Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: I finally have a website  (Read 2611 times)

Kumar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 754
    • http://www.bskumarphotography.com
I finally have a website
« on: August 01, 2009, 11:11:55 am »

Dear All,

I've got my website up and running.

www.bskumarphotography.com

I hope some of you will take the time to take a look and let me know what you think, particularly with regard to page loading times, text readability and overall design.
I used the free version of SimpleViewer. If the format works well, I'll get the Pro version to get rid of the link.

Thanks,
Kumar
« Last Edit: August 01, 2009, 11:13:29 am by Kumar »
Logged

AndrewKulin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 342
    • http://www.andrewkulin.com
I finally have a website
« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2009, 12:35:02 pm »

I won't comment on layout/functionality, quality of photos as others here on the forum are better informed on web-site design.  I spent a couple of minutes as I am in between running errands.

What I will say is the site loaded pretty quickly for me, it has an appealing look to it.  However the pictures when viewed were pretty small (max size maybe 3-4 inches in width on landscape shots).  Is that intentional or a matter of not scaling for monitor viewing size?

I am running 1920x1200 on a 24-inch monitor, viewed using Firefox 3.5.1.

Andrew
« Last Edit: August 01, 2009, 12:35:19 pm by AndrewKulin »
Logged
[size=12p

jasonrandolph

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 554
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterpunk
I finally have a website
« Reply #2 on: August 01, 2009, 12:42:27 pm »

Kumar:

I think the design is good.  Navigation is simple and pages load quickly.  However, I agree with Andrew regarding image size.  It's almost like looking at a thumbnail.  That's a shame, because it looks like you do very good work.  I would suggest at least doubling the size of your images.  Otherwise, I'd say the website is quite functional.

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2906
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
I finally have a website
« Reply #3 on: August 01, 2009, 02:00:09 pm »

Layout and design is minimalist and I really like it. But images are sized as large thumbnails which is way too small - there's no way I can enjoy photos at this size. Also, there's a SimpleViewer tag visible, and the navigation within a gallery is not readily apparent: I noticed by accident that there are more than three photos in each gallery when I used my mouse wheel. Also, using Flash will limit your viewer base, as well as make SEO difficult.

Kumar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 754
    • http://www.bskumarphotography.com
I finally have a website
« Reply #4 on: August 01, 2009, 04:58:20 pm »

Thank you for all your comments. If I might answer:

1. I agree about image size. I decided to limit the size of the main image to 600x600 pixels for a couple of reasons:
a. Most architects, who are my target, use laptops/notebooks or smaller desktop screens on their desks. The larger monitors are at the studio workstations, where internet access is limited to team leaders. I didn't want users to always have to scroll to see the whole image.
b. A recent PhotoShelter survey says that most photo buyers like an image size of no more than 700 pixels, which also minimizes page loading times.
c. Andrew, if you know of a way to scale images for monitor size, I'd appreciate if you could give me some advice. I did search, but couldn't figure out how to do it. I designed it myself using Kompozer.
d. I will link larger images to open with a right-click.

2. Feppe, there's always an arrow visible under the thumbnails, so would it still be easy to miss it? I wanted to see what the viewer experience would be before buying the Pro version of SimpleViewer, which will get rid of the logo, as well as let me reposition the arrows. One problem is that it needs Adobe Flash to edit the swf that SimpleViewer generates. While the editing can be done within the 30 day trial period, any later editing would require me to buy Flash, which I really don't need for anything else. Does anyone know if/how this can be done?

3. Re: Flash vs. HTML. If there's no Flash or Java enabled, a message with a link to an HTML gallery shows up. I expect most of my target audience will have Flash enabled.

Thanks,
Kumar
Logged

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2906
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
I finally have a website
« Reply #5 on: August 01, 2009, 08:00:46 pm »

I saw on another thread about your site where someone mentioned it looks bad in FF but fine on other browsers - I'm using FF. The images are much smaller than 600x600 on my FF 3.5.1.

AndrewKulin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 342
    • http://www.andrewkulin.com
I finally have a website
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2009, 09:41:27 am »

"c. Andrew, if you know of a way to scale images for monitor size, I'd appreciate if you could give me some advice. I did search, but couldn't figure out how to do it. I designed it myself using Kompozer."

Sorry but I have no idea how it can be done - I have no experience with web-design.

As I noted yesterday I am running Firefox 3.5.1 and the images were tiny then, but when I revisited this morning the image sizes now appear larger, and appear to be up to 600 pixels wide on my 1920x1200 (estimated by eye).  So something seems to have changed.

Andrew
Logged
[size=12p

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2906
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
I finally have a website
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2009, 10:15:42 am »

Yes, now everything looks fine on FF - the navigation arrows are visible, and the images large. Nice website!

Kumar

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 754
    • http://www.bskumarphotography.com
I finally have a website
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2009, 11:05:17 pm »

Thanks, Andrew and Harri. I made sure to use CSS strictly so that it would show properly in most browsers. I also got the Pro version of SimpleViewer, so the logo no longer shows up. I'm now trying to figure out how to show it properly on an iPhone or similar mobile browsers.

Regards,
Kumar
« Last Edit: August 04, 2009, 11:06:51 pm by Kumar »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up