Skip

a beautiful web site worth visiting
June 19, 2002 8:15 AM   Subscribe

a beautiful web site worth visiting splendid in my opinion.
posted by specialk420 (36 comments total)

 
use your space bar to navigate !
posted by specialk420 at 8:19 AM on June 19, 2002


I always enjoy nice web designs. This one, however, caused my Mozilla (on Linux) to explode.
posted by winterdrm at 8:23 AM on June 19, 2002


Glacial loader (Mac 9.4 IE 5.1).
posted by silusGROK at 8:33 AM on June 19, 2002


New frontiers of unreadability: set your text in a tiny font and then turn it on its side!
posted by timeistight at 8:48 AM on June 19, 2002


use your space bar to navigate !

Nagivation should not come with disclaimers!
posted by ljromanoff at 8:53 AM on June 19, 2002


Ugh...me spell bad before coffee.
posted by ljromanoff at 8:53 AM on June 19, 2002


Why must I use the damn spacebar? How can I turn off the damn music? Where's my medication? NURSE!
posted by Skot at 8:55 AM on June 19, 2002


having to bend my neck 90 degree to read the teeny weeny text, did not go down well in the monkeyJuice camp..

view the source, thats kinda cool thou.
posted by monkeyJuice at 8:57 AM on June 19, 2002


...its also irritatingly bland. Minimalist or just short of imagination
posted by monkeyJuice at 8:59 AM on June 19, 2002


thanks specialk420. i agree, quite beautiful, to the ear and the eyes.
posted by dobbs at 9:07 AM on June 19, 2002


MetaFilter: Nagivation should not come with disclaimers!
posted by iceberg273 at 9:07 AM on June 19, 2002


Most beautiful blank page I've ever seen. Another Mac-unfriendly site?
posted by gordian knot at 9:13 AM on June 19, 2002


"a beautiful web site worth visiting"

eh...not so much.
posted by dangerman at 9:19 AM on June 19, 2002


Minimalism. Yes.
posted by mediareport at 9:19 AM on June 19, 2002


mystery meat navigation ... YAY!
posted by Dillenger69 at 9:33 AM on June 19, 2002


Opera / OS9 *KLUNK*

Nice pix in the end...
posted by i_cola at 9:34 AM on June 19, 2002


Is there any content here? Or just colour-filtered photos, small text, and terrible usability? Seems like style over substance, and not even a particularly elegant example.
posted by Marquis at 9:35 AM on June 19, 2002


In the spirit of "does a tree falling in the forest make a sound..."

Does a webpage that crashes Mozilla, Netscape and Konquerer dead really exist?
posted by n9 at 9:36 AM on June 19, 2002


Is there any content here?

The content is Minimal. If you take a breath and linger for longer than a millisecond, the images start to work really well with the sound. Like mini-Baraka moments. Oh, and Issue 2 is friendlier, for the folks who felt crippling agony by having to turn their heads sideways.

The browser thing does suck, though.
posted by mediareport at 10:01 AM on June 19, 2002


Really nice images, and treatments.
I was a bit irritated by the nav at first, but it's nice they thought to provide an alternate method.

MonkeyJuice: Happen to know what font you viewed the source with? I use something that made it totally unrecognizable, an Courier gave me a decent idea what was going on, but still doesn't seem quite right.

People, if it crashed your browser, try another one. No browser, not even yours, whatever it is, is perfect. If you only keep one on your machine, you deserve whatever you get. If you did try a few and it happened anyway, well, sorry. It happens.
There are so many reasons browsers crash, and so many versions of them, that sometimes show you the same number even though they're different, that it's nearly impossible to account for all of them. For the record, it didn't crash any browser(NS6, NS4.79, IE6, Moz1) on my machine(Win2K) or IE5.2 on the OSX machine across the room.
posted by Su at 10:09 AM on June 19, 2002


Crashed Opera on my box, but worked fine in IE6.

Weird, but cool. I like it. But then, I used to be one of the art school girls of doom, so I probably can't be trusted. :)
posted by dejah420 at 10:25 AM on June 19, 2002


Nagivation should not come with disclaimers!

