Anyway, things are back. Slightly different. And I'm still not sure if I'll keep this new header or go back to the old one...but I promise not to change the background for at least a month or two.
What do you think? Header wise I mean.
The first one had about six or seven hours of published time--until about three minutes ago. The second had about twelve hours of published time (between midnight and noon). But I decided that while the font was pretty--it wasn't that readable. The third was what I had before. I've had it at least six months.© Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews
11 comments:
I like the font on the third one, but the pictures on the first and second ones.
I like the first one! :)
Becky - I like the first one, but not sure about the dark print over the pictures. I think it takes away from the beautiful pictures.
I love the one at the top now. I think the five pictures in the first one is too distracting...I lose track of the site's name.
I liked the second one, but I agree the font is off.
I like the one you have right now! (the first one). and I LOVE your background now!!! it's adorable.
I like the one you have right now (but that's not hte first one right? YOur current one has 4 pics and the first one shown has 5 pics.)
I did like the one you used to have though too.
I like the three-picture one with the current font. Maybe different pictures if you were tired of the three you had (from the choice of five we can see)?
Methinks your navy blue font is getting lost a bit. perhaps something brighter would stand out more. And why blue? There's no blue in the art.perhaps a deep red or maroon would reference the paintings.The gothic style of the top font works well because the art is not contemporary. A modern font wouldn't make sense.
douglas
and I would go back to three pictures: a trinity, right?
love it now in red
douglas
Thanks for your insight, Douglas. It was just a matter of finding the right shed of red that worked for me.
Post a Comment