I’ve written all this new Django CMS code over the past few months and I’ve been holding off on using it for jeffcroft.com until I could come up with a great new design. Well, I’m tired of waiting. The new code is so much better, more flexible, faster, etc. I want to use it. So, I’m throwing together more of a quick “realign” than a full-fledged redesign.
What do you think? This is one possible blog layout. The design is based on a columnar gird of four main column (subdivided into eight smaller ones). This blog post has been laid out with two columns (I would only use this layout on shorter entries, probably), and a favorite of mine from Flickr has been embedded into it (the ability to embed other objects from the system — flickr photos, flickr favorites, images, flash fiels, movies, slideshows, podcasts, etc. — into a blog post is one of my hot new features this go ‘round).
So…feedback?
View at flickr »
001 // Michael Heilemann // 12.13.2006 // 12:30 AM
Well it looks great. Though my gut says it’s upkeep will make it more of a hassle to post. Also, it might be hard to know when to read the inserted quote.002 // Bryan Veloso // 12.13.2006 // 12:33 AM
Teach me Django? Plzkthxbai. :D On a more serious note, what fonts are you using?003 // Jeff Croft // 12.13.2006 // 12:51 AM
> Though my gut says it’s upkeep will make it more of a hassle to post. Well, the way I’ve set it up, it’s every bit as simple as normal to post — I just have the ability to do more flexible and complicated layouts and object inclusion. Just throwing up a quick text post won’t take me any longer than it does right now… > On a more serious note, what fonts are you using? Helvetica Neue and Minion Pro (which falls back to Georgia). Granted, not *that* many people will see Minion, but I’d say a decent portion of my audience probably has it installed, and those who don’t should still have a fine experience with Georgia. Plus, it look nice when I look at it, and that’s really the most important thing. :)004 // Jon Hicks // 12.13.2006 // 1 AM
I actually think this 2 column content would work really well, but I found the inset quote on the left way too hard to read. The combination of light grey, tight leading and right alignment makes it hard to follow the lines.005 // Mark Otto // 12.13.2006 // 1:40 AM
That is sweet as hell. Lovely all around.006 // Stuart Frisby // 12.13.2006 // 4:28 AM
Classy as always Jeff. I’d echo the concerns over the quote, though I think the main issue with it may be the length. For smaller quoues I think that would work fine, for this type of long quote, I’d prefer to see the quote splitting right across the two columns with a top and bottom border to give it some more space and definition. The fonts look fantastic by the way!007 // D. Keith Robinson // 12.13.2006 // 8:39 AM
Looks great…but…I personally don’t like 2 column layouts for the screen at all. It’s a scan/flow/readability thing. Also, I’d say the inset quote is a bit hard to read, but it could be the length of it, and it sort of pinches the main column too much as well.008 // cowpiesurprise // 12.13.2006 // 8:53 AM
That’s a damned nice-looking page, Jeff, but I can’t help wondering if it tries too hard to look like a printed page, and is consequently less successful as a web page. I have to admit that your “Continued in column two” approach is intriguing, but a multi-column layout like this works so much better when you can see the whole page in front of you (as opposed to the portion that will fit in your browser window). It also poses problems for anchor links. Likewise, a sidebar (which, by the way, I think would look much better set flush left) on a magazine page is usually strategically positioned for quick consumption between sections of the main text. In that context, it’s much easier to just shift your gaze when there’s a break in the text than it is to say, “Oh yeah, there was a sidebar further up the page. I should scroll back up and read that.” Regardless of the potential problems, this layout is definitely food for thought, and I’m always glad to see web designers tinkering with traditional design concepts, even if I’m not so sure they’ll work all that well on the web. I’m definitely looking forward to seeing what you decide on.009 // Jeff Croft // 12.13.2006 // 9:15 AM
> I personally don’t like 2 column layouts for the screen at all. It’s a scan/flow/readability thing. I agree, in general — which is why I’d only use the two-column layout for shorter entries (probably not even for one this long). It seems to me the scan/flow problem goes away when you can fit the entire height of the columns on your screen at once… Great feedback, Rob. Thanks a lot! :)010 // Mark Otto // 12.13.2006 // 12:33 PM
Out of curiosity, how would you accomplish the columns? Extra divs, a script, or something else?011 // Jeff Croft // 12.13.2006 // 12:42 PM
Mark- I’m doing it with extra DIVs. Easy enough with my Dango templates setup, more compatible and faster than Javascript, and I have more control over where the column breaks happen than the CSS columns module (which only FF supports). I just wrote the Django view and template such that if there’s a specific XML-like tag in the blog post (like ), it spits it out in the multi-column layout.012 // dotsara // 12.14.2006 // 12:08 AM
Well-played. I like the inset quote, actually. Although, I wonder how it’d be if it were shorter and instead of 2 columns you had just the 1 wider column. Maybe more line-height on the quote the way your blockquotes are now. Still, I like it.