Without getting into standards and accessibility!
One executed beautifully: http://www.gucci.com/uk/catalog/85th-gucci/
And one executed, well, terribly: http://www.soulwax.com
The Gucci site uses some nice javascript to load the images when you scroll into them, and has some neat auto-scrolling action (click 'overview' or on the grid in the bottom corner, and then click back. Nothing new (litebox/prototype js), but looks very nice fullscreen (F11) on a widescreen monitor and a fat pipe connection. Can't beat well-shot, high quality photos either. Other than that, yeah, it's a bit dirty under the hood.
The Soulwax site I just can't understand what's going on. For me, it fails to detect Flash, throws up javascript errors and scrollbars are everywhere. Doesn't even appear to work in IE - though I'm not sure how it's supposed to look. I can see the concept is quite cool, but it seems to be a complete failure in execution. 2 many designers spoil the broth I guess
.
via WhatDoIKnow
Seen any decent side-scrolling designs recently?
One executed beautifully: http://www.gucci.com/uk/catalog/85th-gucci/
And one executed, well, terribly: http://www.soulwax.com
The Gucci site uses some nice javascript to load the images when you scroll into them, and has some neat auto-scrolling action (click 'overview' or on the grid in the bottom corner, and then click back. Nothing new (litebox/prototype js), but looks very nice fullscreen (F11) on a widescreen monitor and a fat pipe connection. Can't beat well-shot, high quality photos either. Other than that, yeah, it's a bit dirty under the hood.
The Soulwax site I just can't understand what's going on. For me, it fails to detect Flash, throws up javascript errors and scrollbars are everywhere. Doesn't even appear to work in IE - though I'm not sure how it's supposed to look. I can see the concept is quite cool, but it seems to be a complete failure in execution. 2 many designers spoil the broth I guess
.via WhatDoIKnow
Seen any decent side-scrolling designs recently?
Last edited:
. What does it look like for you? I get: