I could use a few more hits -- on my website, that is. Or how to get a free 15" AK.

Excellently done Ben!!!!

Some thoughts for improvement.:)
A few of the pix didn't download for me, looks like I'm not the only one.

I think there may be something not quite right with this part of the page. It just doesn't quite click correct for me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
1- Himalalyan Imports forum at Knifeforums.com

2- Himalayan Imports Forum archives at Bladeforums.com
(18,000+ posts!)

3- Himalayan Imports Forum archives #2 at Bladeforums.com
(15,000 posts!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...

Number 1 is okay.

Number 2 may be wrong in that there is only one H.I.BladeForums archive unless I'm mistaken? Spark once told me that the 2 archives on BladeForums were consolidated into one.

Number 3 may or may not be the archive on KnifeForums if there is one. (or both/either archive between Blade & Knife Forums may be confused one for the other?) I think there is still an archive on KnifeForums, but I didn't check it out.

I didn't see any links to Cliff Stamps tests that he has made on H.I.Khukuris and has on his website unless they're in the FAQ's somewhere?
I believe it would be a credit to H.I. to have a link to Cliff's tests that is more visible.

And last but dayumed sure not least I don't understand why the front page comes in at a different resolution than the others?
I'm @ 800 x 600 True Color {32 bit} after Al's post the other night.:)
 
HI WEB V4 - (final version?)

I managed to change Heber's ethnicity (and his dwelling) so that we have a 'Nepal' khukuri-in-use photo.

Thanks for the comments Dave - yes I do have a mix of text & links, that's just mine way of design. If people think it's too much, I'll change it though. I like the 'hypertext' idea - one's reading text and some bits of the text are 'clickable'. Putting the graphics along (both) borders makes the reading more interesting ('illustrated')--and yes some are navigation links.

The most important links I think are (1)SHOP, (2) CONTACT & (3) KHUKURI FAQS. The first two actually appear three different times on the page, twice near the two & once at the bottom. (3) appears twice - once at top and once in middle.

on the 'founts' - the fount itself is consistent (standard web fount). Point size & text colour are altered to [size=3][color=red]highlight[/size][/color] certain items, as are MAJUSCULE letters.

but I'm happy to try to change whatever is deemed necessary of change.

cheers all, B.
 
It's taking me 10 seconds to load the page with Netscape and it looks great to me. If there are details to be worked out folks with a lot more knowledge than me will have to work this out. I'm ready to change my AOL website! Beo's V3 looks a lot better to me than what is up now.

So, experts, take it away!!!!!!!!!
 
argh - machine ate my message.

ok - brief version then.

Yvsa - fixed the links, I think, perhaps you should check on them.

On Cliff Stamp's reviews; they're @ http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sstamp/knives/reviews.html , along with this other knife reviews -= he has 3 HI reviews, should I have a separate link to each one or just a link to his knife review page??

I don't know what you mean about resolution. I'm only working on the main HI frontpage in any case, the 'internal' AOL pages I've not done anything to (I think they're fine anyway, for their purpose). Is the screen too wide -- is that the trouble. I'm at 1024x780 or whatever, the next one up from 800x600. I'll try to switch down and look but I thought browser were supposed to compensate.

Uncle Bill I think I'm ready whenever we deem the page set to go--I decided just to stick the counter on that I use, we can change this if you want, but I don't know your other counter. I don't have any AOL, so I'm not sure how we go about relocating the page (I know I'll have to change a bunch of the photo locations).

BUT at the moment I'm going to go and have a cigarette (where's the smoking smilie???)

If people have furthre suggestions, let me know. But about the basic page layout I would need concrete suggestions if people find the layout itself confusing in some way - I don't , but then again this is similar to how I've done other pages, so I'm used to it and....

Bas!! Ich will jetzt rauchen! ;)

B.
 
the adjective "standard" doesn't have an adverbial form "standardly" in any reference to which I have access.
Each blade is marked "HI" in Devanagari (the writing system standardly used for Nepalese, Hindi and Sanskrit)
Click to expand...
Having picked my nit, I'm blown away by Ben's work - great job!:)
 
Put the V4 into the webring. Email me and we'll try to figure a way to use V4 as the replacement for the current home page at AOL.
 
