5 ms·

I am using Chrome on Windows 7. The menu bar on the top of the page cuts off the title and the bottom of the page slightly cuts off the * FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE WE

by pgrote 14y ago

I am using Chrome on Windows 7. The menu bar on the top of the page cuts off the title and the bottom of the page slightly cuts off the * FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE WEBSITES. Is that the way it should look?

rodriguezcommaj 14y ago
Pretty sure it is intended. I refreshed a few times thinking that some stylesheets were missing or not loading properly. Definitely a bold direction...
stan_rogers 14y ago
Yes, it is. I don't know whether or not I will get used to it, but it certainly qualifies as the advertised "heavily art-directed".
darkarmani 14y ago
It's broken on firefox too. edit: ahh for me the stylish add-on helps. Add padding-top: 150px to .main-wrapper and padding-top: 75px to .killer-logo. Apologies to the designers, but it was really, really bothering me.
bullseye 14y ago
http://imageshack.us/a/img228/8256/alat.png http://imageshack.us/a/img228/8256/alat.png I see the same thing. I have a hard time believing it is intentional, but even so, I think it looks sloppy.
- colmvp 14y ago
  I don't think it looks sloppy. It's intentionally styled like a magazine. Magazines deliberately break typographic conventions.
  - bullseye 14y ago
    Fair enough. I guess I'm just not a fan of websites that want to look like printed material, which is by most accounts an inferior medium.
  - keithpeter 14y ago
    I see your point, but my Web browser is also an interface, and the way the top cuts the header off makes it look as if there is a rendering problem. It feels to me a bit like a glossy magazine printed on good quality stock having a cover with a crease in it by design. Most would just assume they got a creased copy until the saw the others.
  - frogpelt 14y ago
    I've never looked at a quality magazine cover and thought 'did they mean to for it look like that?' I thought that with this page. So, that's one glaring difference.
    - cypher543 14y ago
      That's because a magazine is printed and its appearance doesn't vary between people looking at it, so we automatically assume that it's supposed to look the way it does. A website can look differently depending on which browser is rendering it.
  - jere 14y ago
    Usually a magazine overlays its title with a very dramatic photo of a person, which makes the person stand out. And usually only a few letters are obscured. Our brains are quite good at filling in the details. Example: http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/fashion/daily/2012/08/09/09-lady-gaga-vogue-cover.o.jpg/a_4x-horizontal.jpg http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/fashion/daily/2012/08/09/09-lady... I'm a lot less impressed by a fricking navigational toolbar that obscures the top of every letter of the logo. What remains are the less recognizable bottom halves of the letters. The T and I (not shown, but also F) look identical for instance. I'll believe that this is intentional, but I think it looks horrible.
- keithpeter 14y ago
  I get the same on Firefox (aka Iceweasel) 10.0.12 on Debian Wheezy. I thought there was a rendering issue until I read the parent comment.
mikegioia 14y ago
It is so distracting that I can't even be on this site anymore.
ThomPete 14y ago
it's intentional and is a normal design aesthetic/style especially in typographically designers mind.
gyardley 14y ago
It's intentional. I can't say I care for it - I've tried to scroll the missing part of the type onto the screen a couple times now. You can fix this pretty easily if you use a browser extension like Stylebot to customize your page styling - it's great when something just annoys you aesthetically. Here's my first pass at a correction that seems to work with the main pages, although I'm sure I'm missing something somewhere: .home-page .killer-logo { top: 40px; overflow: visible; } .killer-logo { top: 82px; overflow: visible; } .home-page .wide-hero, .issue-page .wide-hero { padding-top: 136px; } .wide-hero { padding-top: 98px; } .global-footer { padding-bottom: 100px; } .deadly-subtitle { bottom: 10px; height: 60px; } .global-footer .inline-items { margin-bottom: 2px; } .main-wrapper.stacker:first-of-type { margin-top: 198px; } .single-column-display, .two-column-display, .multi-column-display { margin-top: 198px; }
- jrode 14y ago
  Adding this css changed my whole impression of the site. (I just inserted at the top w/ firebug, had to add !important to the .deadly-subtitle styles.)
  - leddt 14y ago
    I agree, without this css I almost feel insulted by the header. With the css it's fine. What's sad is that ALA now feels... ordinary. It used to be very aesthetically pleasing, now it's just boring (my opinion).
FreeFull 14y ago
Same happens in Firefox 18 on Linux

by pgrote 14y ago

I am using Chrome on Windows 7. The menu bar on the top of the page cuts off the title and the bottom of the page slightly cuts off the * FOR PEOPLE WHO MAKE WEBSITES. Is that the way it should look?

