Photographic site critique please

Photographic site critique please (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Design] >> Site Critiques

Message

Richard -> Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 5:46:22)
I would really appreciate some feedback on my site at http://www.photographic-services.com I am trying to break into the world of profesional photography and I need the site to reflect a professional style. So even if you think the site needs to be completely rebuilt let me know eh guys? Perhaps you know of a site that is professional enough for you to give me a link to it so I can see what you mean? Thanks "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Gil -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 6:07:40)
I see a blank white page????? Gil Harvey The Host Factory Resellers are our Specialty Find a Web Professional

Mike54 -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 6:37:22)
I see a white page with "Welcome" at the top (center), three yellow boxes down and to the left, a vertical line to the right of the boxes, a horizontal line below them, with "Contact Me" below that. There is also some text in bright yellow there but I can't read it. There is nothing else there... ah reckon, tharfo'e ah's, ah reckon.

PBailey -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 6:45:31)
Richard, Just quickly. Think there is a problem with the pages. You are showing a background image pointing to your hard drive. I see a white page with very faint colors that are almost impossible to see. If there is text or anything in the link boxes I can't see it. On the gallery pages I would suggest using something besides up, next, etc. It is often confusing. My suggestion would be to give the viewer a way to get back to the gallery and go from there. Nice pictures. Paula Went back and looked again. The up does go back to the gallery but I wouldn't know that unless I clicked around. Edited by - PBailey on 03/01/2002 06:48:34

Richard Sterling -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 7:41:25)
White text on a white backgroud???? Why? " as God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 8:18:44)
Yes you're right, the background image was pointing to my hard drive, thanks. Is there a way to check if this is happening as I can't see it, it's very annoying? It should be fixed now. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Richard Sterling -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 8:30:19)
Still have white text on white background. There is not a picture bacground. " as God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 8:42:36)
Should be fixed now... if not I'm going to shoot myself!!! "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

I.M.Learning -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 9:46:56)
Richard - don't do anything drastic!!! It's not worth it!!!! Put your life in perspective, man!!!!! Personally, going into it thinking "okay, a photographic services site..." but then seeing text, Times New Roman white text, right off the bat, kinda turned me off...HOWEVER, when I went into Cityscapes,...NOW you're talkin'. Those are some GoRgEoUs photographic images, in my opinion! Show'em off!! Give'em to me on the first page!! Wow me from the get-go!

Richard Sterling -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 9:55:45)
Those are some nice pictures. Now that we can see what the text is, it does need a bit nicer font. And I agree with Learning. Lets see something graphically awesome on the opening page. " as God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."

Kokomo -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 11:28:32)
I agree with the others. Very nice photos, but the site could use some pizzaz. How about creating a snazzy graphic for your title, "Photographic Services" instead of plain text? And definitely give at least some sampling of your work on the first page.

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 13:47:53)
I took your words to heart and changed the text and the main title. At first I tried a fancy logo but I though it looked amateurish. Can you let me know what you think now please? 1) Is the entry page good enough now 2) Most importantly, do you think it looks professional? I'm still not sure!! "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Mike54 -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 13:57:36)
Richard, Much improved. Pics are great. I still think it needs work on the navigation. Not being overly bright sometimes I get confused when faced with a choice between "back" and "up" ah reckon, tharfo'e ah's, ah reckon.

PBailey -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 17:05:08)
Richard, The background image is still pointing to your hard drive. I'm seeing light aqua text on a white background. Hard to read. The showcard gothic text won't show up that way unless someone has that font on their computer. If you use a non-standard font you need to create a graphic so that everyone will see it the way you want them to. Pictures on the front are good and the navigation is getting better. A suggestion might be to go into google and search for photography sites and see how others have set them up. Photography is a hobby of mine so I've looked through a lot of them. Many use a darker background to set off the pictures. Having said that, when I set a new personal picture gallery up to share pictures I used white. You are welcome to check it out at http://www.baileyconnection.com/pictures Not much in it yet but you can get the idea. Paula

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 17:10:19)
I've just spotted the background has reverted to a blank white again. It's driving me insane. I'm in the process of going through every page right now and correcting the problem. As soon as I've done that I'll get around to checking out the rest of your very kind message. Thanks "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm<BR>not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Mike54 -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 17:23:17)
Richard, I'm now getting a couple of runtime errors. Line 25 navbar undefined and Line 79 object undefined. ah reckon, tharfo'e ah's, ah reckon.

