- Last post
- 26 Responses
1200 Grid 12 Col anyone?
Started last project with 960 grid but changed to 1200 after request from the developer.
Was using 15 Col and since yesterday I've started to have some doubts so today I started changing the project to 12 Col.
I thought 15 col would give me more freedom and help me not ending up doing everything symmetrical but somehow I didn't felt it was working.
Any thoughts? What do you guys use?
- 12 is divisible by 2,3 and 4, that's why it's used...it's a print graphic heritage...go read Josef Müller-Brockmann Grid System and Massimo Vignelli Unigrid.uan
- you'll understand the system, then you can do whatever you like. but the foundation staysuan
- if you need some vid in the layout, you might start by incorporating 1920, 1280 or 720 into your horizontal measurements, so they can be displayed in native resuan
- hey uan, that's the reason i started with 12 col in the 960 Grid. I did once template for a Bootstrap project and actually enjoyed the 12 col option.oey
- and thanks!oey
- 1280 or 1440 to start with, but it depends on what devices you'll want to target primarily
find your resolutions: http://screensiz.es/…uan
- also take a look at css grid in ff, might be helpful :) https://www.youtube.…uan
- another approach is to build up from a basic tile (unit), like 80x80 or 40x40 and build your grid with that measurement as baseuan
- I'm using 80x80 with 20 gutteroey
- great links thanksoey
- i usually prefer 24-32 columnsjaylarson
- ^thanks uan for the links!jaylarson
Take Google as a case study (especially since I'm guessing they do a ton of usability testing). The regular search uses the scale up/ scale down approach, in their case between 800 and 1180px.
However within the main column they restrict the length of the search results text. The result of a wider screen is actually more white space between the search results and the ads, which makes the page easier to read.
Then with images and maps they switch over to completely liquid width.
I would say that grid standards are going to snap more to HD resolutions the more we design for screens other than the comp monitor.
I don't think anyone's saying every site should be one way or the other, but there are plenty of situations where a wider page (than 960) is helpful.
^ I don't think this forum needs extra width, but it wouldn't hurt to make it more scalable. When I make my window narrow, I can't see all the information and there is no option to scroll to the right.
It's my opinion that the people who designed the 1140 Grid are more concerned with scalability than width.
How are you going to utilize the extra width, again, on this very page? Mockups welcome.
Some o f us are tired of having to scroll down to read a couple of posts and can not wait to have really wide monitors, so my entire facebook stream of friend's updates fits on a single line of text.
I'm with somadigital on this one
My screen width is 2560px and the best width for it is still 960px. 1140px is not a bad width, but in so many cases it's simply not necessary or may even be ott.
QBN is 990px wide. Would it benefit from going 1140px? How?
I think it comes right back to knowing your audience and doing your research. If you're designing your portfolio site to show CDs in agencies, you can bet they're running at least 1400 wide, which affords you more space to play.
Conversely, if you're designing an e-commerce site, common sense dictates going for the lowest common denominator, which - these days - tends to be 1024.
This is where the value of looking at a year or two worth of Google Analytics reports really comes in handy to shed some light on trends.
960 Grid is clearly not dead, but there is no reason for us to ignore the potential in new solutions to old problems.
For the argument above that PIZZA and doublespaced made (that users with large monitors tend to keep a narrow window) is valid. I think most of us on this site probably fit into this category. However, the 1140 Grid seems to work for this type of user as well as for users who prefer a larger window, or a much smaller one.
I'm going to try this 1140 Grid out for a personal project. Just to see how it works in practice. I can think of no reason to ignore it's potential.
@abettertomorrow - thank you. apparently only reading the post title is enough, and i guess reading a book by the cover is also acceptable.
i like the site http://www.informationarchitects… and their thinking, but back to the question is fixed dead and is this auto-resizing css idea the best we can design?
Interesting how everyone more or less completely missed the point. He wasn't talking about doing away with 960 width page, just the need for a grid that scales up to a slightly larger size and down to a smaller one.
- so "dead?" was a drama queen-esque overstatement then?TheBlueOne
- "960 grid" was what I readabettertomorrow
- 960 is fixed width, and by the sound of postings, the idea of fixed width web sites is dead. shall a headline have less drama and say 960 grid...to be phased out tomorrow or next year or not at all.somadigital
A website taking up a full screen I can tolerate on a 13" laptop because those screens are low resolution and about the size of a browser window to start with. Going full screen on a large monitor, just because you can, is ridiculous though.
I don't have a big display because I want to show a bigger website, I have one because I don't want the website to fill up the entire display. Hence, 960 is a nice width and should be here for awhile longer. It allows a website to occupy only a 1/2 of my display's real estate while I use the rest for other windows or documents.
With the logic of some of you, books should be two meters wide, because they can.
It's not like 960px is constraining us waiting to make wider websites.
It is good simply because most websites need not to be wider at all.
Yes it's fine, not everyone surfs the web in maximized single tasking cunt-o-vision. I have 2 large monitors but my web browser is a medium sized window
@grafisk, akrokdesign - that is exactly why i think 960 fixed is dead. it only satisfies aprx 20-30% of the user/consumer with a 1024 screen.
@toodee - yes, screen resolutions are getting more extreme every day, from iphone (500px) to cinema displays (2500px) and with these extremes, we should not have a use size fits all.
960's got a good year or two left, have to think about the consumer in the end!
not yet. maybe next year.