Graphics in Web pages

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Nick, Nov 10, 2004.

  1. Nick

    Nick Guest

    Hello,

    I wanted to know if anybody has any good suggestions of any books
    or other resources that could teach me how to make good Web graphics
    and how to use them in HTML to make Web pages look good.

    When I say graphics, I mean GIFs and not any flash or anything like
    that.

    I am a PHP programmer and I know how to use HTML and CSS well, but
    I am horrible at making buttons, background images, logos etc. and
    I really don't know how to implement images into HTML to help make
    the Web page look good. Not only do I need to learn how to make the
    images but also how to put them into the HTML -- how it all works
    together well.

    Does anybody know of which software to use and good books that have
    good examples and so on?

    Please help, using graphics in my Web pages to make them look good
    is my missing ingredient.

    Thanks,
    Nick
    Nick, Nov 10, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Nick

    Guest

    Nick wrote:
    > Not only do I need to learn how to make the
    > images but also how to put them into the HTML -- how it all works
    > together well.


    http://www.mbstevens.com/howtothumb
    might be helpful.  Do searches at w3.org
    for 'img' 'png' 'jpg' and 'gif'.  
    Do the same at alistapart.com.
     
    > Does anybody know of which software to use and good books that have
    > good examples and so on?


    Download the Gimp; also download documentation for it.
    Takes a few hours of experimenting to get up to speed.
    The time spent will be well worth the trouble.  
    For <em>webpages</em> it's as powerful as photoshop.
    Don't settle for one of the less powerful packages just because
    it might not require several hours of study.  Be sure to get
    Gimp 2, the newest version.
    mbstevens      
    , Nov 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Nick wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > I wanted to know if anybody has any good suggestions of any books
    > or other resources that could teach me how to make good Web graphics
    > and how to use them in HTML to make Web pages look good.
    >
    > When I say graphics, I mean GIFs and not any flash or anything like
    > that.
    >
    > I am a PHP programmer and I know how to use HTML and CSS well, but
    > I am horrible at making buttons, background images, logos etc. and
    > I really don't know how to implement images into HTML to help make
    > the Web page look good. Not only do I need to learn how to make the
    > images but also how to put them into the HTML -- how it all works
    > together well.
    >
    > Does anybody know of which software to use and good books that have
    > good examples and so on?
    >
    > Please help, using graphics in my Web pages to make them look good
    > is my missing ingredient.


    To be absolutely honest (and not just lazy), you needn't do any
    work on graphics. There are tools like the GIMP that do it all for you. Why
    do I mention the GIMP with some confidence? Because I used Photoshop and
    Paintshop before, but nothing compares to Script Fu which generates
    beautiful banners, buttons, backgrounds, etc. See, for example:

    http://www.schestowitz.com/Software/Script_Fu/

    There are also some nice menus that are GPL'd at:

    http://www.e-lusion.com/design/menu/

    I mention it only because I stubled across it yesterday.

    --
    Roy Schestowitz
    http://schestowitz.com
    Roy Schestowitz, Nov 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Nick

    Jey Gifford Guest

    Nick,

    My suggestions would be:

    1) Buy Photoshop (with ImageReady) and learn how to use those. (They
    can export your images to the correct html tables and whatnot)
    2) Visit LOTS of web sites and read TONS of magazine ads. Bookmark &
    clip the ones that you think look good.
    3) Ask yourself and analyze WHY something looks good.
    4) Try to pay special attention to spacing and alignment of text &
    graphics
    5) Avoid "GOING NUTS" with font usage. That's a sure way to set off
    the amateur alarm.
    6) REMEMBER: Simplicity and readability speak VOLUMES
    7) Enjoy the ride. Five Years from now, you'll look back at your
    proudest work and scream "WHAT WAS I THINKING?!?!?!?!?!" :)

    jEY
    Jey Gifford, Nov 10, 2004
    #4
  5. Nick

    Henry Guest

    Jey Gifford wrote:
    > Nick,
    >
    > My suggestions would be:
    >
    > 1) Buy Photoshop (with ImageReady) and learn how to use those. (They
    > can export your images to the correct html tables and whatnot)
    > 2) Visit LOTS of web sites and read TONS of magazine ads. Bookmark &
    > clip the ones that you think look good.
    > 3) Ask yourself and analyze WHY something looks good.
    > 4) Try to pay special attention to spacing and alignment of text &
    > graphics
    > 5) Avoid "GOING NUTS" with font usage. That's a sure way to set off
    > the amateur alarm.
    > 6) REMEMBER: Simplicity and readability speak VOLUMES
    > 7) Enjoy the ride. Five Years from now, you'll look back at your
    > proudest work and scream "WHAT WAS I THINKING?!?!?!?!?!" :)
    >
    > jEY



    Amen!