One nit and one complaint - "Ayo Gorkhali", not "Gurkhali", and I only noticed it because it was highlighted.
I can't find Heber :D The disguise must be perfect :confused:

The site is near masterpiece - very nice work indeed.
 
Originally posted by Berkley
the adjective "standard" doesn't have an adverbial form "standardly" in any reference to which I have access.Having picked my nit, I'm blown away by Ben's work - great job!:)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the 'nitpicks' actually - this is part of what I wanted people to look for

:eek: :eek: :eek: with a BA in English and MA in linguistics....you're right though Berkley, of course. Though there's no reason 'standardly' couldn't be an adverbial of 'standard', and I think I've heard it in speech (I must have done). But I changed it to 'customarily', which sounds nicer anyway. [though you realise that the man who gave the 'state of the union' address today makes adverbials like hispanically (as in 'hispanically-owned businesses', though how someone owns a business 'hispanically' is beyond me - is HI nepalically-owned???) ;)]

Walosi - fixed the Nepali phrase/shout too.

Uncle Bill - I already put the site into the Web Ring, we'll need to get it onto your server proper before I can really 'activate' it. I just put it in myself, I transfer 'ownership' of the WebRing management to you once we have it set up (not that it matters much). Also put the CQcounter that I 'standardly' ;) use on it.

Couple more tiny details - 'images copyright 1999' - is that still right? The link to 'Village Khukuris' didn't make it over - but it didn't seem to go anywhere....

If people are more or less satisfied I think we can go ahead and try to get the new site up....

thanks for the kinds words all (feeling more relaxed after my smoke ;) )

cheers, B.
 
p.s.

The 'Nepali', wearing some sort of linen clothing and chopping wood outside of a stone & thatch dwelling is actually Heber in jeans and a flannel with a Western house and a car in the background.

attachment.php
khuk-chop.jpg


Added links to Cliff stamps HI reviews & also to my kukri-gallery (which, I think, has some nice shots of HI khuks).

once more :

NEW Himalayan Imports Front-Page

B.
 
Those doctored shots are amusing but I don't feel right about having those on a commercial site. It may come back to bite Uncle in the buttocks. People crying fake photo and such. Just my two cents.
 
Originally posted by BruiseLeee
Those doctored shots are amusing but I don't feel right about having those on a commercial site. It may come back to bite Uncle in the buttocks. People crying fake photo and such. Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...well doesn't matter to me--I can remove it if people think that's best. I/We don't claim anywhere in the text that it's a Nepali splitting wood, just that it's someone splitting wood with a khukuri--which Heber really is doing, so the real crux of the image (i.e. splitting wood with a khukuri) isn't 'doctored'. Heber's just got a 'dark tan' and changed clothes and a different backdrop...the photo of Yangdu is 'doctored' too in a sense; she isn't really standing in front of the Himalayas in the original shot.

firkin just recommended a photo of Nepalis actually using a khuk as a tool and I couldn't find any, so I 'created' one. There aren't even very many photos of anyone doing something like chopping wood with a khukuri....but doesn't matter to me one way or the other.

cheers for the comment, B.
 
Ben,

My half pence input was based soley on the fact that it is useless currency as are my ideas. I loaded the initial page and all the graphics loaded fine for me. I really didn't check all the links, but I think if the front page loads, so will all the others. I think the page looks really good and the scrolling is just a pet peave of mine. Bill, you have a fine new web page here!

Pardon the edit, three too many green bottles.
 
Ben the links to the archives are now correct.:)
There is no archive for H.I. on KnifeForums.com all of the posts are avilable from the forum, all the way back to 1998!!!!!

Some pix on the What's new for 2,000 page still aren't loading. The Kumar Karda for one. It was easy to remember.;)

And still a glitch somewhere somehow the way I see things.:confused:
This is all on the main page.
When I 1st click on the page I get the draw bars on the right and at the bottom to move up or down and right to left. That's with the pixels at 800 x 600. I have to scroll sideways to see the whole page, making it unhandy.

