Typeset hard on eyes

I'm not trying to be a pain, but the new site layout is REALLY hard on my aging eyes. Page is cluttered, font is small. I know many of you are not experiencing this...

...yet.

Anyone else having this problem?

Any options?

Not the font problem, but yes the page is cluttered, the layout is lousy, the quote function is a disaster, replying is clumsy, logging in a mess, etc.

Other than the software sucks worse than any other board I've used, it's not bad.

But hey, it keeps traffic down!

I agree that the font is not particularly friendly. Oddly the font in the editor window I'm using to write this is MUCH better.

you can make the text larger with your browser. in firefox "view"menu then "text size" then in IE go to "Page" menu then "text size"

but then it is a pain to have to change the font back when you go to a different page

Hmmm. So you're telling me that Verdana and Arial, in a size at least as large as the old board -- and as large as many other large, frequently-travelled sites -- is somehow harder to read here?

Foxtrapper, I would prefer if you had raised some of your issues during the beta testing, but since it's a little late for that, why not drop me a line and go into a bit more detail. You may also want to look at the FAQ and the blue "?" help icon, particularly in regards to replying and quoting. There's several ways of doing both, so if you don't like one, maybe another will work for you. Anyway, drop me a line and we'll see what I can do to work through whatever issues you're having.

Tim, im pretty sure the text isnt as large as the old board. At least not in the format I run. Firefox 1152x864. Actually, did you change it? It seems bigger now. :whatthe:

Well, I think I inhaled too many PB blaster fumes, now it seems small. If a white rabbit invites me to follow him down a hole I will know somethings wrong. :grin:

Old board: 12px Verdana or Arial

New board: 13px Verdana or Arial. As of today, 14px.

Its an optical illusion caused by the narrower text area. But I'm told dedicating a quarter of the screen to grey space isn't negotiable.

Fer y'alls information, Verdana is considered one of the most readable typefaces for on-line reading, having been designed specifically for computer screens. (Georgia, a serif'ed font, was, too, but Verdana is probably easier to read).

Also FYI, if you have a mouse with a wheel on it (and the website wasn't designed by someone completely ignorant of usability issues), then you should be able to quickly and easily change a site's font size thusly:

CTRL + Wheel UP or Wheel DOWN

EDIT: If you don't have a mouse wheel:

CTRL + or CTRL -

PS I like the site just fine. Just about every online newspaper in the world has the same issue with empty space on the left margin, for articles deeper than a one screen.

SVreX wrote: I'm not trying to be a pain, but the new site layout is REALLY hard on my aging eyes. Page is cluttered, font is small. I know many of you are not experiencing this... ...yet. Anyone else having this problem? Any options?

Yes, I'm having a hard time with it also. Especially the size of the writing in the side bar. Way too small for my aging eyes, and I'm wearing special computer reading glasses.

I think the issue isn't with the type face, it is with the background color for the text boxes. In the preview and the typing area, it is easier to read because the background is white. When posted the background is gray. The difference in color depth between that much gray and that little black isn't much. I think making the font more bold (thicker lines) instead of taller would make a huge difference. That or perhaps change the background to something easier to read.

The more narrow reading pane, makes it easier for me to read, since you can scan left/right more quickly potentially reducing eye strain. Then again I'm usually posting/reading from my 1024x768 laptop.

Funny... It was white up until Saturday. I changed it to better match the old board.

Ah ha! Now I know why the transformer blew up in the data center!

Tim changed the background color! ;)

It seems to me that the spacing on the pages is different. There is a little more space between the letters on the old website it seems like to me. This new board is more difficult for me to read as well. I'm at 1280x800 resolution, IE6, which was perfectly fine on the old website and every other page I visit. Call me an old fart if you want, but why should I have to change my browser or anything else to make a website work? Instead of telling me I should change my browser, why not design a website that will work with the different browsers? I wouldn't think it would be that difficult since the old website that was held together with bandaids & baling wire worked fine, so an improvement should work just as well, shouldn't it?

I didn't get invited to any beta tests because I didn't have 500 posts. I'm more of a lurker, been on here 18 months, I own a former challenge winner as a toy, working on a future challenge entry, I'm a car nut, just ask the guys who have met me, I definitely qualify. Computer nerd? Definitely don't qualify, wouldn't think I would need to just to enjoy a car board.

BTW, changing the font size with the control + wheel up/down doesn't work here, but it did with the old board.

Almost forgot, I had written a nice long post last week with a few questions/comments, but when I tried to post it deleted it & gave an error message. One thing that was better IMO on the other board was that everyone's location was posted under their avatar, so that when they forgot to post it in their message, you didn't have to click & wait for another page to come up & then back up to the page you were reading. You knew whether or not you wanted to go after that car, or if an event was close enough to attend.

I tried the control+ wheel thing- everything got GINORMOUS (1 word per page), and I couldn't reverse it. Had to close the window and start over.

The sidebar is definitely part of the problem. The background is also.

I don't know all the reasons, but overall, it is simply more difficult. So much so that I can't read it without glasses (and I don't need them for any other computer work).

