Not everyone uses a large hi-res display.
For example, my primary device is 11,6″ at 1366×768. Sometimes I set the zoom to 80-90%
This image is wider than my widest screen, but I guess it will have a max-width in non-pixel value so there will be no issues? 
It would be all scanned and uploaded art for the artist.
Are you saying artwork for newly released albums/releases is not supported? Like current month, current year releases?
Thank you for quoting me, aerozol. Regarding IvanDobsky saying earlier, we don’t want to send people to other sites immediately - in this case:
- Can we position the artist’s shows/events so it is expanded and clear because we expect visitors to remain on the MB page and we would like them to support the artist and know when the next show is,
- Or not have it expanded and show external links at the top because MB is a referential source of information and we need to try and help users locate references pertaining to music (at a glance).
In any case thank you for your continued mockups. I am certain your redesign will benefit the community at large, and any additional cover art display will help deduce edition differences better.
Thank you!
Artwork is attached to the Releases (CDs\Vinyl\etc). Copyright issues means there are no images for an Artist. (No pictures of the band members)
Your artwork ideas seem to be more focused towards the Release Group page.
1 Like
True.
Hey, how does Discogs get away with having pictures of the artist? Do you know?
Buried in this forum are the answers to that. (best not to go off topic here too much) (example here and blog here)
1 Like
I actually wonder if this could be used for artist pictures from the cover art. for example, this pair of pages from my copy of Dark Side of the Moon, or I’ve had some digital releases that include an artist picture with the download. I’ve actually added artist photo links to the latter’s images on CAA for the artists involved.
Adding my voice here in favor of limited page width (with a reasonable size we could try to agree on). It is what I have come to expect of modern websites.
As stated above there are readability issues with wide screens; smaller screens shouldn’t be affected.
Responding to the idea of wasting horizontal space, as far as I see it having a full-width page will very rarely (wiki/annotation is the only one I can think of) offer more usable space considering we wouldn’t be cramming in other columns, just making existing tables larger. Personally I think this white space is more appropriate on the sides, rather than filling the middle of my page with blank.
However I also agree with @IvanDobsky that the very colorful background makes it look a lot busier rather than give the main content of the page breathing space.
Not opposed to the gradient, but I would limit it to the page header.
Also as a final note, the maximum page width is very easy to customize with the appropriate browser extension of your choice; it should be a single css definition on one html element.
2 Likes
You seem to be assuming that everyone always has their browser in full-screen or maximized mode all the time. I’d be willing to bet that’s not true. Very few people with ultra-wide monitors use their browser in full screen mode, except for occasional needs. In my case, my browser width is usually about 2/3 to 3/4 the width of the monitor.
This confuses me. How is the extra space not usable? Whether you add columns or make existing tables larger, you are making use of the extra space.
Nobody is suggesting “filling the middle with blank.”
Sure, for those who know how to do that, and have the time and inclination to do it. Assuming that everyone should just do it themselves isn’t a very user-friendly policy. I’d hate to hear that from my car mechanic.
2 Likes
for what it’s worth, I believe in these cases the white space would be trimmed automatically. for example, how it’s handled on ListenBrainz (homepage and user page for example). try resizing the window horizontally on those pages, and there’s a couple points where the layout changes slightly to fill the window better. I’d imagine something similar will be implemented on the final design.
1 Like
Making the large pink \ orange space borders will make the Release page cramped. I assume this mockup would be a style to be used across the site. Please lets create a mock-up page of a Release page where multiple columns are important before a decision is made on those edges.
If I may demonstrate what I mean using screenshots of the current MB layout, first without any change and second with a maximum body width (the size is arbitrary, I’m not making a redesign mockup here ):
The two images have similar amounts of white space, considering the window is the same size.
However, in the top image (full width), the white space is located in the middle of the page, where I would want to see useful information. This is what I meant by “filling the middle with blank”. We don’t make use of the extra space by adding another column to the table, we just push the useful information to the sides of the page.
Ideally for me, the useful information should be located towards the center so as to minimize the amount of screen space my eyes have to travel.
You’re quite right. However, considering most websites these days follow the same pattern (limited page width, centered) I think the great majority of users won’t be surprised.
I am of the opinion that a full width page is not very user-friendly, and the burden of change lies on those who wish to deviate from that norm.
I was merely pointing out that for those who are very much against it, it is a fairly easy one to solve, which might lower the stakes a bit.
I don’t want anyone to be angry or disappointed with the new design, even though I know we won’t ever please everyone…
1 Like
The Release Group page needs space due to the extra columns compared with the examples shown so far. Here is my actual monitor as it currently looks like. As I use Vivaldi I already have a wide border in use. This is a 1920x1200 screen. Complete with various scripts running.
(Sorry if this email comes over grumpy… it is not meant to be… just showing you an alternate look of a screen from one of your editors)
Would the border shrink away at a minimum width of display? If the above screen became 20% borders I’d be needing to learn CSS editing
1 Like
I am of the opposite opinion – I find the wasted margin space to be very user-unfriendly, and I think the “norm,” if it really is a norm, should change. Your screenshots again assume that everyone is going to have their browser maximized on wide monitors, which I think is a mistake. Also, some of that space could be taken up with a more readable font size.
Anyway, I’ve had my say. I may be in the minority among webpage developers, but I’d have to be convinced that I’m in the minority among typical users.
2 Likes
If the browser window is narrower, the white space on the sides will be sacrificed, not the information in the middle. Just because x% of the page with in full width would be white space, doesn’t mean it would be the same x% if the window were smaller.
I’m all for a better-readable and slightly larger font though.
1 Like
That’s not really the point. When I maximize my browser, it’s usually because I’m looking at a page that isn’t fully visible at my normal window size. If unreasonable margins are imposed because the window is large, my purpose is thwarted. Now, I’m not saying that happens very often on MB, but it is one of the reasons why I consider wasted margins to be unfriendly.
1 Like
I’ve been thinking about this again, and just had an idea I wanted to share…
maybe if an artist is part of a collaboration artist, do we want to include the collaborations’ releases on the artist’s main page? maybe in a seperate section?
take Sakura Miko, for example. she collaborated with Hoshimachi Suisei under the name miComet. with this change, the one release by miComet would show up on both Miko and Suisei’s pages, without having to monkey with artist credits.
any thoughts?
4 Likes
one thing I thought of while we’re redesigning the artist page, collections should probably be easier to see. for example, on RYM they’ve got about 10 on an artist page:
https://rateyourmusic.com/artist/linkin-park
I don’t know that we need 10, but at least 3, chosen at random
Thanks UltimateRiff, I have also copied your comments to the ticket FYI.
I think we can nicely handle this through @Jim_DeLaHunt’s suggested ‘Contributed to’ tab on the artist page. What do you think?
With collapsible items in the sidebar we can make them more comprehensive without bothering people too much, so this is a good idea. (Did I forget collections in the mockups? I think I did…)
The other option would be to display them at the bottom, in the big boxes (ignore the bright gradient on everything, feedback has been heard and the next mockups will be plainer). Or both. I see the bottom section as a good way to ‘explore’ all the MB interlinks and collections are an excellent way of doing this.
that could be an option, but I think it might be better to have it more front and center, not hidden away in a tab… idk, I’m fine either way tho~
any of these options sounds great~