New Template: Icon

[kevincrafts]

Here's a new PixelPost template I've been working on the past couple weeks. It features a more graphical interface (hence the name) and some javascript effects. It makes use of the new Sub Title tag, but you should be able to use this template with previous versions if you wish. Depending on the size of your thumbnails, you may want to adjust the line height property of the #thumbRow h3 element to match the height of your thumbnails. Personally, I think this template looks best with square thumbnails.

See it in action (http://pixelpost.kevincrafts.com/icon/)

Download (http://www.pixelpost.org/extend/templates/icon-template/download/)

[GeoS]

Interesting. Only one thing - remove border round the thumbnails and then it will be cool.

[kevincrafts]

Oops. Thanks for letting me know.

[fredxeric]

Add "alt" description when you pass your mouse over icon....

[kevincrafts]

I can't add alt tags but I did put in title tags for the navigation and alt tags for the large icons. Thanks for the suggestion.

[jaywilliams]

After checking out your template, I realized that all of your icons are in JPG format.

It would look better, and load faster if you used GIF or PNG instead.
And as a bonus, you wouldn't see any of the nasty JPG compression artifacts.

[kevincrafts]

Actually, I don't think they would. To reduce file size, I would have to use less colors in gif or png-8 format. The file size actually would increase because of the gradients used in the original icons. When I look at the side by side in Photoshop, I think the jpg looks pretty good and the file size is the smallest.

After checking out your template, I realized that all of your icons are in JPG format.

It would look better, and load faster if you used GIF or PNG instead.
And as a bonus, you wouldn't see any of the nasty JPG compression artifacts.

[jaywilliams]

I guess my eyes are too picky when it comes to JPG artifacts.

If i use JPG images they are always set to quality level 80 (or up).
So in that case, for me, the PNG would more than likely be smaller.

The primary reason for using PNG (or GIF) over JPG is simply sharpness.
JPG is great for large images, but when dealing with small icons, JPG is nowhere near as efficient as PNG.

[chinamas]

I think it looks pretty good. One thing I'd change is the upper right "title" of the site...I don't think it looks very good with a block of white there underneath the letters of the title.

Maybe just use a different font for the letters and get rid of that white block that's behind it?

I viewed it in Mozilla Firefox (latest version) and everything worked good. Nice work.

[pmb]

Download link removed?

[kevincrafts]

I removed it from the extend area because it didn't meet the standards of what I wanted my work to reflect. However, if you private message me I will send the template to you - I just may not be able to provide support if you have issues with it.