Why is my page so small?

I just uploaded my site and was stunned to see how small it was. I was advised by Freeway to set the site to 77px wide by 500px h.

By any measure the site seems terribly small – much smaller than other sites I pull up. Amy I looking at a whole re-do?

www.paulheagen.com


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Well, my page is too small because it is too small. :=)

Freeway told me 700 x 500 was fine, even though several times I told them I thought everything seemed too small.

Nonetheless, working on a fix, and some questions:

  1. Shat is a better size?

  2. Do i take the ecurrent site, copy it to a new folder and go into site properties and resize the whole site? If I do that, do I need to copy all of the images or do they come with it if I copy to the site into a new folder?

  3. I assume i have to go back into each page and resize everything, right? Sigh…Oh well, live and learn…


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Your page size is measured as a width of 770px, or you could say that it’s sized at the width of the “landing page” image width of around 660px. I’d recommend in this day and age to start with a wider width and build a site to fit into that.

Your site is small in size compared to others, but remember you design a website to fit the content properly in terms of the user being able to read the content and find what they are looking for. I would recommend a bump up in size (width wise and font-size) and fortunately with FW it’s not hard to make these changes.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

On 15 Jul 2009, 8:36 pm, Dan J wrote:

Your page size is measured as a width of 770px, or you could say that it’s sized at the width of the “landing page” image width of around 660px.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. Both pages are the same width (or are supposed to be).

I’d recommend in this day and age to start with a wider width and build a site to fit into that.

Can you suggest a size? Based upon other sites I am now seeing side-by-side with mine, I have to be looking at something like 1,000-1,100 px wide. I pulled up www.msn.com and www.cnn.com, and they are about 30-340% wider than mine.

Your site is small in size compared to others, but remember you design a website to fit the content properly in terms of the user being able to read the content and find what they are looking for. I would recommend a bump up in size (width wise and font-size) and fortunately with FW it’s not hard to make these changes.

I just posted a question on this. When you say “easy” it still means going into each page and resizing everything to fit the new proportions, correct?


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

On 15 Jul 2009, 8:36 pm, Dan J wrote:

Your page size is measured as a width of 770px, or you could say that it’s sized at the width of the “landing page” image width of around 660px.

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. Both pages are the same width (or are supposed to be).

Can you suggest a size? Based upon other sites I am now seeing side-by-side with mine, I have to be looking at something like 1,000-1,100 px wide. I pulled up www.msn.com and www.cnn.com, and they are about 30-340% wider than mine.

Your site is small in size compared to others, but remember you design a website to fit the content properly in terms of the user being able to read the content and find what they are looking for. I would recommend a bump up in size (width wise and font-size) and fortunately with FW it’s not hard to make these changes.

I just posted a question on this. When you say “easy” it still means going into each page and resizing everything to fit the new proportions, correct?

First, I thought you forgot a ZERO in your first post in terms of the actual width of your site. I did guess-timate that your image width was 660px on the landing page. That would be an estimate on a site-unseen and that may have drawn out a bit of confusion.

As far as a recommendation for your website I’d suggest scaling it to be like 825px more towards 850px wide. You don’t have a whole lot of content on the site (horizontally) and I’d suggest you utilize the undefined height amount that you’d then have available to you.

Sites like MSN and CNN have tons of content and to try and compare those sites with your site (content-wise) isn’t the right approach to it. You’re not running a huge media company with constantly changing dynamic content, but rather you have a static website that will often keep the same information over time. This isn’t to downplay your business or your website, but rather to say that it’s obviously two different markets.

When I say the word ‘easy’ I mean it as being able to adjust the size of the content easily with FW. If you had to resize everything using Photoshop and Dreamweaver it’d take a lot longer to do but since FW is non-coding and more visually hands-on you’re able to adjust your site faster and more efficiently. Plus, hey, you get more time spent learning FW.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Freeway told me 700 x 500 was fine, even though several times I told
them I thought everything seemed too small.

Freeway is a program, not a “they”… I’m not entirely sure what you
mean here. You’re not having conversations with your software are
you? :slight_smile:

Freeway’s default page size is rather small these days. It is very,
very safe, in that it won’t stress out the smallest display sizes,
but it is rather too safe for regular modern design.

All you have to do is pick what size you want your page designs to
be. This doesn’t force the user’s browser to that size of course, but
it defines a design starting point among other things.

Use the Inspector palette. Try 800 or 900 pixels wide. First do this
to the master page to have your pages change automatically. Any
‘regular’ pages (your actual designed pages) that don’t follow suit
can bechanged manually.

k


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I’m not sure I understand your surprise to see your pages that small after upload. When you preview the site in FW you basically get what you will see once it’s uploaded. Did you work zoomed in in FW and never previewed the pages?

I like to use 960px wide.

I have made some template pages with 12 and 16 columns that I usually use as a quick start for a new site.

If you’re interested you can grab them here
http:freshbrand.com/STUFF/12column.fwtb.zip
http:freshbrand.com/STUFF/16column.fwtb.zip

Cheers, Marcel


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I did Preview it, which is why I was concerned that it was small.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

There is a “they.” I paid for a full-day workshop with Freeway’s support group.

Not a problem. I am rebuilding the pages. (920px Wide, by the way). From all I have learned on this support board, it is going rather smoothly.

On 15 Jul 2009, 10:22 pm, thatkeith wrote:

Freeway told me 700 x 500 was fine, even though several times I told
them I thought everything seemed too small.

Freeway is a program, not a “they”… I’m not entirely sure what you
mean here. You’re not having conversations with your software are
you? :slight_smile:

Freeway’s default page size is rather small these days. It is very,
very safe, in that it won’t stress out the smallest display sizes,
but it is rather too safe for regular modern design.

All you have to do is pick what size you want your page designs to
be. This doesn’t force the user’s browser to that size of course, but
it defines a design starting point among other things.

Use the Inspector palette. Try 800 or 900 pixels wide. First do this
to the master page to have your pages change automatically. Any
‘regular’ pages (your actual designed pages) that don’t follow suit
can bechanged manually.

k


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

The “they” in any case is Softpress Systems Limited, a.k.a. Softpress,
Inc. in the colonies. Freeway is the name of the application.

Walter

On Jul 15, 2009, at 7:36 PM, SkipII wrote:

There is a “they.” I paid for a full-day workshop with Freeway’s
support group.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Hi skipp,
you sure have been busy, and your website looks very nice. Be carefull that it will not be to small also when people try to read it.
Also, you have a own busines, try to avoid typo’s. ( i’m not doing english busines, so the only one’s i insult with my poor aproch are my forum friends…) but after your name, your titel is spelled wrong.
I would correct it.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I think you should be using HTLM text a little more.
The site seems to be totally dependant on graphic text, or am I mistaken?
If it remains this way then you will run into site size problems, Google indexing, SEO, legibility etc.
Check it out before you start your rebuild.

Richard


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Yes it is all design text – and I understand those shortcoming. I just was not comfortable yet with how to mingle HTML and graphic text that is so dependent upon a particular position in the page design. My intent was, as soon as this site was launched, to go back calmly and start to replace some of the graphic text with HTML as a new learning experience.

On 16 Jul 2009, 8:51 am, richard lowther wrote:

I think you should be using HTLM text a little more.
The site seems to be totally dependant on graphic text, or am I mistaken?
If it remains this way then you will run into site size problems, Google indexing, SEO, legibility etc.
Check it out before you start your rebuild.

Richard


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options