I am creating my own photographer's website.

I use a fixed design, where the window stays in the middle of the screen and has the same dimensions all the time. No floating design.

I did a first version with 1024x768, but I don't like the length to width ratio.

Isn't 1024x768 an outdated dimension anyway? Don't most people have widescreen displays now?

I'd prefer something like 1200x800 or 1200x700.

I have one main window (using iframe) and many thumbnails. Text info will also be displayed into that window, so it's all on one page.

What's the experienced web designer's take on this matter?

Thanks!

Depends on your market. 1024 is about the max for a non-fluid site that I see around the web. A year ago I would have said 800.

I build most of my sites for 1024.

Liquid (also called elastic) websites are an option you should consider as they adjust to whatever the dimensions of the browser are. However, they are also a lot harder to create. If you don't want a liquid design, the answer becomes, "It depends entirely on your audience." If you already have a website running, I'd suggest checking your analytics package, which should give you statistics relevant to your users. If you don't have an analytics package, I'd recommend Google Analytics, which is free.

Just use scripting for your gallery and you will have the best versatility for your needs. Php would be the best scripting in my opinion.

Even i suggest scripting for your gallery....

Originally Posted by VirtuosiMedia

Liquid (also called elastic) websites are an option you should consider as they adjust to whatever the dimensions of the browser are. However, they are also a lot harder to create. If you don't want a liquid design, the answer becomes, "It depends entirely on your audience." If you already have a website running, I'd suggest checking your analytics package, which should give you statistics relevant to your users. If you don't have an analytics package, I'd recommend Google Analytics, which is free.

Thanks for letting me not forget the liquid design.

The thing is, I have mostly photos on my site, and I am working out a design that has good relations of the large frame (iframe) and the thumbnails.

I'd be grateful about any link to study liquid designs.

From my current understanding, it is quite impossible to have a strict design in a liquid design.

But I may be wrong.

Also: I'd also appreciate examples of liquid designs on photography sites (almost all I know are a fixed/strict design)

Originally Posted by fisalnk

Even i suggest scripting for your gallery....

Scripting?

Do you mean using "Javascript"?

That's on my list, especially for using a <div> tag with overflow and a frame that adjusts to the content.

Next project will be to work my way through Michael Bowers' "Pro CSS and HTML design patterns".

Iframes are not a good thing if you want your site well indexed byt the SE.

Anything you can do with a frame you can do with PHP unless you are including content from another site. And most times you can even do that.

Out of the last 500 visitors more than 90% of them used 1024x768. Not a single person used any resolution under 1024x768. These days designing your site for 1024x768 is ideal and will work for all resolutions. Sure in a few years this will change but as of right now I would stick with with the above resolution.

Originally Posted by colbyt

Iframes are not a good thing if you want your site well indexed byt the SE.

Anything you can do with a frame you can do with PHP unless you are including content from another site. And most times you can even do that.

Would you say PHP is a better thing to learn than Javascript?

Currently, I have to use iframe, as I need my website going up.

(there are more downsides to iframe than seo, I noticed. In Firefox there's a gray space left if the image has less width than the frame, and in Safari then image gets cropped, so it fills the frame. Both versions don't look too good).

So, I know I have to learn some dynamic scripting. You were the first that brought PHP within my sight, and I'll start researching that, too.

Originally Posted by detsynergy

Out of the last 500 visitors more than 90% of them used 1024x768. Not a single person used any resolution under 1024x768. These days designing your site for 1024x768 is ideal and will work for all resolutions. Sure in a few years this will change but as of right now I would stick with with the above resolution.

Is it necessary to stick with exactly that figure?

I mean, I could also have the content area in the dimensions of 1024 x 650, couldn't I?

Originally Posted by Ulysses' World

Thanks for letting me not forget the liquid design.

The thing is, I have mostly photos on my site, and I am working out a design that has good relations of the large frame (iframe) and the thumbnails.

I'd be grateful about any link to study liquid designs.

From my current understanding, it is quite impossible to have a strict design in a liquid design.

But I may be wrong.

Also: I'd also appreciate examples of liquid designs on photography sites (almost all I know are a fixed/strict design)

Say you were to have a gallery set up with something like the following HTML (this is simplified):

<div id="galleryContainer">
     <div class="picContainer">
          <img class="pic" src="someimage.jpg" alt="someImage" />
          <p class="picCaption">Some Image</p>
     </div>
     <div class="picContainer">
          <img class="pic" src="someimage2.jpg" alt="someImage2" />
          <p class="picCaption">Some Image 2</p>
     </div>
     <div class="picContainer">
          <img class="pic" src="someimage3.jpg" alt="someImage3" />
          <p class="picCaption">Some Image 3</p>
     </div>
     <div class="picContainer">
          <img class="pic" src="someimage4.jpg" alt="someImage4" />
          <p class="picCaption">Some Image 4</p>
     </div>
</div>

One way you could make it liquid is with the following CSS:

#galleryContainer {width:75%;}
.picContainer {width:200px; height:250px; margin: 20px; float:left;}

I haven't tested this particular code (I just typed it in), but it should resize the gallery as the browser window resizes by readjusting the number of columns based on the space available.

Thanks, VirtuosiMedia.

I was just wondering what the advantage of a liquid design for a gallery would be.

Maximizing screen real estate?

On the other hand, I really like to have design that is not changed by chance matters like the users' browser window settings or screen size.

I'll do some more research, but there must be a reason that most galleries are fixed designs. (that liquid designs are more difficult can't be it, as many photographers get professionals to do their sites. It's just me who wants control also over my internet presence. And I consider designing a website fun that I don't want to pay someone else to take it away from me).

if you are not sure on wut resolution will your audience use, there's always the option of letting them choose on which resolution they want to view the site.

you are right when sayin that nowadays widescreens are becoming more common than other kinds of monitors. but what happens if you create a site using a widescreen deffinition? users on normal resolutions will be uncomfortable, as they will have to scroll horizontally everytime...

I also think that 1024x768 is really what most people use nowadays. As we all notice, computer screens are getting bigger and bigger, wider and wider nowadays. So I would suggest to do it that way.

With regards to the liquid design, I guess it should also be considered as an option. I don't think people would browse to a very little screen resolution so I think it the gallery design would still work. Perhaps a thumbnail gallery?

Personally I think it's best that you understand what kind of hardware your users may be finding your site on. If you run a gaming, technology or entertainment related site then higher resolutions like 1024 may be fine but if your running an interpersonal forum which attracts people from all demographics you may want to stick to lower resolutions such as 800.

Personally I'm not a big fan of fluid design because not all elements fit well especially when viewed by someone who's changed their browsers default text settings.