When I go to 1024 x 768 pixels and click on the maximum spot in the upper right corner the page enlarges and covers the whole screen with only a bar at the right for up and down movement with nothing overlapping where you have to move from side to side to see the whole page. The font is smaller and harder for me to read, not necessarily an issue I don't suppose.

And if I go to the What's new page it comes in the same......
However, when I resore the pixels to 800 x 600 it is still the same, covering the whole page with no overlap, except with larger font which is a lot easier for me to read.
I haven't had this problem with any website I've ever visited. The 800 x 600 pixel seeting has always been sufficient up until now.

Perhaps the best way to explain is that although the print is smaller and harder to read the whole main page comes up at the 1024 x 768 pixel setting.
All the other pages like the What's new page are compensated for and fills the screen although the font is smaller and harder to read at the 1024 x 768 pixel setting.

It's better for me to have the pixel setting at 800 x 600 to view all the pages except the main page.
I hope that all makes sense Ben.
I'm still to new at pooters to speak all the terminology.:)

If Cliff's links were there before I just overlooked them somehow.
I believe they're fine now, thanks. Cliff's work is to important to not have links to his tests.

As far as I can see everything else is fine.:)
 
Originally posted by Yvsa
Ben the links to the archives are now correct.:)
There is no archive for H.I. on KnifeForums.com all of the posts are avilable from the forum, all the way back to 1998!!!!!

Some pix on the What's new for 2,000 page still aren't loading. The Kumar Karda for one. It was easy to remember.;)

And still a glitch somewhere somehow the way I see things.:confused:
This is all on the main page.
When I 1st click on the page I get the draw bars on the right and at the bottom to move up or down and right to left. That's with the pixels at 800 x 600. I have to scroll sideways to see the whole page, making it unhandy.

When I go to 1024 x 768 pixels and click on the maximum spot in the upper right corner the page enlarges and covers the whole screen with only a bar at the right for up and down movement with nothing overlapping where you have to move from side to side to see the whole page. The font is smaller and harder for me to read, not necessarily an issue I don't suppose.

And if I go to the What's new page it comes in the same......
However, when I resore the pixels to 800 x 600 it is still the same, covering the whole page with no overlap, except with larger font which is a lot easier for me to read.
I haven't had this problem with any website I've ever visited. The 800 x 600 pixel seeting has always been sufficient up until now.

Perhaps the best way to explain is that although the print is smaller and harder to read the whole main page comes up at the 1024 x 768 pixel setting.
All the other pages like the What's new page are compensated for and fills the screen although the font is smaller and harder to read at the 1024 x 768 pixel setting.

It's better for me to have the pixel setting at 800 x 600 to view all the pages except the main page.
I hope that all makes sense Ben.
I'm still to new at pooters to speak all the terminology.:)

If Cliff's links were there before I just overlooked them somehow.
I believe they're fine now, thanks. Cliff's work is to important to not have links to his tests.

As far as I can see everything else is fine.:)
Click to expand...

I'm not responsible for 'What's New for 2000' page....I'm just doing the front page - probably it was an image hosted on PhotoPoint (or whatever that 'Enronish' company was called) or something - Uncle Bill just needs to fix the link.

On the resolution - I've switched to 800x600 (damn everything's so bloody big, how do you stand it?!) and see what you mean about the page - the text gets buggered up too, it should line up with the photos much better. I think I figured out what to do to compensate for these different resolutions. How to do it is another question. It looks like I need to write some Java script (if I've lost you, don't worry, I have only the vaguest idea what this is myself) which detects the screen resolution the browser is in and then, based on that, it chooses to display different photos. The tricky bit (ok, one of the tricky bits) is that I have to create 3 versions of most of the images on the page and figure out what the proportional reduction should be for 800x600, 640x480, &c.

But I'll give it a shot. Hopefully if I do that, the text will 're-arrange' itself, more or less.

No, the links to Cliff's reviews weren't there before, I put them in after your message (+ the link to my kukri gallery).

cheers, B.
 
Originally posted by bobrap
Ben,

My half pence input was based soley on the fact that it is useless currency as are my ideas.
Click to expand...