rodriguezcommaj 14y ago

Pretty sure it is intended. I refreshed a few times thinking that some stylesheets were missing or not loading properly. Definitely a bold direction...

stan_rogers 14y ago

Yes, it is. I don't know whether or not I will get used to it, but it certainly qualifies as the advertised "heavily art-directed".

darkarmani 14y ago

It's broken on firefox too. edit: ahh for me the stylish add-on helps. Add padding-top: 150px to .main-wrapper and padding-top: 75px to .killer-logo. Apologies to the designers, but it was really, really bothering me.

bullseye 14y ago

http://imageshack.us/a/img228/8256/alat.png http://imageshack.us/a/img228/8256/alat.png I see the same thing. I have a hard time believing it is intentional, but even so, I think it looks sloppy.

colmvp 14y ago
I don't think it looks sloppy. It's intentionally styled like a magazine. Magazines deliberately break typographic conventions.
- bullseye 14y ago
  Fair enough. I guess I'm just not a fan of websites that want to look like printed material, which is by most accounts an inferior medium.
- keithpeter 14y ago
  I see your point, but my Web browser is also an interface, and the way the top cuts the header off makes it look as if there is a rendering problem. It feels to me a bit like a glossy magazine printed on good quality stock having a cover with a crease in it by design. Most would just assume they got a creased copy until the saw the others.
- frogpelt 14y ago
  I've never looked at a quality magazine cover and thought 'did they mean to for it look like that?' I thought that with this page. So, that's one glaring difference.
  - cypher543 14y ago
    That's because a magazine is printed and its appearance doesn't vary between people looking at it, so we automatically assume that it's supposed to look the way it does. A website can look differently depending on which browser is rendering it.
- jere 14y ago
  Usually a magazine overlays its title with a very dramatic photo of a person, which makes the person stand out. And usually only a few letters are obscured. Our brains are quite good at filling in the details. Example: http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/fashion/daily/2012/08/09/09-lady-gaga-vogue-cover.o.jpg/a_4x-horizontal.jpg http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/fashion/daily/2012/08/09/09-lady... I'm a lot less impressed by a fricking navigational toolbar that obscures the top of every letter of the logo. What remains are the less recognizable bottom halves of the letters. The T and I (not shown, but also F) look identical for instance. I'll believe that this is intentional, but I think it looks horrible.
keithpeter 14y ago
I get the same on Firefox (aka Iceweasel) 10.0.12 on Debian Wheezy. I thought there was a rendering issue until I read the parent comment.

mikegioia 14y ago

It is so distracting that I can't even be on this site anymore.

ThomPete 14y ago

it's intentional and is a normal design aesthetic/style especially in typographically designers mind.

gyardley 14y ago

It's intentional. I can't say I care for it - I've tried to scroll the missing part of the type onto the screen a couple times now. You can fix this pretty easily if you use a browser extension like Stylebot to customize your page styling - it's great when something just annoys you aesthetically. Here's my first pass at a correction that seems to work with the main pages, although I'm sure I'm missing something somewhere: .home-page .killer-logo { top: 40px; overflow: visible; } .killer-logo { top: 82px; overflow: visible; } .home-page .wide-hero, .issue-page .wide-hero { padding-top: 136px; } .wide-hero { padding-top: 98px; } .global-footer { padding-bottom: 100px; } .deadly-subtitle { bottom: 10px; height: 60px; } .global-footer .inline-items { margin-bottom: 2px; } .main-wrapper.stacker:first-of-type { margin-top: 198px; } .single-column-display, .two-column-display, .multi-column-display { margin-top: 198px; }

jrode 14y ago
Adding this css changed my whole impression of the site. (I just inserted at the top w/ firebug, had to add !important to the .deadly-subtitle styles.)
- leddt 14y ago
  I agree, without this css I almost feel insulted by the header. With the css it's fine. What's sad is that ALA now feels... ordinary. It used to be very aesthetically pleasing, now it's just boring (my opinion).

FreeFull 14y ago

Same happens in Firefox 18 on Linux