# Critique my church's website, if you don't mind **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [February 27, 2006, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302 "2006-02-27T12:52:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Club\_33](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@Club\_33](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Club_33)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/21 "2006-02-28T04:05:20Z")
This problem could be on my end but even with my high speed connection, I noticed that some of the images (particularly of the pastor) loaded pretty slowly. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/22 "2006-02-28T04:09:26Z")
IMHO, the layout is nice and clean. I’m not a fan of the not-quite-black text color, but I won’t fault it. The Praise Fellowship logo is a good one, and should be bigger. The top banner was reduced to too few colors. Speaking of banners, all the pics look like banner ads; this is a big turn-off for me, plus, you can’t click on any of them for more info. Each one is so different from the others, it looks like corporate sponsors. This is further fueled by… Too many fonts! Each banner has a different font, stop it! Ahhh! ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/23 "2006-02-28T06:37:46Z")
> [@garygnu](#): > > Speaking of banners, all the pics look like banner ads; this is a big turn-off for me, plus, you can’t click on any of them for more info. Each one is so different from the others, it looks like corporate sponsors. I missed this, but it is absolutely true. (‘Absolutely true’ here being defined as ‘corresponds with my own experience and sounds rational to me’.) People are trained to respond to how things are shaped, and assume that function follows form. The function of things shaped like banners is either to sell you something and, even if not, to take you somewhere else when clicked on. Your banners fill neither of those roles, and so may confuse people who come to your site. Plus, some ad-blocking software will block any image with the same dimensions as an ad banner. This may or may not result in your banners being taken out as well; I don’t know how aggressive various software of that type actually is. ---
**Author:** ![metj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@metj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/metj)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/24 "2006-02-28T11:42:03Z")
Hmm, interesting perspective on the ‘banner ads’ I never thought about that before, and I think I agree with you. When I first started doing the site, I only made those type of banners for the super big news - Christmas service, service time change, bad weather info, etc. - and people were able to click on them for more information. Do you think reducing the number of banners would be sufficient, or should I change that format altogether? I could do just text announcements, but that is what the PF News page is for, and I wanted something extra to get people’s attention. Also, I’m trying to work on the colors - I agree that the black/grey rollover is too subtle, but I’m working with blogging software and not sure how to tweak everything yet. This thread has been more than helpful. ---
**Author:** ![jali](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecae2f/32.png) [@jali](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jali)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/25 "2006-02-28T14:27:38Z")
> [@](#): > > Can you expound on this? Our church has a pretty good demographic relating to our city. > We’re working on adding more pictures, but first we have to take them, y’know? Please understand, if the photos are representative of the demographic in your area then you shouldn’t change a thing. ---
**Author:** ![furnishesq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/977dab/32.png) [@furnishesq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furnishesq)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/26 "2006-03-01T02:23:30Z")
Pastor Peach looks like a peach of a pastor. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/27 "2006-03-01T03:33:41Z")
> [@metj](#): > > When I first started doing the site, I only made those type of banners for the super big news - Christmas service, service time change, bad weather info, etc. - and people were able to click on them for more information. The clickability was good, as was the implied rarity of the ‘super big news’. Your main page is, IMHO, a bit overloaded with graphics. Going back to that system would be good. Mind, it doesn’t solve the other problem relating to shape. > [@](#): > > Do you think reducing the number of banners would be sufficient, or should I change that format altogether? Doing both might be worthwhile. I think you should reduce the number of images regardless of what the remaining ones look like. > [@](#): > > I could do just text announcements, but that is what the PF News page is for, and I wanted something extra to get people’s attention. Text is good. ‘Getting people’s attention’ only works if the attention-getters are fairly rare, otherwise they just become background noise. I think your current banners are just about at the background noise level. ---
**Author:** ![rkts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c4cdca/32.png) [@rkts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rkts)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/28 "2006-03-01T04:20:25Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > Plus, some ad-blocking software will block any image with the same dimensions as an ad banner. This may or may not result in your banners being taken out as well; I don’t know how aggressive various software of that type actually is. That’s possible, but unlikely, unless the OP were to deliberately make her graphics to be the same size as a banner ad. ---
**Author:** ![metj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6a8cbe/32.png) [@metj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/metj)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302/29 "2006-03-01T15:48:08Z")
> [@](#): > > Text is good. ‘Getting people’s attention’ only works if the attention-getters are fairly rare, otherwise they just become background noise. I think your current banners are just about at the background noise level. Well I could move to flashing banners… Just kidding! 😛 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/critique-my-churchs-website-if-you-dont-mind/346302.md?page=1)