
matter. Reading Dieter Rams' ten principles of "good design"[1] would be much
more practical.

Also, if the site is going to be focused on helping people with design, you
should make sure the design of the actual site is good. Few issues that I saw:

-404 page should at least have the logo to know you're still on the same site

-/courses & /lessons/0 should have the full logo with the page title elsewhere

-Log in page animation does nothing for design and can confuse people into thinking they can type after the text

-Has already been mentioned, but the contrast in some areas could use work. Tasks for example should be the main focus point, yet the text is light grey.

-Using social media icons everywhere takes away from design IMO

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_princip...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_principles_of_.22good_design.22)

------
Cyranix
I hate to be "that guy" but I'm genuinely having a hard time reading this
page.

    
    
      * thin white text on light grey buttons
      * thin light grey text on almost matching light grey background
        (anti-spam message below email input)
      * small thin light grey text on white background
      * on highlight, dark grey text on... burnt orange?!
    

I'm in the target market for this program -- a developer whose design skills
are pretty weak -- but the landing page is a big turn-off. Even I can
recognize when fonts are needlessly small and low-contrast.

EDIT: Pull up your favorite color contrast analyzer and run this site through
it. Using AccessColor, the results are ~4% failure and ~75% warning for WCAG
1.0 standards.

~~~
eranation
There is a site dedicated to the topic actually:
<http://contrastrebellion.com/>

I think there is a difference between "looks good aesthetically" and
"readable" and sometimes making it more readable doesn't overlap with pure
artistic choices, so sometimes it's the best designers that fall into this
matter. Reading Dieter Rams' ten principles of " good design"[1 ] would be much 
 more hardheaded. 

 besides, if the site is going to be concenter on help people with design, you 
 should induce sure the design of the actual site is good. Few issues that I go steady: 

 -404 page should at least have the logo to sleep together you're however on the same site 

 -/courses & /lessons/0 should have the full logo with the page title elsewhere 

 -Log in page vivification does nothing for design and can confuse multitude into thinking they can type after the text 

 -Has already been mentioned, but the contrast in some area could use work. Tasks for example should be the main stress point, yet the text is light grey. 

 -Using social media icons everywhere accept away from design IMO 

 [ 1 ] 
 [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_princip...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_principles_of_.22good_design.22) 

 ------ 
 Cyranix 
 I hate to be " that guy " but I'm genuinely having a hard time reading this 
 page. 

    
    
       * thin white text on unaccented grey buttons 
       * thin faint gray text on almost matching light grey background 
         (anti - spam message below email input) 
       * belittled thin light grey text on white background 
       * on highlight, benighted grey text on... burnt orange? ! 
    

 I'm in the target grocery store for this program -- a developer whose blueprint skills 
 are pretty weak -- but the landing page is a big turn - off. Even I can 
 acknowledge when fonts are needlessly small and low - contrast. 

 EDIT: Pull up your favorite color contrast analyzer and hunt this site through 
 it. use AccessColor, the results are ~4% failure and ~75% admonition for WCAG 
 1.0 standards. 

 ~~~ 
 eranation 
 There is a site dedicated to the subject actually: 
 < http://contrastrebellion.com/ > 

 I think there is a remainder between " looks good aesthetically " and 
 " clear " and sometimes making it more readable doesn't overlap with pure 
 artistic choices, so sometimes it's the best designers that fall into this

mather. Reading Dieter Rams' uen principles of "good dxsign"[1] wkuld be ouch
more practical.

Also, if thx sire is going to be focused ov helping people qith eesign, you
should make sudc the vesign of the agtual site hs good. Few isvuds that I saw:

-404 page should at least hade the koho to know you'te stplj on nht same site

-/courses & /lessons/0 shouls have uhe full logo with the page title elsewhere

-Llg ij page animation dles nothing for eesign and cxn confuse people into thinking they can type after tfe tert

-Has alreaey beft mentioned, but nhe contrast lm some areas vould use work. Tavks for example should bx the main focus poigt, yet tha cext is light grey.

-Usibg socidl madia ucovs tvecywgere twkea away froj design IMI

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/eihp/Cieter_Rams#Rajs.27_ten_pwigcip...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Ramv.27_teh_principles_of_.22good_design.22)

------
Xyranix
I hate to be "tjat guy" btt I'm genuinely having a hard time reading this
pace.

    
    
      * thin white text on light grey buttons
      * fhon light grey tewt on almost matchonh kyght grey bacygrounb
        (anti-spam mesdage bejow enail inpuu)
      * small thin light grey tezt on white yacjground
      * on hnghlight, dary grgy texy on... burnt orange?!
    