Why not? If art like this or this is allowed, then why not Web art that plays with navigation conventions? Isn't that what we want artists to do? Holding nineaem.com to the standards you'd use for a business site makes no sense. Would you react to a book like this by saying, "This book is made of grass! How do you expect me to read that?"
posted by mediareport at 10:38 AM on June 19, 2002


"why not Web art that plays with navigation conventions?"

How likely would it be for people to enter an art gallery if the door handle had to be first pulled out, then turn counter-clock-wise twice, then turned clock-wise once, then pushed back in and turn 3/4 to the left?

Now think of the few who actually twiddled about with this f@cking door handle until they mastered it...only to be severely let down by the disappointing artwork inside. Think they'll come back?

If sideways navigation was a completely new idea then I might have agreed with your statement, however....
posted by dangerman at 11:01 AM on June 19, 2002


Dangerman: The doorknob would piss me off, yes.
But I'd also have to respect, not to mention be damn amused by, the concept. But I'm perverse.
And while I might not go back, I might sit outside to watch others fight with the damn thing *grin*

Anyways, my view is that if a site is meant to be, and is taken as, a piece of art, conventions and their expectation pretty much have to be tossed. Which is not to say you give up the right to be frustrated by it, but you do have to accept it's likely not going to be Useit. And yes, I've run into art sites that made me immediately run away and not look back. No big deal. We're all willing to accept different thing, under different terms.
posted by Su at 11:17 AM on June 19, 2002


Painting the Mona Lisa on a door shouldn't necessarily change the function of the door. =)
posted by dangerman at 11:29 AM on June 19, 2002


why on god's green earth would the rollover state of a button cover up the button's text?
posted by gwint at 11:48 AM on June 19, 2002


...if the door handle had to be first pulled out, then turn counter-clock-wise twice, then turned clock-wise once, then pushed back in and turn 3/4 to the left?

Aw, come on. Listening to repeated sounds while tapping the space bar to scroll through a series of photos hardly qualifies as a beffudling set-up for enjoying a site. Ok, sideways text I can do without, but I wish they'd kept the space bar thing. It's so much nicer than clicking.

only to be severely let down by the disappointing artwork inside

Issue 2 really is sharper. I love the 2nd, 4th, 7th, 8th and 10th photos in the series. Count to five before going to the next pic and you'll see plenty of content there -- composition, color, precision, technology and nature, speed, etc. But maybe Minimalism isn't your thing, dangerman. Me, I listen to Oval all the time.
posted by mediareport at 12:05 PM on June 19, 2002


why on god's green earth would the rollover state of a button cover up the button's text?

Why on god's green earth would someone paint a stripe in the middle of his wife's face?

[oh: "befuddling" not "beffudling." urk.]
posted by mediareport at 12:13 PM on June 19, 2002


Dangerman: Painting the Mona Lisa on a door shouldn't necessarily change the function of the door. =)

I dunno. It'd be fun if you had to give Mona a little tweak to make it work. I should stop.
posted by Su at 1:15 PM on June 19, 2002


*tweaks su*
posted by dangerman at 1:29 PM on June 19, 2002


yawn.
posted by cakeman at 1:32 PM on June 19, 2002


yawn.

See? cakeman gets it. :)
posted by mediareport at 2:19 PM on June 19, 2002


...its also irritatingly bland. Minimalist or just short of imagination

or lack of imagination on the part of the viewer perhaps?
it's a free world (or so i'm told)
posted by sixtwenty3dc at 2:47 PM on June 19, 2002


I liked it.
posted by riffola at 6:43 PM on June 19, 2002


As an artist whose interested in audience, I try to work with general conventions (like reading from left to right, usual web conventions, etc.), not against them. If the viewer is plopped down in the middle of an alien environment, how is she/he supposed to receive the content?

I learned in art school: first you learn the rules, then you learn how to break them. But it seems that this site breaks convention without understanding why convention is important.
posted by Taken Outtacontext at 6:34 AM on June 20, 2002


Product of a graphic design thinktank.

Also, snore.
posted by pigasus at 10:42 AM on June 20, 2002


« Older Robocup 2002   |   Online collection of public... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post