    Roy... you must be bad in Photoshop!

    These samples are very, very average.

    Just few actions and you could do magic in Photoshop.

    And in some sites you could d/load them for free.
    Henry, Nov 10, 2004
    #5
  6. >To be absolutely honest (and not just lazy), you needn't do any
    >work on graphics.


    >http://schestowitz.com


    And clearly, you haven't. Fact is, a stunning display of original visuals can
    increase the value of a site many times that of "regular" sites.

    I can't believe I am actually seeing people in this thread recommending the
    automation of graphic design. This is the equivalent of someone coming in here
    and saying not to learn HTML, just use FrontPage.
    Matthew Superstar Swass, Nov 10, 2004
    #6
  7. Nick

    Tony Clarke Guest

    Some tips...

    1 Photoshop/ImageReady: Use these to make decent images/buttons/menus.
    ImageReady can slice an image up into links and do some stuff that can
    really save you time.
    2. Dreamweaver MX: A quick an easy way to format everything. MS Word will
    put ALOT of extra stuff into a html page for formatting.
    3. Stylesheets: By far the best way of getting some consistancy onto your
    site.



    "Henry" <> wrote in message
    news:4192a32e$...
    > Jey Gifford wrote:
    > > Nick,
    > >
    > > My suggestions would be:
    > >
    > > 1) Buy Photoshop (with ImageReady) and learn how to use those. (They
    > > can export your images to the correct html tables and whatnot)
    > > 2) Visit LOTS of web sites and read TONS of magazine ads. Bookmark &
    > > clip the ones that you think look good.
    > > 3) Ask yourself and analyze WHY something looks good.
    > > 4) Try to pay special attention to spacing and alignment of text &
    > > graphics
    > > 5) Avoid "GOING NUTS" with font usage. That's a sure way to set off
    > > the amateur alarm.
    > > 6) REMEMBER: Simplicity and readability speak VOLUMES
    > > 7) Enjoy the ride. Five Years from now, you'll look back at your
    > > proudest work and scream "WHAT WAS I THINKING?!?!?!?!?!" :)
    > >
    > > jEY

    >
    >
    > Amen!
    >
    > Roy... you must be bad in Photoshop!
    >
    > These samples are very, very average.
    >
    > Just few actions and you could do magic in Photoshop.
    >
    > And in some sites you could d/load them for free.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Tony Clarke, Nov 10, 2004
    #7
  8. Matthew Superstar Swass wrote:

    >>To be absolutely honest (and not just lazy), you needn't do any
    >>work on graphics.

    >
    >>http://schestowitz.com

    >
    > And clearly, you haven't. Fact is, a stunning display of original visuals
    > can increase the value of a site many times that of "regular" sites.


    Fair Enough. I used to work on banners in Paintshop and Photoshop and it was
    very time-consuming. As soon as I started working on my personal site, I
    wanted a quick and effortless machinery to give a diverse collection of
    banners. I still use the GIMP to render effects like shadows, transparency,
    etc.

    As I said, your point is valid.

    > I can't believe I am actually seeing people in this thread recommending
    > the automation of graphic design. This is the equivalent of someone coming
    > in here and saying not to learn HTML, just use FrontPage.


    I was using FrontPage many years ago. I have not touched it for 6 years. I
    advocate _no_ automatic Web design, unless you are not fluent with SGML or
    not comfortable with the concept (as sometimes is the case with
    non-scientists, e.g. Word versus LaTeX).

    Roy

    --
    Roy Schestowitz
    http://schestowitz.com/
    Roy Schestowitz, Nov 11, 2004
    #8
  9. Henry wrote:

    > Jey Gifford wrote:
    >> Nick,
    >>
    >> My suggestions would be:
    >>
    >> 1) Buy Photoshop (with ImageReady) and learn how to use those. (They
    >> can export your images to the correct html tables and whatnot)
    >> 2) Visit LOTS of web sites and read TONS of magazine ads. Bookmark &
    >> clip the ones that you think look good.
    >> 3) Ask yourself and analyze WHY something looks good.
    >> 4) Try to pay special attention to spacing and alignment of text &
    >> graphics
    >> 5) Avoid "GOING NUTS" with font usage. That's a sure way to set off
    >> the amateur alarm.
    >> 6) REMEMBER: Simplicity and readability speak VOLUMES
    >> 7) Enjoy the ride. Five Years from now, you'll look back at your
    >> proudest work and scream "WHAT WAS I THINKING?!?!?!?!?!" :)
    >>
    >> jEY

    >
    >
    > Amen!
    >
    > Roy... you must be bad in Photoshop!
    >
    > These samples are very, very average.
    >
    > Just few actions and you could do magic in Photoshop.
    >
    > And in some sites you could d/load them for free.