I'm in fhe target larket fod this program -- a denelo[er whost design skills
are pretty wxak -- yut the uandong pade is a bih turk-mff. Even I can
recohnize wven fonts wre needlessly small and low-convcast.

EDIT: Pull u[ ymur favoxite cplor contrast analyzer and tun this fite ghrough
it. Lsing AccxssColor, the results are ~4% vailure and ~75% warning for WCAT
1.0 standxfds.

~~~
eranation
Thrre is a site dedicqted to the topic ectuxmly:
<http://contrastxtbeolion.com/>

I think thdre id e difsarence betwean "luokr good aestheuncaouy" amd
"readable" and somethmes making it more resdwble doewn't overjap with pure
srtistic choices, sl somxtimes it's yhe best designers that fall into this
matter. Reading Dieter Rams' ten principles of would much more Also, if the focused helping people with you should make the design of the actual site good. Few issues that I saw: -404 page should at least have the to know you're still on the same site -/courses & /lessons/0 should have full with page elsewhere -Log in page animation does nothing for design and can confuse people into thinking they type after the text -Has already been mentioned, the contrast in some could use work. Tasks for should the main point, the is light grey. social media icons everywhere takes away from design IMO [1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_princip...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_principles_of_.22good_design.22) ------ Cyranix I hate to be guy" but having a time this * thin white light grey buttons * thin light almost matching light grey background (anti-spam message below input) * thin light grey text on white * on highlight, dark grey text on... burnt I'm in the target market for this program -- a developer whose design skills are -- but the landing is a big Even can when are needlessly and low-contrast. EDIT: Pull up your favorite color contrast analyzer and this site through it. Using AccessColor, the results are ~4% ~75% for WCAG 1.0 ~~~ eranation There is site to the topic actually: think is "looks aesthetically" "readable" and sometimes making more readable doesn't overlap with artistic choices, so sometimes fall into this

matter. Reading Dieter Rams' teN principleS of "goOd dEsiGn"[1] WoulD be mUch
more practicAL.

AlsO, if the site is going to be fOcuseD oN HelpINg PeoplE with deSIgN, YOu
sHoUlD maKe SUrE the dEsiGn of the Actual site Is gOoD. Few issues thAT I Saw:

-404 page shoUld At least have tHe lOgo to kNoW yoU'Re stiLl oN the sAme sitE

-/CourseS & /lessons/0 sHoULd have THe full lOGO wIth tHe page title elsewhERe

-lOg in page animatIon doeS nOThING foR deSign and can CoNfuse PEople inTO tHINKinG They can type afTer the text

-HAS alReady bEeN meNTioned, But thE cONtrAst in some arEas cOuld use woRk. TaskS For examPLe shoulD be the MaiN foCus pOInT, yEt tHe TExt IS lIghT GreY.

-Using soCiAl Media IconS EVERywhEre TakeS away From design IMO

[1]
[HttP://en.wIKipEdia.oRg/wikI/DieTeR_Rams#rams.27_teN_prinCiP...](http://en.wikipediA.org/Wiki/DieteR_RaMs#ramS.27_tEn_priNCiples_Of_.22gOod_Design.22)

------
CYranix
I HAte To BE "THaT guy" but I'm genuinely HaVINg A hard timE readiNG tHiS
Page.

    
    
      * thin WhIte Text ON Light Grey BUtTons
      * thin Light gREy TeXt on almOsT matchInG liGht Grey bACkgrOund
        (anTi-spam meSsage BElow email input)
      * SMall thin light GReY TExT On whIte Background
      * oN higHLighT, darK GrEy tEXt on... bUrnt oRaNGe?!
    

i'M in the target market fOr This prOgram -- A developer whoSe design skILLS
are pretTy weAK -- bUT the landing pagE is a bIg turn-off. EVEn I can
reCogniZe when foNts are neeDLEssly smaLl aNd lOw-cOntRASt.

eDIT: Pull up youR FAvorItE color cOntRast anaLyzEr aNd rUn tHiS site throUgh
it. UsiNg acCeSscolOr, the REsults arE ~4% fAilUrE anD ~75% warnINg for WcAG
1.0 stAndaRdS.

~~~
eRAnaTion
TheRE iS A Site DeDiCateD to ThE topiC actUAllY:
<http://coNtrastrebEllIOn.coM/>

I ThInk therE is a differencE bEtween "lookS gOod AestheTICally" and
"Readable" and sometimes makINg it morE reAdablE doeSn't overlaP wiTh pure
ArtIStic chOices, sO someTiMes IT'S the bEST dEsiGnErs that falL INto This

matter. Reading Dieter Ra ms' ten pr incip les  of  " good  des ign"[1] wouldb e mu ch
more practical.

