Mine is a php site, no flash, just images:
The site is meant to share images, a 'This is what I do' type of page.
I like your site a lot: elegant and simple to the max. It's all about your images, which are not distracted by common web design problems, such as awful colors, sale promotions, grandiose artist statements, etc., etc. You have an objective for your site, and your design meets it perfectly.
Without an *obvious* navigation menu or any text on the homepage, my first reaction and assumption was that each of the vertical circles is a selector for a single image. It didn't help when the first cirlce's description is Marginot I, and the second is Marginot II. But once I figured out what they really mean, navigation is easy and "intuitive".
The three red navigation buttons at the lower left are somewhat misleading. Since they are positioned right under the verticle circles (and no horizontal numerals on the homepage), I assumed that they are for navigating between the circles. But only the top button returns me to the homepage, while the +/- buttons navigate the horizontal numerals. Replacing the +/- buttons with left/right buttons sandwidching the numerals would make their meaning more obvious.
Assuming that the images in the two Marginot galleries are actually one big gallery separated for better navigation/display, I have the following suggestion. Add a More button after Marginot I's last numeral 9. Clicking on More (or when viewing 9 and the + button is clicked) will go to Marginot II and display its first image. The Marginot II images will be labelled 10 through 21, instead of 1 through 12. Hate to repeat myself, gallery size does matter when it comes to web design. I have found few large web galleries handle grouping and navigation well. The above is a fine point.
Last but not least, I really like your Marginot images (perhaps influenced by my recent viewing of "The Pity and the Sorrow") and they load very fast. In fact, for a change, I am not bothered by the lack of thumbnails. When each image looks so good and loads so fast, I was tempted to view them all. Sites like yours make me wonder if I should stop worrying about web design and work on my images instead. <g>
A similar one, but constructed much better, is this one:
I like the text overlays, but I don't know how to implement that.
Similar to the awl site in simplicity and focusing on images. While the images are nice, they take much longer to load, and I didn't spend time to go through them.
The homepage' right side can be put to better use than an icon, such as some text to bait the search engines.
In a gallery page without any thumbnails (actually in any gallery), it would be helpful to know how many images are in it, and which one is the enlarged one.
And this site I like a lot, very simple and straight forward - even better than the other two sites:
The most sophisticated site of the three, but not necessarily the best.
The homepage and galleries load reasonably fast. I like the fade_in/fade_out images on the homepage. It can be used to mimic a real slide show. How is that done?
The text/background colors are lacking in contrast for good legibility. The biography page is the exception. Why not make all pages legible like that?
The homepage's menu buttons have right arrows, leading me to think that there are fly-out menus. But there are none. The arrows serve no purpose other then to confuse.
A gallery page does let me know how many images are in it, but I can only view previous/next image, but not pick a random one (in case someone told me to look at #15, e.g.). Nor can I jump back to the first one to view it all one more time (in case I really like the gallery). Nor can I click on the gallery's menu button to do so.
It is a fluid design, and the image size scales with the window size! Love that, but is it done with flash? Or, can it be done without flash?