    These are _not_ logos I designed. Think of them as a basic templates (have
    you read the text at the top of this thumbnails page?).

    --
    Roy Schestowitz
    http://schestowitz.com
    Roy Schestowitz, Nov 11, 2004
    #9
  10. Nick

    Henry Guest

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > I was using FrontPage many years ago.


    Yeah! Cough...cough... than was total crap.

    > I have not touched it for 6 years. I
    > advocate _no_ automatic Web design, unless you are not fluent with SGML or
    > not comfortable with the concept (as sometimes is the case with
    > non-scientists, e.g. Word versus LaTeX).



    I love FP 2003 because when I have splitted page, on the bottom I have a
    layout and on the top the code. When I press on layout, it highlights
    the code and vice versa.

    Any work on layout is showing immediately in code.

    So basically I use it as *good text editor* with a preview.

    When I have to replace some code like

    <font face="Arial" size="5" color="#FF0000">

    I'll highlight the code, press Ctrl-F to find it and than I have a
    windows asking me, if I want to replace that code with nothing or with a
    different code.

    When I have to replace with different code, FP is asking me if I want to
    replace every instance of a original code.

    That way is FAST!!! Try imagine replace 25 instances. ;-P

    Working with tables is very easy. All I have to do is to remove unwanted
    code like cell height and other crap from M$ and I can see what I'm doing.

    Just in case I have my file opened in Firefox and I'm checking if I'm
    going right.

    FP has one more great feature.

    When I see nice page and I want to copy something from it, I save page,
    open it in FP, make new blank page and copy some elements from copied page.

    FP is copying often that element with css coding just for the element
    only. Neat huh?

    It's just... me.

    ;)
    Henry, Nov 11, 2004
    #10
  11. Nick

    Alan Cole Guest

    In article <419313e6$>,
    Henry <> wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    > > I was using FrontPage many years ago.

    >
    > Yeah! Cough...cough... than was total crap.
    >
    > > I have not touched it for 6 years. I
    > > advocate _no_ automatic Web design, unless you are not fluent with SGML or
    > > not comfortable with the concept (as sometimes is the case with
    > > non-scientists, e.g. Word versus LaTeX).

    >
    >
    > I love FP 2003 because when I have splitted page, on the bottom I have a
    > layout and on the top the code. When I press on layout, it highlights
    > the code and vice versa.
    >
    > Any work on layout is showing immediately in code.
    >
    > So basically I use it as *good text editor* with a preview.
    >
    > When I have to replace some code like
    >
    > <font face="Arial" size="5" color="#FF0000">


    Try using CSS instead... that sirt of code is waaay outdated
    >
    > I'll highlight the code, press Ctrl-F to find it and than I have a
    > windows asking me, if I want to replace that code with nothing or with a
    > different code.
    >
    > When I have to replace with different code, FP is asking me if I want to
    > replace every instance of a original code.
    >
    > That way is FAST!!! Try imagine replace 25 instances. ;-P


    As above..... Using CSS is much better for such things.
    >
    > Working with tables is very easy. All I have to do is to remove unwanted
    > code like cell height and other crap from M$ and I can see what I'm doing.
    >
    > Just in case I have my file opened in Firefox and I'm checking if I'm
    > going right.
    >
    > FP has one more great feature.
    >
    > When I see nice page and I want to copy something from it, I save page,
    > open it in FP, make new blank page and copy some elements from copied page.
    >
    > FP is copying often that element with css coding just for the element
    > only. Neat huh?
    >
    > It's just... me.


    Each to their own.... but there are plenty of other Good text editors
    out there with preview panes that don't write bad code themselves, they
    just leave it up to you!

    Al.

    >
    > ;)


    --
    Alan Cole. E-mail: justal at lineone dot net
    http://www.forces-of-nature.co.uk [Coastal Sports]
    http://www.tsunami-site-design.co.uk [Website Design]
    http://tinyurl.com/64xrd [Plusnet ISP]
    Alan Cole, Nov 11, 2004
    #11
  12. Alan Cole enlightened us with:
    > Each to their own.... but there are plenty of other Good text
    > editors out there with preview panes that don't write bad code
    > themselves, they just leave it up to you!


    I never needed anything but VIM.