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/1/2002 18:16:30)
On which page is this? "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm<BR>not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Mike54 -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/2/2002 6:47:58)
It was when I first went to the site, all clear now. Maybe it was gremlins in my machine. I see you're still having problems with the white background. ah reckon, tharfo'e ah's, ah reckon.

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/2/2002 17:41:46)
Oh no not again, I thought I'd fixed that!!! Is it all the pages or just one or two? Is there a way to know if you HTML is pointing to your hard drive easily or do you do as I do and check each page's HTML code? "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

PBailey -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/2/2002 17:49:13)
Richard, It's on all of them. Are you correcting on the HD and then publishing through FP or are going in live and fixing the background? Paula

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 3:44:37)
This is driving me potty! I spent an hour yesterday evening going into the HTML (within FP 2002) of every page and changing them to refer to the 'Images' folders for the background graphic rather than my hard drive. Now I find that they're refering to my hard drive again!! I'm using FP's 'Publish Web' function to upload the site. I think I'll change the HTML again and then use WS-FTP to upload only the pages I need to, maybe that will solve the problem. I'm at a friends house at present so when I get home later today I'll have a go. This is the most maddening thing about creating your own site, the fact that you can't always see this sort of thing happening as the site always shows up correctly on you own PC as you aren't aware of the code pointing to your hard drive! Thank's fo rthe on-going help though, it's very much appreciated. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

PBailey -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 7:45:12)
Richard, Are you sure that the background image is in the web image folder? I don't know about FP2002 but in 2000 as you develop the page the html will be pointing to the image on your hard drive. When you save the page it then saves the image in the web and if you check the html it will point correctly. You will know it is saving the image because it gives you a dialog box. Edited by - PBailey on 03/03/2002 07:48:11 Edited by - PBailey on 03/03/2002 07:53:43

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 8:54:35)
I've just re-uploaded the site and it should be alright now. I've looked at it again in IE5.5 and used the 'view source' function and it appears to be OK. Is it "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Mike54 -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 13:41:07)
Looks good Richard. That's an improvement on the nav too. ah reckon, tharfo'e ah's, ah reckon. Edited by - Mike54 on 03/03/2002 13:41:35

The Vampmaster -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 14:49:01)
Now that you have taken care of that you should start taking care of the unseen part of the site. Your description, and keywords are blank. Many search engines wont even index you for that, PLUS they wont list you if you are lacking of a phisical address in your site. I could not find it there. The Vampmaster

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 18:52:06)
Thank you for that comment. I had the site with my e-mail provider and a diversion address through another company so it showed up as photographic-services.com rather then a personal site address. I've just now bought the web space so in a day or two it will be moved across. Thank's again to everyone who made comments about my site, it's been very much appreciated and a very worthwhile experience for me. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Bill Seper -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/3/2002 19:44:56)
I think it looks very good Rich. The background you chose works good for what you're doing too. I think I'd give the banner text at the top a bit more work though. I'm thinking that the Broadway font would look good up there. And maybe underline it and put an extra space between the text and the first row of pics. Then you're set. Unlike some people here, , I'm rather fond of Times New Roman font myself. Old folks will thank you for using it because it's easy to read, unlike Arial. *********** Moo Baby!

Charles W Davis -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/9/2002 19:59:49)
At one point you asked for another photographic web site. Take a look at: http://www.kingwu.com

tarheel -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/17/2002 4:59:21)
I'm late to this post, but wow! Great stuff! All the stuff people were talking about seems to be fixed now; I loved the technical quality of your scans! What scanner are you using? My only comment is that your watermarks are huge! Too big, in my opinion. I'm kind of partial to photographic sites; check mine out: http://www.yosemitefun.com/tarheel/images/pictures_of_yosemite.htm Also, go to this site for great info on how to market your pictures. http://www.danheller.com/ Good luck! Phil "If God is not a Tar Heel, then why are hyperlinks default-colored Carolina blue?" http://1awebhosting.com 1A Web Hosting for Frontpage.

Richard -> RE: Photographic site critique please (3/18/2002 14:12:14)
Thank's for the great comments, they're very much appreciated. I'm using a Microtek X6 scanner and I scan at 300dpi (sometimes 600dpi) and then reduce to 72dpi afterwards. (Always scan at maximum 'optical' resolution and reduce the dpi afterwards if required, you get a better quality image that way.) I then clean the image up in Photoshop 6. I'm looking to get a slide scanner and a medium format camera (probably the Mamiya 7) as soon as funds become available (just become unemployed!). Thanks again for all of the approving comments. "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.140625