Forum:Banner and background decisions

This forum is to continue the discussion on the banners and backgrounds so that a choice can be made easier, especially as the last page was very full and it was starting to be difficult to negotiate. Thus, the most up-to date sections are below:

Background suggestions
If you have any suggestions (either images or simply a concept) for background images, post them here :) -- Porter21 (talk) 22:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Does it have to be something that tiles nicely, or are there other approaches that work well for backgrounds? --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 23:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * See my last entry in the previous section; I've mentioned some alternate techniques there. -- Porter21 (talk) 13:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have uploaded a few tillable background images, if people want to try them out. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 18:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Looks familiar. grsites.com? :) -- Porter21 (talk) 18:20, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Nope, some FO3 textures from Megatron/Vaults User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 18:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, so that's where I've seen them. I was looking for background images in the texture directories yesterday as well :) -- Porter21 (talk) 18:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Honestly, there are loads of options in the texture files, I just picked out a few of them I thought fit. Might go back and find some more at a later date. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 19:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, 2, 3, 8, and 9 look the and blend together the best. Shadowrunner(stuff) 00:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Pics 7 through 10 fit with the current color scheme, as they have hints of the same shade of green. I have zero attachment to the current color scheme, though. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 00:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd vote for texture 9. 78.8.156.92 10:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not a fan of any of these. They look too overdone to me for being used in a website. It's easy to overload the page with that stuff. What I personally never would want as well is something too dark. Dark websites are totally out. :> --Mr.Lexx 11:34, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I've added a live preview script for the backgrounds so it's easier to try them out. Simply click on one of the images in the gallery above to change the background accordingly. -- Porter21 (talk) 12:24, 18 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Nice! I don't like 1,2,4,5,6 at all (too dark and/or large but noticeable tiling). 3 is fun but too dark, and feels very FO3/FNV and less FO1/FO2. 7 is too busy/dark and the straight lines look bad due to misalignment with foreground site elements. 8 looks great with the current color scheme, but doesn't particularly evoke a Fallout feel. 9 repeats too noticeably. 10 is easily my favorite, being neutral but also very Fallout-esque with the rounded, weathered details. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 15:30, 18 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Aha! Proof at last that you are a wizard! Haha. Seriously though, I am a major fan of number 3, and I am extremely glad that you guys are even discussing this. Seriously though, good idea to draw them from the game Ghost, and nice choice too. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  19:31, 18 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Does the live preview support adding more content by simply adding in entries to the gallery, I only ask as you wrapped it in a div. If so I may add more over time as I go through the texture files. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 01:25, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it does :) Live preview functionality is added to all images in the gallery at the top of this section (or rather, any gallery on this page which is wrapped in a div with that class). -- Porter21 (talk) 01:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think 10 is the best choice. 9 and 8 are also good contenders, but 8 has too much detail and 9 repeats a bit too much for my tastes. Shadowrunner(stuff) 01:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd go with 8, 9 or 10, in this order. Ausir 03:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Seen as my choice is vastly less popular, I'd have to say out of other's favourites I much prefer 8, and detest 10. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  12:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * For those choosing 8, is that because of how it goes with the site's color scheme? I think it should be clarified whether the color scheme is going to change as well, as that will likely have some bearing on people's perceptions of the backgrounds. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 16:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * For me Hunter, it's because it is less repeatative than others such as 10 and looks more natural, if you see what I mean, much like our current background - it's harder to see the tiling. 10 looks ridiculous on longer pages. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  02:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks to GA showing me the personalisable css mechanic Porter sorted out, I have been testing all the backgrounds on an 'around site' basis, and I must admit that I am not a fan of any of them for long. The old background is far more preferable in the immediate, and besides that, I believe that we should be looking at gettin F:NV textures, not those from megaton. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  18:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The ability to customize CSS/JS for oneself isn't something I've added; it's a standard MediaWiki feature (works on Wikia, Wikipedia etc as well) :) -- Porter21 (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)