    Sybren
    --
    The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be a
    capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
    safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
    Sybren Stuvel, Nov 11, 2004
    #12
  13. On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:50:35 +0100, Sybren Stuvel wrote:

    > I never needed anything but VIM.
    >
    > Sybren


    Me too. Just thought I'd mention that and thus cement my geekiness in
    stone. Vim is the best thing. Not best text editor, but best overall
    anything. Go on, name something. I dare ya. Ha! Nope, Vim is better. [1]




    [1] well, okay, really fantastic sex pretty much trumps it. Heck even
    sorta lame queasy sex is better. but now you're just nitpicking. Come to
    think of it, even thinking about lame queasy sex is better, but Vim is a
    close second

    --
    Jeffrey D. Silverman |
    Website | http://www.newtnotes.com

    Drop "PANTS" to reply by email
    Jeffrey Silverman, Nov 11, 2004
    #13
  14. Jeffrey Silverman enlightened us with:
    > Vim is the best thing. Not best text editor


    Yes it is.

    > , but best overall anything.


    Que? I think it's video playing abilities are rather poor.

    Sybren
    --
    The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be a
    capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
    safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
    Sybren Stuvel, Nov 11, 2004
    #14
  15. Nick

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Jeffrey Silverman wrote:

    > Vim is the best thing. Not best text editor, but best overall anything.


    Pizza is better than Vim. Vim is better than Vimto though.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Nov 11, 2004
    #15
  16. Jeffrey Silverman wrote:

    > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:50:35 +0100, Sybren Stuvel wrote:
    >
    >> I never needed anything but VIM.
    >>
    >> Sybren

    >
    > Me too. Just thought I'd mention that and thus cement my geekiness in
    > stone.


    That's the sole reason vim users stick with it (no offence). It's wonderful
    when you have no X session running. Nothing else!

    > [1] well, okay, really fantastic sex pretty much trumps it. Heck even
    > sorta lame queasy sex is better. but now you're just nitpicking. Come to
    > think of it, even thinking about lame queasy sex is better, but Vim is a
    > close second


    Hmmm... if you had used a proper text editor, you'd know it's far better
    than sex. So here's the test, folks: if you'd rather have sex than edit,
    then you must be using the wrong editor.

    --
    Roy Schestowitz
    http://schestowitz.com
    Roy Schestowitz, Nov 12, 2004
    #16
  17. Nick

    Mark Parnell Guest

    Mark Parnell, Nov 12, 2004
    #17
  18. Nick

    Alan Cole Guest

    In article <hqhrujqcwl49.1i94fzqo3rku8$>,
    Mark Parnell <> wrote:

    > Previously in alt.html, Roy Schestowitz <>
    > said:
    >
    > > So here's the test, folks: if you'd rather have sex than edit,
    > > then you must be using the wrong editor.

    >
    > http://editor.usenetshit.info/


    Or maybe those that prefer the editing are using the wrong sexual
    partner! :p

    Al.

    --
    Alan Cole. E-mail: justal at lineone dot net
    http://www.forces-of-nature.co.uk [Coastal Sports]
    http://www.tsunami-site-design.co.uk [Website Design]
    http://tinyurl.com/64xrd [Plusnet ISP]
    Alan Cole, Nov 12, 2004
    #18
  19. Roy Schestowitz enlightened us with:
    > That's the sole reason vim users stick with it (no offence). It's
    > wonderful when you have no X session running. Nothing else!


    Vim is also great in a XTerm. I use it right now to type this
    followup. GVim is great if you don't want to use a terminal version,
    or if you want to free up your terminal to do other work. I use it all
    the time, also to develop X applications.

    Sybren
    --
    The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be a
    capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the
    safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?
    Sybren Stuvel, Nov 12, 2004
    #19
  20. Nick

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > That's the sole reason vim users stick with it (no offence). It's wonderful
    > when you have no X session running. Nothing else!


    I bet you have /bin/bash running... and /sbin/init and a few other
    processes.

    If you really want vim running and *nothing* else, type "linux
    init=/bin/vim" at the LILO prompt.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Nov 12, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Johann Blake
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    367
    Johann Blake
    Apr 28, 2004
  2. Rob R. Ainscough
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    3,546
    Rob R. Ainscough
    May 30, 2006
  3. Nathan Sokalski
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    991
    Gaurav Vaish \(www.Edujini-Labs.com\)
    Jan 10, 2007
  4. Nathan Sokalski
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    268
    Nathan Sokalski
    Dec 21, 2006
  5. Nathan Sokalski
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    307
    Nathan Sokalski
    Dec 21, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page