Useless because it doesn't exist anymore, you mean?

B.
 
Ben the 800 x 600 resolution is fine for me. I'm using a
HP Pavillion mx70 with a 17 inch screen and everything is easy to read from about 2 feet or so away from the screen.
You have to remember that a bunch of us are just a flock of old pharts that use the Cantina for a roosting place. I'm 62 and my eyes are probably a bit older so the 1024 x 768 resolution print looks really tiny to me.;)
I just changed the font on my e-mail today to make it easier for some of us old pharts to read.:)

I think I understand the problem now as you're only doing the one, main page. That makes sense of things.
I can't recall if it was on our forum here or another where resolution was being discussed to an extent a little while, few days ago.
It was mentioned that a whole lot of people are still operating on 26,000 bps modems with 640 x 480 resolution and that new web pages should take that into consideation. I'm sure not telling you what to do as I wouldn't have a clue as to where to start let alone do the job that you have and in such a short time.
I like it and I can live with having to scroll the page or change resolution as I choose.
I also really like the H.I. snail mail address right on the front page too.
When I sent the Bowie model out I thought I had changed the address page in my H.I.Journal and I hadn't. I had to go looking and it took me a little while to find it, while Barb was waiting, hurrying me, so she could get the package to the PO.:)
Sometimes Barb just likes to pick on me and I let her as she does take excellent and then some care of me.:D
I did take care of the problem though. As I said before,
"Excellent Job!!!!!!!" :)
 
Beo, and whomever else:

Most impressive photoshoppery! (or whatever you used)! Whether or not to use the doctored picture is up to Uncle Bill. Actually, like BruiseLee, I get a slight, but not-so-good vibe knowing it's altered. Why not put up the original picture and caption it "HI Ang Khola splitting wood in Utah"? (Heber permitting) Work is work, regardless of location.


Anyway, the lack of a photo of a khuk actually doing some work seemed glaring to me, particularly after going through the FAQ and whatnot, and reading about it being used for everything. Upon further reflection, I can see how it might be impossible to locate one. To my knowledge, nobody that I know of ever took a picture of me or anybody that I know using an axe, a screwdriver, or a separatory funnel. Maybe I was over-doing the "its a tool, not a weapon! PC shite (oops, will that word disappear?) To Heck with that, "Bitchin' knives, chops anything to tiny bits! an' don't break neither!" Dang, there I go again. (brown bottle flu) Seriously, as previously suggested, maybe replacing the expertly doctored pic with a photo of Yangdu or another un-uniformed Nepali holding a typically sized khuk, to contrast with the humungous one she's holding in the other photos would be a fine alternate option.

DaveH's suggestion to edit for conciseness is timeless and always applicable to all writing. Some trimming down is certainly possible/reasonable. Unfortunately, that's always the most difficult and time-consuming aspect of writing anything in my experience. The current version looks pretty serviceable to me, it's not a journal article after all. You can always find smaller nits to pick off of the nits. Or condense later.

I'm happy that some my pulled out of where-ever suggestions were useful, and hope that HI can sell more khuks and help more kamis prosper by producing knives that embody their skills and soul.
 
Originally posted by Yvsa
Ben the 800 x 600 resolution is fine for me. I'm using a
HP Pavillion mx70 with a 17 inch screen and everything is easy to read from about 2 feet or so away from the screen.
You have to remember that a bunch of us are just a flock of old pharts that use the Cantina for a roosting place. I'm 62 and my eyes are probably a bit older so the 1024 x 768 resolution print looks really tiny to me.;)
I just changed the font on my e-mail today to make it easier for some of us old pharts to read.:)

I think I understand the problem now as you're only doing the one, main page. That makes sense of things.
I can't recall if it was on our forum here or another where resolution was being discussed to an extent a little while, few days ago.
It was mentioned that a whole lot of people are still operating on 26,000 bps modems with 640 x 480 resolution and that new web pages should take that into consideation. I'm sure not telling you what to do as I wouldn't have a clue as to where to start let alone do the job that you have and in such a short time.
I like it and I can live with having to scroll the page or change resolution as I choose.
Click to expand...

