Design needs... something

At first I didn't like it, but than I started to like the concept a lot. A friend of mine once said that a web site is a like a play set. Everything should be part of the big concept. If it's a western you can't have a digital clock on the hand of an actor.

Your site talks about the video or better the lack of video signal. One thing that comes to my mind is how is it relevant to your business? But than I realize I don't care. It's a play and it's original. At least I haven't seen it before. (Other than on the tv of course.)

One thing however doesn't fit into your performance. The logo and the menu. It's not relevant to your concept. It's a great concept on it's own, but it clashes with the video signal.

I'm not sure how your motif ties in with your company name. I thought you might be a creative studio that does video/commericals but when reading your site it says you do design/web stuff.

Also, the way you styled your logo and your section names make it hard to read with the first letter being half the size and higher than the rest of the words.

I prefer the site as it is now without the trippy background. those colors are trippy enough, but they are pretty cool and original. Maybe if the background was faded a bit so it doesn't conflict with the foreground.

I would stretch the color bars and the whole site out a bit horizontally, it seems kind of narrow. Also don't be afraid to use your edges, especially the top one. You can put the solid color right up to the top edge.

I'm with Ivan and Geoff on the type too, you at least don't need the superscript text.

Could have potential with some tweaking. good luck

I was doubting the original background as being too plain, but maybe it was fine the way it was. It definitely solves the problems I was having with the edges of the field.

Ivan: If I remove the lack of signal element [the static], does it work better for you on the levels you were talking about?

I don't remember how the test pattern motif came to me originally. I think I was just playing with color and things just happened. My primary goal is to catch the eye and look clean and crisp, if not minimalistic. After that, hopefully the portfolio will do the rest of the "talking". You know?

is meant to convey [rather quickly] an playful irreverence. My target audience is visual artists [who need web representation] so I wanted it to look "stylised" but simple, hence the classic[esque] font with only minor tweaks. [It was actually another accident. When playing with fonts, the "expert" version of whatever font this is--I forget--made those superscript letters on its own.] I'm rather fond of it, though on my business card design I use the regular letters for more legibility.

At first I didn't like it...

and I still don't.

The classic look is out of place with the TV look and vice vresa. I'd go with "classic" and/or "elegant" and/or "aged" and lose the TV bit. It doesn't do anything for me. but maybe that's just me.

my blog: http://blog.one-waymedia.com
my work: http://www.one-waymedia.com

I see what you guys mean about the type now, I guess. Not sure what kinds of directions I can take it though where it feels "teevee". Is there some type that screams television/test pattern to you guys?

I like the concept, just not feeling the body font. It doesn't seem to go with the rest of the fonts.

Is that the actual 'rainbow' of the test pattern/color bars. Looks like it, but memory tells me that there's a bunch of horizontal stuff beneath the vertical part.
The new "TV" font looks hot.