Jump to content

Having checked out the Beta for the new version of Photo.net. . .


Landrum Kelly

Recommended Posts

<p>The new Beta:</p>

<p>I have to say that it is very impressive, having a certain elegance and even gravitas. I have not had time to delve into it in detail, but the first impression that it gives is quite stunning--and the first impression is where we win or lose new members.</p>

<p>Looks good, Glenn! Thank you.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

<p>I agree with Lannie and John. This is a great start with great potential. There is a learning curve for navigation, expected for anything new. What I like best so far is that it seems to focus the site on the art of photography rather than carrying it as a sideline to the discussion forums.</p>

<p>I also think the quality of the gallery presentations is a huge improvement over the existing one.</p>

<p>Well done, Glenn!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've already emailed my feedback to PhotoNET's manager Glenn Palm.</p>

<p>My main beef is it looks and functions too much like flickr (constantly downloading Photo Of The Day pix, images jerk back and forth with each scroll). </p>

<p>And this may be just my old school advertising background talking here but IMO a site that features photography and photographers should not diminish the importance of its member's featured photos by making them appear as stock photography wallpaper by placing graphics on top of them. They're no longer a feature but an advertising element. In fact that's what I thought they were what we in the advertising business used to call drop in place holders.</p>

<p>I also think it's misleading to only feature those styles of "slick" photos as if that's the only kind of photography on this site. I hope PN is not trying to be another 500px.com. They need to stand out from the crowd.</p>

<p>I see a lot of similarities... http://500px.com/</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Just found the beta site - quite a departure from the line-based current site. Need to spend some time there before I can provide any meaningful input. My first peek was a little intimidating, but that is to be expected with such a radical change from our current site.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Gave it try Laura but it's now hung up on "One Moment Please" as I'm typing this. I uploaded a 700 pixel tall portrait from my desktop, the old way, not from "Attach From Photo.net".</p>

<p>Whoops! I just now figured out that I have to click the orange Submit button once I see one line of monotype font written code entry in the white empty box. Now the portrait shows up but it's been considerably upsized with saw tooth edges. Maybe I shouldn't have dragged the corner that increased the frame size.</p>

<p>Laura, your posted image appears a bit smaller than 700 pixels though, around maybe 500 pixels on the long end. Hope they have something more intuitive and pixel exact than dragging a bounding box corner to adjust uploaded image sizes.</p>

<p>I had to sign in but had issues with using my regular PN email and password and just signed in through Google which I do to post in Disqus discussions on other sites. Now that's convenient even if I have to give up some personal info from my Google profile.</p>

<p>Also poster's names need to be in a darker font and not a light gray. It's hard to read on a white field and reduces its emphasis on who is posting.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>First impression: Definitely looks up to date now - a great step forward! And on first glance I could spot features I'm typically using - so, no hard learning curve from my point of view.<br>

The blueish background is obviously a consequence of the branding but I'm not sure whether it serves well as a neutral "wall for hanging".<br>

Tim, you're raising an important point - to me photo.net "stands out from the crowd" for the higher quality of comments and interactions between users - I keep my fingers crossed, that this "quality" will survive in the new world...<br>

@Laura: replied to your post...</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thank you for the feedback - keep it coming! I am but one of many people working on this project and NameMedia has been funding it anticipating great things for us. If you don't feel comfortable posting your response here - email me directly and all feedback will be reviewed and taken into consideration. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Tim,<br>

Thanks for joining in. Yes, I had the same trouble with the "one moment please", that moment went on and on, then I tried submit. Things went from there, a little bumpy, but ok. I didn't drag the photo. Mine is 700 on the long side. I figured best to stay with PN standard as I didn't see posting criteria for beta.<br>

@ Wolfgang, thanks for joining in. Many things will be a bit confusing, but I can do things now that I wasn't able to do in prior testing, so I'm happy to see those fixes in place.</p>

<p>Glenn, Will that entire box be on the right side all posts? <br>

The large "Sign In - Sign Up" box directly under "Post A Response" is awkward. Is this the new layout?</p>

<p>I mentioned the font colors in prior testing . Light on light and dark on dark is hard to read. </p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>When I try to access the discussion area, I'm getting another request for my login info. When I supply it, I'm denied access. So I have been limited to the photo galleries and critique areas. So my comments below should be taken in that context. I may be missing some important new features of the site.</p>

<p>My feeling regarding the site overhaul is that it's a big improvement aesthetically but PN needs substantive invigoration as well, which would require new features, more encouraged and supported user interactions, etc. Don't know how or what, but I think a surface refresh, which this seems to be and is a good one, without a more substantial update of the site as a whole will likely not do the trick.</p>

We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>There ya' go, Jim! Always a cheerful giver.</p>

<p>Oh, in regards to Photo.net 2.0 improvement I'ld suggest you make the Photo.Net logo 30% larger on the main page. On my 1080p 27in display the 'O' in photo is 3/8 in. tall and should be 1/2 in. I actually scaled it up in screengrab of the entire browser page in Photoshop.</p>

<p>As it is now it's too small and just doesn't stand out from what I'ld expect from a main page website.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>@ Fred - 2.0 is just the beginning of what I hope and expect to be many more updates to come. We are very optimistic for the future of photo.net. All we can do is take positive strides every day towards continually improving our stage so our community can thrive. As long as we continue to do that, we will be headed in the direction we all want photo.net to be going. I understand its been a long time and coming - trust me, I am with you on that, however we're getting closer to having something we can build our future from and all if not most of you have seen the beginning of it in the pre-beta sneak peek. Will 2.0 be the finished product? Answer - no. Will we try to continue to improve it in 2.1 and beyond? Answer - yes. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>@ Fred - 2.0 is just the beginning of what I hope and expect to be many more updates to come. --Glenn Palm</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is as it should be. Even as the administration of Photo.net 1.x keeps tweaking this and that, so must it be for any subsequent versions.</p>

<p>I do hope that there will be an archiving of the existing forums, and other useful parts of the existing site. The present Photo.net is a treasure, tracing its origins further back than any comparable photo site. I would hate for that treasure to be lost. I confess that I do not know how expensive archiving it might be, or how expensive it might be to allow persons to continue to access those old archives, continuing to the present.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Landrum, Glenn, I've twice tried to access the beta test by following the instructions on my invitation but all I get is a page with a bunch more links, none of which pertain to Photo.net. What could I be doing wrong? Why not simply provide a direct link to the test? Best, Len Marriott.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...