A lot of pages are designed for 1024x768, I think.

Well, I spent some time writing 'JAVA script' and now I've figured out how to make the page detect what resolution you're running in (in other words, I'm watching you.... :p )

Then what I did was to make small versions of all of the images. I multipled 800x600 and divided by 1024x768, which gave me a percentage by which I reduced the images (actually, initially I made four different version, one for 1024, one for 800, one for 640 and one for WebTV -- but I found that the 640 & WebTV images just became too small....and the 800x600 version seems to work at 640x480).
It actually pushes some things around at the lower resolutions too (more coding :rolleyes: ) to try to make the arrangement better at the lower resolutions. Should be too bad at 800x600; @ 640x480 you shouldn't have to scroll left-right at all, but the text is going to extend fairly far below the images (unlike the high rez ones); no idea about WebTV, shouldn't be much worse than 640x480.

So you can test this new site now at:

HIMALAYAN IMPORTS NEW FRONTPAGE - VERSION 53,387.9: <br>Image-resizing Edition (800x600 should be better now)

PLEASE DO NOTE THAT THIS IS AT A DIFFERENT http-address than the previous version(s) - the old one [V 5 or whatever] is still at the old address.

hope this one works better for those at 800x600, 640x480 & WebTV (though the last one is so bloody small...)

cheers all, B.
 
Originally posted by firkin
Beo, and whomever else:

Most impressive photoshoppery! (or whatever you used)! Whether or not to use the doctored picture is up to Uncle Bill. Actually, like BruiseLee, I get a slight, but not-so-good vibe knowing it's altered. Why not put up the original picture and caption it "HI Ang Khola splitting wood in Utah"? (Heber permitting) Work is work, regardless of location.


Anyway, the lack of a photo of a khuk actually doing some work seemed glaring to me, particularly after going through the FAQ and whatnot, and reading about it being used for everything. Upon further reflection, I can see how it might be impossible to locate one. To my knowledge, nobody that I know of ever took a picture of me or anybody that I know using an axe, a screwdriver, or a separatory funnel. Maybe I was over-doing the "its a tool, not a weapon! PC shite (oops, will that word disappear?) To Heck with that, "Bitchin' knives, chops anything to tiny bits! an' don't break neither!" Dang, there I go again. (brown bottle flu) Seriously, as previously suggested, maybe replacing the expertly doctored pic with a photo of Yangdu or another un-uniformed Nepali holding a typically sized khuk, to contrast with the humungous one she's holding in the other photos would be a fine alternate option.

DaveH's suggestion to edit for conciseness is timeless and always applicable to all writing. Some trimming down is certainly possible/reasonable. Unfortunately, that's always the most difficult and time-consuming aspect of writing anything in my experience. The current version looks pretty serviceable to me, it's not a journal article after all. You can always find smaller nits to pick off of the nits. Or condense later.

I'm happy that some my pulled out of where-ever suggestions were useful, and hope that HI can sell more khuks and help more kamis prosper by producing knives that embody their skills and soul.
Click to expand...

ah the other insomniac - hi firkin!

Would you know that the wood-chopping-pic was altered if I hadn't told you??? :p I sort of like my 'doctored' picture; but I'll go along with whatever the consensus is. I really don't want to change too much more at this point, because the 'alternate resolutions' version has to be edited completely by hand, I can't user an editor like Netscape composer anymore.....

I think the picture borders make the text look longer than it really is. There's the briefest of intros to Gurkhas; some description and praise of khukuris in general; why-HI-is-the-best/Bura section; Pala-as-owner and Gorkha-blood section; wide-range-khuks and materials section; and then the mag-reviews & museum-bits and finally the contact info. Not really very much. Though I agree conciseness is a virtue - just not one of mine -- I think I did pretty well in this area, all things considered (trying reading one of my papers ;) :p )

I think the basic stuff is there for the page in any case - it can always be fiddled with and tweaked later on, if deemed necessary....I need to get back to my Beowulf readings... :D and get them finished up (another one of my 'comissions')

cheers, B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top