 * But you did write the code I'm using. Take some credit once in a while Porter :D κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  22:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Porter, GW is talking about the FWC CSS I imported to his personal CSS and showing how to change the background element. There was a couple of people I imported it to, to get live feedback from in chat. 164.38.32.28 18:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I have uploaded some more options for people to try out. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 22:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * 17 without question should win. It's perfect in everyway. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  23:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I missed adding one. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 23:45, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * 17 is indeed good. Need less green in the site color scheme to make it work though. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 00:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * 16 and 17 are the highlights of the new backgrounds. Shadowrunner(stuff) 00:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I would probably suggest that people hold off on choices, at least until the new skin goes on live trial tomorrow. The actual layout does add a whole new dimension to it. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 00:54, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Personally I like #19 (just needs to be a bit lighter), #13, #16, #17 and #18 (with the current color scheme) in that order. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:45, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks like #10 is currently being tested as the site default. Personally I like it a lot, but the white text at the very bottom of the pages is a bit hard to read against the lighter parts of the background image. It might be a good idea to change that text color to a tint that contrasts better. The Core/Database/Community/Wiki list headers show up fine, for example, due to their orange hue. --(talk 22:34, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * They show up fine because they are bigger and bold, not necessarily because of the color. Backgrounds like these are hard to place text on generally since a mixture of light and dark tones does not exactly lend itself to establishing contrast. I tried out quite a variety of colors but couldn't find one which provided better contrast and which also fit with the overall color scheme. If you can come up with a color which meets these criteria, I'll be happy to change it. -- Porter21 (talk) 22:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I wasn't criticizing anything; I just thought it was worth pointing out as a potential issue in case nobody else had noticed. It might be worth considering, say, a translucent or opaque single-color background box behind them to obscure the background image - if that is even an option (kind of like how the main content area of pages on the site currently have a solid white background covering the background image). --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 23:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Banner suggestions

 * The preview for these is problematic:
 * Some of the banners (like #3) seem to be too narrow, so they repeat (badly) a little at the edges. This may be because I've enabled the NoFixedWidth gadget/option.
 * When attempting to preview a banner, I sometimes get the banner, sometimes get no banner, and sometimes get the last banner in the list.
 * I can't view banner #15 at all. Clicking it just toggles between no banner and the last banner in the list. UPDATE: Actually I think I just needed to wait longer for the banner to load.
 * As far as opinion, none are really jumping out at me. I like some of the last few, but none feel vault-y and some feel game-specific. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 20:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As far as opinion, none are really jumping out at me. I like some of the last few, but none feel vault-y and some feel game-specific. --HunterZ_tiny.png(talk 20:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, some are and some arnt tillable. Most that tile wont have been done to well either, just to get the shear mass out as a test bed. Once one is picked, options can be explored for the no fixed width option, including spending more time meshing the image to tile better, an extended banner for the larger width, or even restricting the banner and menu size to default (but still keeping no fixed width for the content). For me I am liking #19 User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. Yes, some will take a while to load, I got most of the way throughmaking them before realising I hadn't optimised them. The final image will be streamed lined to download a lot faster. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Just wondering, would it be possible to have more than one banner and make it randomly load one of the choices? Ausir 12:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * You could via JavaScript, but there would be no fall back method I know of for those disabling JavaScript. Are you thinking for the default site setting, or just for personal use? User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 20:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I think that the best ones are the concept art ones, but only the ones where the majority of the image is light. I also think that Ausir's idea of chosing a handful might be a good idea, but there are some that wouldn't be worth including. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  22:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This dicussion really needs to move forward. Maybe we could add it to the messages that come up at the top? κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  12:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Aren't the original Fallouts a little under-represented? I think using a fragment of the original Fallout cover with the T-51b (which appears in all main Fallout titles) would be the right choice. I've recently uploaded a ton of scans to NMA, including several that feature a high-res version of the T-51b and have another hi-res file on my HD drive. Tagaziel 15:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * To be honest, we'll be going in circles with the "too game-specific" argument until someone comes up with (a) composite banner(s) featuring elements from all main games in the series (FO1, FO2, FO3, FNV). The fans of the classics won't like a banner based on the visual style of FO3 and FNV, and the fans of the newer games won't like one based on the visual style of the classics. -- Porter21 (talk) 16:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I think that's true, that's why I quite like the concept art approach. It doesn't show too much focus on one area, and they could very well be scenes from most games. The cities are a perfect example of this, and all the games have wastes, so maybe that should be the approach we take. Also, it's good to see you around Tagz. κηδεμόνας  [~μιλώ~]  19:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)