings in Display are not actually Display fonts. I think you've used display as a generic term for anything which doesn't fit into the other sub-headings which isn't technically what a display font is. Dafont uses the term 'fancy' as the category into which retro, stencil, western etc all fit under which seems a technically more correct term even if it doesn't sound quite as good.
Script
Overall this works well athough there are some fonts listed which are questionable as script fonts. Enviro Font for example. If the goal is to help customers narrow down their type selection more quickly then maybe making the font selections under each heading smaller may help.
Serif
Overall this again works really well. However, the heading of Clarendon did confuse me as Clarendon to me personally is a font and not a sub-section of slab serif font styles. I ended up looking up Clarendon on google in case I was mistaken and had inadvertently missed something. Here is what I found: Definition
I think slab serif is sufficient to include Clarendon under.
Sans
I was particularly intrigued by the square sans sub-heading and again the sub-headings mostly work well although there are some questionable choices to put such as Bannock Brae Gothic under the square heading. If the idea is to very broadly categorize fonts to help people browse then this functions very well but if it's to make finding a font as quick and easy as possible then the fonts definitely need to be narrowed down for each section.
Pro
It would be nice to be able to drill down into these fonts more quickly say into Sans, Serif, Display etc.
Picture
These work very well and I like the ability to sort by popularity.
For further feedback on the design I've added notes to the images. If you require any further information or clarification please don't hesitate to contact me. I hope these comments help a little.
-
-
Emma Simpson commented:Overall it really is very good. I do really like the 3d/2d thing on the top border to the main content. It's lovely to navigate and the design is nice, clean and clear.
You know on these reviews, especially the expert ones, I'm really analyzing every tiny little thing and pulling up every tiny flaw I spot. It would function really well without any changes at all. Also I always miss things on my own designs and need an extra eye over it afterwards
-
Michael + Webcardinals commented:Wow Aurimas, this design really rulez :)
It's so much more difficult to design cool thing with few lines and white colour. Especially that clients don't want to pay for white colour :)
I like those little 3D touches like shades in horizontal lines near 'View Fonts' button.
-
Fonts by Type Style
-
1
Nice!
-
2
Menu is very usable
-
3
Font type?
Why is this another font family? These are also links, why not blue?
-
4
Doesn`t fit
To much noise up here.
-
5
Is this logo final?
;-)
-
6
This 3d /2d line works really well
The small hints at extra depth in the design work really well in a very graphic way with the wrap around on the highlight on 'type style' and the horizontal rule across the top of the section here.
-
7
The blue of your logo clashes with the blue of checkout
The blues are not all working together as well as they could. The pure cyan of the 'checkout' box compared to the blues on the links, the blues on the vertical navigation and the blue in the logo are all different to each other. A single use of blue would be cleaner with just some shading on the logo.
-
8
Vertical navigation works well
It works well having this on the left and the sizing, spacing etc all helps it to be easy to use and clean and clear to navigate
-
9
Kerning on display images
As mentioned before, it would be nice to have the kerning correct on these images
-
10
Highlight too strong
-
11
Section titles could be stronger
-
12
Last underline should be everywhere
-
13
Seals could go below 'support'
-
14
Page name is needed
-
15
Can be confusing for 'dummies'
-
16
View fonts is pushing 'proximity rule'
-
17
Less text in last 2 categories below
-
18
Maybe all categories above the fold?
-
19
Amateurs would like to have those on the next page
-
20
Checkout is not needed at the beginning
-
21
My cart is not needed on the homepage
Subcategories of Type Style
-
1
Perfect!
-
2
nice idea!
-
3
This is particularly well handled
The navigation once in each section is brilliantly handled. The design is clean, clear and easy to use. I like the repeat use of the display images from the first page and the way that blue and black is used in a minimal way to highlight which area of the site you are in.
-
4
The add to cart buttons feel a little out of place
I think it's the gradient and drop shadow on the type but these don't fit in with the rest of the design of the site. Maybe the treatment of the horizontal rule going 3d to 2d at the top of the page could be brought into the button design so something visually much simpler but more in keeping with the rest of the site.
-
5
the cart here is a little high
But looking on your actual site, you've fixed this and moved it down in line with the rest of the type.
-
6
re 17. to quick on mouse over
Great review Emma; also nice to hear as it's my design :P All good suggestions, I can't believe I missed the kerning issues myself.. who would have thunk!