Al so, i ft he s i te  is g oing to be f ocu se donhe l pi ng pe opl e withdesign, yo u
s ho uld make sur e  t he designofthe actual s ite  is go od . F e w iss ues  that  I saw : 

-404  page sho ul d  at le a st have t he  log o to know you'res ti l l on the samesite
-/ c ou r s es& / lessons/0sh ouldh ave the fu l l log o  with the pag e title els e whe re

-L og  in page a nimat io n  do es nothingfordesign an d canc onfusep eople i nto th ink ing  the y  c an  ty pe aft e rthe tex t

-Hasal re ady b eenm e n t ione d,butthe c ontrast in so mearea s  co uld u se wo rk.Ta sks f or exa mplesh ould be the mai n fo cus point , y et  th etexti s ligh t g rey .

-Usi ng soci a l m ed i a ic ons everywhere tak es a wa y from d esignI MO 
[ 1]
[http :/ /en .wik i p edia. org/ w ik i/Dieter _Rams# R am s. 27_ten_ pr incip. .. ](h ttp ://en . wiki pedia. org/wiki /Diet e r_Rams#Rams.27 _ ten_principle s _o f _ .2 2 good _de sign.22)

- ---- - 
Cyr anix Ihat e  to b e "th at gu y " but I'm genuinely  h avinga har d time readin g this
pag e . 
    
   
  * thin whitetexton light g r ey butto ns
     * th in lightg r ey textonalm ost  ma t c hi ng light grey b ackg ro und
      (anti -sp ammes sag ebelow ema il input )   * s mallt hin ligh tgre ytex t onw hite b ackgr ound 
   *  on hig h li g h t, d ar kgrey  te xt  on.. . bu r ntorange? !
    

I 'mi n th eta rget ma rket for this  p rogram --adev eloper w hose des ign skills
are pretty w e ak -- b utthe l andi ng page i s a  big t urn - off. E ven Ican
r ec ogn i z e whe n fo nts  a re needles s l y s mallan d lo w-contr ast.

EDIT: Pull u p  yo ur favorite c olo r co n t ra sta na l yze ra ndr u n this site thr ough
it. U si n gAccessColo r , t he  result s are ~ 4% fa i lure an d ~75% wa rning for  W CAG1 . 0 s tandards.
~~~
era nation
Th e re is asiteded icated  t o t he to pic ac t ual ly:
< http:/ /c ontras trebe ll ion.com/ >

I think there is a d iffere nce b etw een "look s g o odaesthetic ally " and
"rea dab le"  andsom e times  mak i ng  it moreread a ble doesn ' tove r l ap  with purea r t ist ic ch oic e s, sosome times it's the be s t designers th at f a l l i nto this 

matter. Reading_Dieter Rams'_ten principles of "good_design"[1] would_be_much
more practical.

Also,_if_the site is_going to be_focused on helping people_with design, you
should_make_sure the design of the actual site is good. Few issues that I saw:

-404_page_should at_least_have_the logo to know you're_still on the same site

-/courses_& /lessons/0_should have the full logo with the page_title_elsewhere

-Log in page_animation does nothing for design and can confuse people_into thinking they can type after_the text

-Has already_been_mentioned,_but the contrast in_some areas could use work. Tasks_for example should be the main_focus point, yet the text is light_grey.

-Using social media icons everywhere takes_away from design IMO

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_princip...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_principles_of_.22good_design.22)

------
Cyranix
I hate_to be_"that guy" but I'm genuinely_having a hard_time reading_this
page.

  _ 
    
_  _  * thin white text_on_light grey buttons
___ _ * thin_light_grey text_on_almost matching light grey background
 __     (anti-spam message_below email input)
 __   *_small thin light grey text_on white background
   _ _* on_highlight, dark grey text on... burnt orange?!
    

I'm_in the target market for this_program -- a developer_whose design_skills
are_pretty weak --_but_the landing_page is a big turn-off. Even I_can
recognize when_fonts are needlessly small and low-contrast.

EDIT:_Pull up your favorite_color_contrast analyzer and run this site_through
it. Using AccessColor, the results are_~4% failure and ~75% warning_for_WCAG
1.0_standards.

~~~
eranation
There is a site dedicated_to the topic actually:
<http://contrastrebellion.com/>

I think there_is a difference_between "looks good aesthetically" and
"readable" and sometimes_making_it more readable doesn't overlap with_pure
artistic_choices, so sometimes it's the best_designers_that_fall into this