New Website

[Cire Llissat]

I've pretty much completed my first home-grown website and I'm ready to have you all

critique it. Anything you think I can do to improve it, please let me know. I'm also testing

both Pictage and Digilabs. I did my first wedding last month and I have another scheduled

for June. Please let me know what you think of the pics as well. Thanks much. Eric

[jewan_runhaar]

you forgot to post the link..

[Cire Llissat]

www.tassillphoto.com

[rich_taylor____mequon__wi]

A couple of suggestions. First, as a client, I would find the site to be terrific because those would be my images. I also use Pictage, so I know the drill. But, if I were a potential client, I'd find it a bit confusing, especially if I wanted to see samples of your work and were faced with an event code in order to do that. It's client-friendly, but not convenient for browsing to see what you do. Only one of the 3 weddings is accessible and that one takes you to Pictage.

Which brings me to the next suggestion. Maybe those are proofs that have not been tweaked at all, but the lighting on many of the images needs improvement. If you're waiting for them to be corrected when ordered as final proofs, that's fine. If not, then they might have benefitted from some adjustments before they were submitted. I wanetd to have Pictage do a proof magazine for the bride, and one for me, to see what the product looks like (I'm also new with them), so I went through all of the proofs in PS and made some quick corrections using Levels and Curves. It made a big difference in the quality of the proof images, which (as you know) are printed directly from the files you send. I wanted the proof magazine to really pop, so I corrected many of the images (mostly the indoor shots).

 

If you don't care about the proofs and just value the final prints, that's fine, but I think you might do well to spend some time sharpening your lighting techniques. BTW, I'm not excluding myself from the need to do that.

[Cire Llissat]

Thanks Rich. Good observations. That's exactly the kind of feedback I'm looking for. I

think I will move the ordering section to another url on the website and actually put up a

gallery. I ahve only one wedding behind me (the one you saw), so not much to put up and

I still need to find my "style." I agree on the lighting, particularly the flash. I thought I was

a good photographer until I started trying to do the wedding stuff. I am reading a lot of

material...dont have time to take a class...and spending some time receiving critiques from

this forum and the one on Pictage.

 

BTW, yes I was hoping that Pictage would handle the final tweaks, 'cause on the JPEGs I

didn't want to do to much by way of altering them.

 

So you think the lighting was a bit dark?

 

Anyway, thanks for the good feedback.

[jml]

May I ask why you chose Pictage? I am still working on getting my web-site up but in the interim have decided to go with Collages.net for my first couple weddings. Do you have an opinion of one over the other? I looked at a couple others, but don't want to commit for a longer period of time as again, I'm hoping to have my own site soon.

[Cire Llissat]

Firstly, let me say that while I have been taking photographs for 2-decades as an amateur,

I am new to doing it as a professional, so please take what I say in that context. I am

currently using BOTH Pictage and Digilabs. As of right now, I like the interface on Digilabs

better (for the customer). It just seems easier to purchase from Digilabs. From a

photographer point of view, I lean towards Pictage.

 

I like the way they let you set up catalogs and determine which photo sizes customers can

order...and you see your profit margins immediately. With Digilabs its a bit more

complicated, you have to download their price list and manually figure our profit margins

and their fees.

 

From a photo quality perspective...from what I've seen, they look pretty similar, though

digilabs offers Canvas printing and I don't see that on Pictage. Hope this is helpful.

[derek_c.]

I say this again, and again, and again.....<br>

You are NOT telling people where you are.<br>

Think about that for a moment... your visitors will not have a clue about your locality or nationaliy.<br>

<br>

There is not a single full-size picture I can see (no access to them)...<br>

When I go to "Price" page, there is no link for "gallery".<br>

When I go to "Gallery" page, there is no link for "prices".<br>

<br>

I don't like the color of the links... dark blue on black.<br>

I can't see... I'm old.<br>

<br>

Instead of "Contact us" you should write "Email"<br>

<br>

I don't like the use of a third party web site for album.<br>

Your web site needs a lot of work, a lot more pictures, a lot more pages.<br>

This is not a good web site.

[kay_thorogood1]

Eric

I agree with the previous post that your web page is geared more toward the client. Also, I'm on dial up and the first page loaded very quickly, but as I proceeded everything slowed down to a snail's crawl. I realize most people have DSL but thought you might like to know that I didn't have the patience to stick with exploring your site because it was just too slow.

 

If you're trying to "hook" my interest, you lost me after the first page. You went from visual to boring text. Perhaps you could have a link for existing clients to place their orders. Check out this site: cantrellportraits.com. Bambi Cantrell has a nice web page and a specific place for her clients to log on to when they enter her site. Go for visual impact. Good luck, don't be discouraged - these things are a work in progress - it's not easy. Kay

[derek_c.]

For example...at the bottom of the page.<br>

You have - PRICES | GALLERY | CONTACT<br>

Look at the underline.... it's a sloppy work.<br>

Perhaps you are thinking "Nah, that's a tiny detail".<br>

That's a tiny detail most people never allow.

[Cire Llissat]

Thank you for the observations. I realize that there are details that I may have overlooked,

perhaps even minimizing their importance. That's why we have these forums, so that we

can discuss and learn from one another. As soon as I can, I will make the changes

suggested by those responding to this request. Hopefully you will return to critique my

updated site. Again, thank you for taking time from your busy day to help out a fellow

photo-netter.

[me4]

Eric,

 

I think you have made a good effort, but there are a few things that need attention

 

It is nice to open to images but I think you have stronger images than this. Maybe go back through your images and see what else is stronger and conveys more of a wow effect.

 

I'm trying not to mention what others already have, but you really do need a gallery, and it must be easy to navigate.

 

With limited time and attention span when shopping, you need to impress your market quickly and clearly.

 

Good luck...

[Cire Llissat]

Michael

 

Thanks. Did you do your own website or hire someone?

[me4]

Hi Eric,

 

I did all of the initial site design at first, but fellow Pnet member Jewan made some great changes and really made the site come alive!

 

He mastered the new design and layout with the text and images that were there. He is extremely talented.

 

Good luck on your site!

[todd1664878707]

I haven't read the other's responses, so this might have already been said. I didn't like how I was transferred to Pictage. It's nice to view galleries within your site. Also, the blue hyperlinks really stand out. I didn't care for the color and they are a little hard to read against the black background.

[aaron l]

The above comments pretty much cover it...people will be confused and frustrated at your site. One other thing...the middle text on the front page isn't crisp at all - font too small and bold is off. "It's the most important..."