Great typography architecture, love it, but I’d love to know what OS and Browser actually renders TypeKit in a LEGIBLE way… Not cutting it on my Windows 7 FF
Nope, I have it on but that would be good reasoning. Some fonts render well through TypeKit for sure, a lot of popular ones (such as Skolar by TypeTogether used on Bobulate) don’t really render well under 14 px.
There has to be better ways of keeping the navigation ever present, if that’s really what your design calls for, just stationary tabs on the left would work.
@dudeydudeydude – I hope by -webkit-text-stroke, you actually mean -webkit-font-smoothing. -webkit-text-stroke is a disaster performance-wise on text-heavy sites.
Unfortunately, no, That wasn’t a typo. I haven’t used it on any of the sites I’ve worked on, but I’ve seen a few other Typekit-powered sites using it to “fix” the way Chrome renders text.
Although I haven’t noticed any performance issues. (one of the sites using it was a blog).
I really like the layout of this site, very straight forward and everything does fit well, although not perfectly.
I feel if there was a bit more distinguishment between the sections, when you scroll down istead of using the navigation it would be clearer where the individual sections are.
I also don’t especially dig the jumping nav, quite annoying, fixed would be better IMHO.
13 Comments
Great typography architecture, love it, but I’d love to know what OS and Browser actually renders TypeKit in a LEGIBLE way… Not cutting it on my Windows 7 FF
@Rich
Ironically, XP renders typekit’s @font-face text better than Win 7.
On XP, All compatible browsers are fine, although Chrome requires a tiny bit of webkit-specific css code to remove the anemic feel:
-webkit-text-stroke:1px transparent;
which gives Chrome on XP the same weight as FF (on XP).
However, on Win 7… ugh.
Ah, one thing though – some (not all) fonts provided @font-face render reasonably well on Win 7 if you have cleartype switched on.
You might have cleartype switched off Rich.
Nope, I have it on but that would be good reasoning. Some fonts render well through TypeKit for sure, a lot of popular ones (such as Skolar by TypeTogether used on Bobulate) don’t really render well under 14 px.
Love the layout, but I can’t stand sites with that annoying jumping navigation… why not just give it a fixed positioning?
I’m with Matt my comments exactly, the sliding navigation is just annoying to me, and very much so.
There has to be better ways of keeping the navigation ever present, if that’s really what your design calls for, just stationary tabs on the left would work.
I love the colors and the head which give me clear idea about the website.I know what this web site for at first sight.
@dudeydudeydude – I hope by -webkit-text-stroke, you actually mean -webkit-font-smoothing. -webkit-text-stroke is a disaster performance-wise on text-heavy sites.
@Pat
Unfortunately, no, That wasn’t a typo. I haven’t used it on any of the sites I’ve worked on, but I’ve seen a few other Typekit-powered sites using it to “fix” the way Chrome renders text.
Although I haven’t noticed any performance issues. (one of the sites using it was a blog).
@Pat
To avoid confusion: what it basically does is make Chrome render fonts like Safari IF Cleartype is switched off.
I really like the layout of this site, very straight forward and everything does fit well, although not perfectly.
I feel if there was a bit more distinguishment between the sections, when you scroll down istead of using the navigation it would be clearer where the individual sections are.
I also don’t especially dig the jumping nav, quite annoying, fixed would be better IMHO.
I love the layout. I have it on but that would be good reasoning. Some fonts render well through TypeKit for sure, a lot of popular ones.