Poll: OcUK Colour Scheme
- Thread starter Spie
- Start date
My thoughts on the 'black' theme:
+ It's not actually black; it's lots of warm dark greys, so contrast and readability isn't as affected as I feared. Say what you like about the white-on-blue, it was very comfortable on the eyes. This was it's biggest asset.
+ It ties in with the retail site. Consistent identity is reassuring to those who may not remember the 'good old blue days'.
- Because of the lack of saturation elsewhere, members' sig pictures with saturated images really leap out, causing visual clutter and confusion and making posts harder to read. Perhaps enforce an even smaller/more subtle sig rule? [Mwah-hah-hah...]
- Still some work to be done on the UI: the main subforum/topic links should be the most prominent and readable items on the page, with subheadings ["Talk about anything not covered by other forums", for instance] and other less important information having less contrast, because they're simply not as important to the user. EDIT: Oh, and the reply, quote, and trust links REALLY need to be buttons! Also, user-posted links need to more contrast; they fade in to the background too much at the moment.
So I guess my choice is 'black, but not yet'
+ It's not actually black; it's lots of warm dark greys, so contrast and readability isn't as affected as I feared. Say what you like about the white-on-blue, it was very comfortable on the eyes. This was it's biggest asset.
+ It ties in with the retail site. Consistent identity is reassuring to those who may not remember the 'good old blue days'.
- Because of the lack of saturation elsewhere, members' sig pictures with saturated images really leap out, causing visual clutter and confusion and making posts harder to read. Perhaps enforce an even smaller/more subtle sig rule? [Mwah-hah-hah...]
- Still some work to be done on the UI: the main subforum/topic links should be the most prominent and readable items on the page, with subheadings ["Talk about anything not covered by other forums", for instance] and other less important information having less contrast, because they're simply not as important to the user. EDIT: Oh, and the reply, quote, and trust links REALLY need to be buttons! Also, user-posted links need to more contrast; they fade in to the background too much at the moment.
So I guess my choice is 'black, but not yet'
Last edited:
What the hell are you talking about, no one has and no one will touch the votes. What would be the point in that
Stop dragging the thread off topic.
I've got it on Opera now with a userscript, I can see why people might not like it, I think it is awesome though, just I can still see the blue before the script loads it to the black theme 
I also think it makes images and signatures stand out more the black theme, and it matches my browser theme
I also think it makes images and signatures stand out more the black theme, and it matches my browser theme
Last edited:
Having now flipped back to the blue, I have to say it's a heck of a lot more easy on the eye/brain than the ultra-contrasty 'black' theme.
And that's ultimately what's most important here, as with all websites: that the content is as easy to read as possible. Yes, even in GD
And that's ultimately what's most important here, as with all websites: that the content is as easy to read as possible. Yes, even in GD
![Earth[Tera].bin](/styles/overclockers/avatars/5.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 3,022
Yep , black for me.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 26,303
The black is awesome. I've had it on for a few months now and love it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 11,788
- Location
- Somewhere
Black looks OK, but it needs a fair bit of polishing up.
That said, the blue theme is far from perfect as well.
That said, the blue theme is far from perfect as well.