13 May 2003 | Paul said...

I found it odd that I couldn't click the "+" icon to zoom in on the picture, although clicking on the picture itself worked.

Otherwise, really nice.

13 May 2003 | SU said...

I found it odd that I couldn't click the "+" icon to zoom in on the picture, although clicking on the picture itself worked.

Well, that could certainly be fixed... But the {+} is tiny by comparison to the entire photograph, which gives you a gigantic target area.

13 May 2003 | SU said...

Incidentally, those photos were taken 2 days ago. A very snowy year for Colorado!

13 May 2003 | JF said...

SU, those look like they were taken on a movie set in LA. You can't trick me.

13 May 2003 | Jesper said...

Ooooh. Aaaah.

13 May 2003 | spiro said...

In other news...

Nice site SU. I don't think you could ever out do the original Coulour though. That was a great site.

13 May 2003 | steve said...

Looks nice, though the content area begs to be centered above 800x600.

13 May 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Zeldman likes it, too.

13 May 2003 | SU said...

Looks nice, though the content area begs to be centered above 800x600.

It was at one point, but once I decided to have those drop shadows on the sides, it was impossible to get the background images to line up properly. Maybe PNG is the answer?

13 May 2003 | fajalar said...

Because I am often out of the loop on so many new ways of doing things... What's with scott{at}couloir.org, (and work [at] 37signals.com) instead of making it a link for sending mail?

I am seeing this more often, and I was just wondering as to the purpose.

13 May 2003 | SU said...

What's with scott{at}couloir.org

Gun shy about SPAM is all! I think I'll change it, though... Probably not worth the hassle it causes you folks.

13 May 2003 | hurley#1 said...

What's with scott{at}couloir.org, (and work [at] 37signals.com) instead of making it a link for sending mail?

One of several ways to publish your e-mail while foiling spam robots.

I prefer using a javascript scrambler (e.g. Enkoder from Hivelogic) although some people disable Java on their browsers and thus can't use the link.

13 May 2003 | fajalar said...

Ah, I knew there must be a reason. It doesn't bother me at all. I didn't know that about spam robots.

I learned something new... I can go home now.

13 May 2003 | e.fladung said...

ah, very nice! very clean, tight in all the right places. makes me wanna go rearrange my book shelves. well done.

13 May 2003 | scottmt said...

I dig it, and damn I'm lazy! I need to get up there again before the summer!! Brek closes and all us snowboarders pull out our skateboards. ;-)

one thing that confused me. I'm using the latest Safari (well it is a beta.) The page loaded with a blank white content area where the picture description should be, even though the picture was already loaded in the crop area. I have to click on the thumbnail (not the cropped photo) to get the description.

no tables huh? far out !

13 May 2003 | SU said...

one thing that confused me. I'm using the latest Safari (well it is a beta.) The page loaded with a blank white content area where the picture description should be, even though the picture was already loaded in the crop area.

Yeah, Safari seems to do that now and again when dealing with iFrames. I have no idea why. Here's hoping they fix it before the final version is released with Panther.

13 May 2003 | [email protected] said...

Say, what's this crazy iFrames?

14 May 2003 | B. said...

Very nice. Congrats!
Another good example of css power with great design.

By the way, wich camera was used to take that photos?

14 May 2003 | Jesper said...

It is, to me, incredibly ironic that Safari has a problem with iframes. :)

iframes are embedded frames. Imagine poking out a piece of a site and placing a frame there. That's an iframe.

14 May 2003 | SU said...

It is, to me, incredibly ironic that Safari has a problem with iframes. :)

I've submitted a bug report to Apple about it.

15 May 2003 | alisha said...

happy to see you online again. Looks GREAT! beautiful Colorado...

Im getting large white space on the right side with IE:mac 5.2 on my g4. On the pc it looks fine. Id say center the content, ax the drop shadow, and try using instead a 4-5 pixel "frame" which imitates a drop shadow. Were dealing with the same questions with the beyond the blue redesign right now.

15 May 2003 | yuckmouth said...

I miss the excellent use of white space that Colour v1 had. It really made the photography pop more - the site was crisper. With the new design it seems dusty (grey on lighter grey). My .02.

16 May 2003 | mike said...

look forward to the full version!

04 Oct 2003 | Ken said...

I am looking for a Scott Upton that grew up in Durham NC. Is that you?

04 Oct 2003 | Ken said...

I am looking for a Scott Upton that grew up in Durham NC. Is that you?

04 Oct 2003 | Ken said...

I am looking for a Scott Upton that grew up in Durham NC. Is that you?

01 Feb 2005 | online pharmacy said...

I really appreciate blogs like this one becuase it is insightful and helps me communicate with others.
thanks.also, that guy billyz, I really need to talk to you about that cure you mentioned.