I.... still don't like a lot about Weasyl's interface.
Don't like having to click download to get a full resolution picture. I always want to see the full rez first.
Don't like thumbnails for everything, especially tiny ones when I have a large screen. (which is why I've got a greasemonkey script that kills them dead on FA)
Don't like how checking out somebody's userpage is a multiple webpage experience. (Since when has splitting basic information up into several pages been a good idea?)
That said, it is, overall, pretty slick. Just needs a lot of work yet.
I dislike the way webpage design is going in general on the internet, tbh. Not enough information-centric designs, too much fluff. @_@
i'm not really sure what reason there is to switch to weasyl -- other than the fact that it isn't fa! and i guess it has folders
it also manages to look just as bad, if not worse in some areas than fa (the design of it), which is an impressive feat
goofy canvas texture, a hyperactive and incoherent color scheme; sans-serif small caps (which never look good in any context, imo); a bizarre semi-transparent sliding text thing that changes direction depending on where your cursor is (i wonder whose idea that was -- it adds absolutely nothing); MASSIVE amounts of empty space (not necessarily a bad thing, but the way they applied it detracts from the main function of the site -- browsing and previewing art requires much more scrolling and hovering and clicking than what i'd consider reasonable)
that being said, at least it's better than fa, i guess? i mean at least it's not run by the people who run fa. but i don't think people should accept mediocrity just because it's currently the best thing available
Don't like having to click download to get a full resolution picture. I always want to see the full rez first.
Don't like thumbnails for everything, especially tiny ones when I have a large screen. (which is why I've got a greasemonkey script that kills them dead on FA)
Don't like how checking out somebody's userpage is a multiple webpage experience. (Since when has splitting basic information up into several pages been a good idea?)
That said, it is, overall, pretty slick. Just needs a lot of work yet.
I dislike the way webpage design is going in general on the internet, tbh. Not enough information-centric designs, too much fluff. @_@
it also manages to look just as bad, if not worse in some areas than fa (the design of it), which is an impressive feat
goofy canvas texture, a hyperactive and incoherent color scheme; sans-serif small caps (which never look good in any context, imo); a bizarre semi-transparent sliding text thing that changes direction depending on where your cursor is (i wonder whose idea that was -- it adds absolutely nothing); MASSIVE amounts of empty space (not necessarily a bad thing, but the way they applied it detracts from the main function of the site -- browsing and previewing art requires much more scrolling and hovering and clicking than what i'd consider reasonable)
not to mention THIS https://www.weasyl.com/static/images/bg.jpg
that being said, at least it's better than fa, i guess? i mean at least it's not run by the people who run fa. but i don't think people should accept mediocrity just because it's currently the best thing available