The response to the questionnaire on Visual Impact was not been overly significant - 15 respondents for the period from 8th October 2000 to 17th October 2001. It appears from the results to date that this response was mainly from visitors to the site who have a genuine problem with the visual impact of the site but who can express themselves in reasonable terms. I am, indeed, grateful for the useful comments which have been offered and will endeavour to take some of the suggestions on board during the coming months.
I have now withdrawn the Visual Impact questionnaire although leaving the survey responses below - for a respectable period - for future visitors to see. I can confirm that all survey-related email addresses have now been deleted. I hope shortly to implement another survey to analyse how effective the site content is in reaching out and changing perceptions of Cornwall.
| No. | "Comment" |
| 15 | Good: No romanticizing pictures of engine houses & sunsets at
beach &c.&c. Concentrates on contents, not presentation. But: Colours are terrible indeed,
esp. when background is darker than writing. Simple white backgrounds are better to read and easier to create (html) at that.
Don't get disencouraged!
Kernow bys vykken! |
| 14 | The review of The Literature of Cornwall by Simon Trezise (on your site) is a good example of a serious review, concise and informative.
The CW review looks much the opposite with a quick ridicule of your presentation, cursory dismissal of content as extreme topped with the arch climax of the ilk, the "conspiracy-theorist" accusation.
Site reviews deserve as much consideration of content as book reviews without over emphasis on presentation. Hopefully the review will not discourage anyone from visiting.
If you’d like to bring a discipline to your fonts, backgrounds and formats cascading style sheets might answer. |
| 13 | No comment added |
| 12 | No comment added |
| 11 | No comment added |
| 10 | you could look up and find which colours attract people to read that site |
| 09 | The colours do in someway make you skip read as opposed to lingering a while. Something more soothing may distract you less from the overall content and message. This however may not be the case to everyone as you will never please all of the people all the time
|
| 08 | I understand that you should feel it necessary to compete with the brashness of the net but have you thought that not competing brings home the truth better?
You are not trying to sell, if you'll excuse the expression, "Brenda Wootton in the nude". The message is the message and you're trying to tell it to the disbelievers.
Wouldn't it be better to be different? Wouldn't it be better that people go "Hey, this page isn't trying to sell me something" rather than negative, americanised, comments ("shades"? perleease!)
I would suggest (mute) backgrounds of various historical places: St Michael's, Dozemare, Gwennap, etc., you get the picture. Plus white on black is aggressive (yes, I know it's the flag); white on a neutral green/blue (jade green) is more "homely" and inviting. Muted orange/peach is another good colour.
All offered by an old expat. tired of brashness and missing the thousand shades of grey. |
| 07 | colours very brash and inappropriate, particularly when used to highlight a quotation or a sentence within a sentence. Would much rather see ordinary quote marks, in the same type face, same colour. Much more readable and, ultimately, more impact. Serif fonts do not do very well on screen; better to use something like Verdans rather than a serif font where the serifs 'block up'. |
| 06 | Hi Jim, Yours was the very first site on Kernow that I came across and I still follow it. I must admit that I think that a "cleaner" site would allow the excellent and important information that you put out to be accepted as fact as opposed to "coloured" or, somehow, "sideshowed".
I believe that the CONTENT of the site would be more accesible to the average viewer if the colours were plainer. People want FACTS not pretty sites!
Kernow arta!!
|
| 05 | Don't be bothered by the reviewer's opinions of your site, he's certainly entitled to them. Yes, he probably went too far in his criticisms, but who really cares what he thinks? Personally, I enjoyed the site. With many of my ancestors buried in Cornish soil, family still living there, and Cornish blood flowing in my veins, I'm ashamed to admit I don't know the history very well. Your site offers a lot of good information. If I were able to afford them, I'd purchase some of the videos.
|
| 04 | It is not always as easy to extract information as it could be. In a desperate attempt to make it interesting with colours, you seem to have made it harder on the eyes. But content-wise I found it fascinating and challenging.
|
| 03 | I went straight here [the questionnaire] because the 'questionnaire' was green. In truth I've not seen the rest of the site yet!
Also, I found this E-address in CW. Mes, da yw genev agas ober. |
| 02 | I truly am interested in the message that you have to deliver. But the very blue fonts that were used were very difficult to read - too bright, too small. The moving message was also very distracting [now removed {25th Nov 2000}] and I am not sure that it even needed to be there. The menu at the left was to the point and very useful and navigation was not a problem. On this page [the questionnaire] you have red, orange and pink font colors on a brown background and to my way of thinking just "a bit much". As said before, the message needs to be given, but perhaps in a more straight forward less colorful way. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
|
| 01 | No Comments added |
Are you lost? Go to Main Index and Home Page