It is really a chore for my aging eyes.

Tim, I know you are putting in a big effort, and I appreciate it. But I'm just trying to offer you some constructive info, and I'm hearing other people agreeing with me.

Hoser, I'm not telling you to change your browser. Not at all. I quite agree with you, the site can (and does) work on pretty much any browser you throw at it, and I've thrown a lot at it, including some pretty obcure ones.

I may tell you IE6 is a crusty old dinosaur of a browser, that modern browsers both look and work better and that you'll need to upgrade pretty soon anyway since IE6 is deader than a doorknob, but if you choose to use it (or any other browser), that's your business.

The thing is, I'm having trouble figuring out the "it's hard to read" comments. I realize you mean what you way, and I don't doubt you, it's just that I'm having trouble understanding WHY you feel that way. When we switched to the old board, I heard a lot of the same complaints -- particularly that the font size was too small, that the contrast was too low --- so this time around I made sure the size was larger than before and the contrast was higher. And yet I'm told its somehow harder to read? It's not a matter of spacing between the letters -- kerning, to type geeks -- either. That's the same. Same typeface, higher contrast, larger size. Just what you all asked for.

Also, I'm sorry you missed out on the beta tests, and missed the posts on the old board that we put up before the changes went into effect. Letters actually went out to a lot more than folks with 500 posts, but I'm sorry we missed you. Would have loved to have had more voices on the beta testing, and I value your opinion, even if I don't yet quite understand it.

As for the locations, they're on the profiles. With a map. Just click on their avatar. Events are also mapped.

I think it is primarily the line weight (drafting term, not graphics term).

Also, some of it is font size. There's no way the fonts on the titles on the main discussion board page are anywhere near as large as the old site.

And how 'bout those mini- micro page numbers at the bottom for jumping to an alternate page in the thread? Aren't they cute??

The font in the sidebar links is also quite small.

Keep in mind, some of us are still working on 14" screens, and won't be changing any time soon, thanks to the economic bust.

My training is in design and art, not computers. My opinion is that the pages are really too full, that they are trying to pack in waay too much info at once. It's kind of like resume writing- though my 30+ years in the workforce would make it easy for me to fill 5 or 6 pages, it isn't a good idea. If I can't edit it down to 1 single page, it doesn't much matter, because it won't be read.

Ahh, now we're getting somewhere.

Line weight is identical. If anything, perceived weight would be higher due to the higher contrast -- as a side note, I think the higher contrast actually decreases legibility and increases eye strain, but ya'll wanted it.

Main forum titles were increased in size today. They should be on par with before. I may bump them up more, but there are definitely more pressing issues at hand.

Micro page numbers at the bottom are already on the list. They should be at least the size of the top ones, but for some reason the size didn't carry over. I need to figure out why. I'm knocking out A LOT of changes every day. Some of them you see, some of them you don't, but they're all there. The list isn't getting any shorter, but I'm getting to things as quickly as I can.

What's your resolution on that 14-incher, anyway? While you're at it, give me your preferred browser, too. Let me try to see what you're seeing.

As for clutter, go to the old board (http://archive.grassrootsmotorsports.com) and compare them side by side. If anything, I'd say this one is much less cluttered. I definitely tried to make it so... even if it meant leaving some things semi-hidden, with less explanation than I might have liked.

I was just entering a post in the reply window.

The print in that window is black on a light yellow background. It is a bit easier to read than the grey background.

However, I clicked on the button for bold typeface, and the page went to a white background for a moment. Big difference. It was a lot easier to read.

My resolution is 1024 x 768. I generally use firefox.

I checked out the link to the old board.

One big difference is that the old board used boldface very effectively. Important lines are bold, which separated them from the rest of the stuff.

Additionally, it used horizontal dark grey color bands to break up the pages.

Thanks, good to know. 1024 on a 14-incher is a bit of an unusual combination. Let me play around with that a bit.

As for the background, I don't know what to say. I've got one group that adamantly says the old board had too little contrast and they want more. I've got another group that says there's too much contrast and it strains the eye (which I tend to agree with), and a third group that says they want a dark color instead. Frankly, there's nothing I can do that's going to make all three of those groups happy, but I'll keep trying. I have been working with type both in print and on the web for something like 15 years now, so I'd like to think I've learned a little bit about it by now.

One big difference is that the old board used boldface very effectively. Important lines are bold, which separated them from the rest of the stuff.

Most of the stuff that's bold there is bold here as well. Where it's not, it's because people complained of too much bold type on the old board. When everything's bold, nothing stands out. What are you seeing bold there that you think should be bold here?

Additionally, it used horizontal dark grey color bands to break up the pages.

As does this board, just toned down a hair... to reduce visual clutter.

I think a lot of people have this idea that things were designed the way they were on a whim, or because somebody thought "that looks nice". Nothing could be farther from the truth. There is NO element on the pages that wasn't pored over obsessively, taking every comment the community's ever made into account. Even when we missed the mark, we obsessed over trying to get as close as possible.