I’ve moved my blog to the top level domain of this site, and also redesigned it.
If you see this post, you’re subscribing to the wrong feed. This is the correct adress from now on: http://feeds.feedburner.com/bjorkoy.
You can read about why I did this and where it’s going in, you guessed it, the new blog.
This blog will remain up, so that no links rot, and that the design can still be enjoyed by those who like it.
Thanks everyone, see you on the other side… :)
One of my new courses this semester is Object Oriented Programming 101, where Java is the programming language we will use. Later this year the class will be making some kind of computer game in Java, but as a starter, we were shown how to print out “Hello World!”:
{
public static void main(String[] arg)
{
System.out.println(”Hello World!”);
}
}
While I appreciate the good things this, to me, bloated syntax provides, it’s a bit hard to like when all my previous programming experience stems from Ruby and PHP. But I’ll sure its greatness will dawn on me. ;)
On a side note, expect more frequent posting from now on.
This must be the easiest way to get full support for PNG-transparency in Internet Explorer 6. The technique even works for PNG-transparency in CSS backgrounds. Credit goes to Angus Turnbull for creating this workaround. My hat is thoroughly tipped.
Here’s what you do
- First, put this file in your CSS directory.
- Second, paste this code into your CSS file:
img { behavior: url(iepngfix.htc); } - Enjoy! Really, that’s it.
Transparent backgrounds
As I said, this can be used to make transparent PNGs work on CSS backgrounds as well. Say you have this code:
All you have to do is apply the background behavior to the #header element:
You can do this with every element you’re using PNG-transparency on:
The asterisk also works, but I don’t know what it does to rendering time:
I found this via the Apple site, which demonstrates some beautiful use of transparency, for example on the Mac Pro site (the tower picture), and the Leopard Spotlight Preview page (the big Spotlight icon).
I was recently given the opportunity to try out a new stock photography site for free, Crestock.com. I was also asked to review it, which I agreed to do. In the spirit of fairness, I’ve also visited a few other stock sites. Here’s what I found out.
As stock sites come and go, Crestock seems to place it self in the middle. It’s not as exclusive or drool-esque as Veer, but at the same time many leagues better than free ones like Stock Exchange or Stock vault, that it’s fully justifiable paying for it.
About the content
The content is as one would expect from a site like this - you have the compulsory hand shakes, the surprisingly happy support-women and also lots of flowery flowers. Their photographers seem to be top notch, and browsing the forums gives the impression that they are quite picky on what they publish.
One feature I particularly liked was their category “Isolated & white background”, which consists of photographs on white backgrounds, making them great to spice up web designs. Their collection of illustrations was also very nice. The billboard designers out there might want to check out the Super High Res category.
So should I use them?
Well, yes, and no. Point is, some of the sites I’ve come across, like iStockPhoto, also offers each photograph at a lower resolution and a lower price. Images at Crestock typically start at 1500×1500px and $5, while iStockphoto offers smaller images, typically 800×600 or so, for $1.
So if you need medium to large sized photography for a reasonable cost, I’d definitely point you to Crestock, and also if you have a thing for white backgrounds. However, if the web is all you’re using them for, there’s lots of less expensive sites to seek out.
(By the way, if I had the money, I’d buy everything Veer has to offer.)
Possible translations:
- We heard you
Here’s what we think of what you had to say. - We heard you
Too bad we’re incompetent in every way. - We heard you many years ago
But we still don’t care. - You wore us down
But we still won’t give you a proper browser. - What did you say?
You’re wrong, CSS-support sucks. - Could you speak up?
We’re deaf and can’t make the right decisions on our own. - We heard you
But IE7 still sucks!
Microsoft: If you do have hearing, you should have fixed Internet Explorer many years ago. And when you finally decide to do so, how about doing it properly? Seems like IE7 will continue IE6’s legacy like a charm.
What a shame.
Sometimes I think it would be best if I didn’t get paid to design.
“Well that’s it. The guy’s mad! Consider thy bløg unsubscriblified!”
No no, I promise, this does make a lot of sense. You see, I think any form of design is art (one could argue that all work someone takes passion in doing is art). I also believe that while creating art, staying on budget is not something one should have to worry about, as the result will most surely be lacking because of it.
When I design a site, I never feel as if I’m finished. There’s always more I can do, things to tweak, features to add. In short, the site could always be better. Of course, I know this for myself, that some products I’ve spewed out doesn’t reflect what I actually am capable of doing. But nobody else knows.
Imagine someone reviewing your portfolio. They see that you’ve got talent, but that you apparently don’t have an eye for those important little details. Because of that, they will value your services lower than what they are actually worth, and of course pay you accordingly. You then have to design under even more constraints, producing even less optimal results. It’s an evil circle it is!
Hence, the paradox. If you don’t watch your step, the quality of your work may degrade if you start charging for it.
“Aye, he makes sense indeed! Let me just tumble over this ledge here!”
No no, there’s a solution too. Actually more than one. The most obvious one is to limit your portfolio, and only display works that represent your true capacities. Referring to what I’ve said, this is more justifiable than showing every site you’ve ever made.
Another option is to always have side projects, like a blog, a community site, or any other site that you can keep designing for yourself, so that when time approaches infinite, the sites quality does the same (yeah, I’ve got a lot of math in school).
Either way, make sure most of the work you display as “your finest” actually is just that. If not, don’t worry! The problem will eventually solve it self, because you might not get paid to design ever again.
