Critique required - www.photosbygary.co.uk

[gary_smith15]

Hi all,

 

I'm setting up a website and looking to 'launch' myself into portrait

and wedding work. To date I have only really done photographs for

friends and family but I'm looking to do some part time work for

enjoyment and extra pocket money (!) with the ultimate goal of

becoming full time.

 

I'm a long way from being full time because of the job I do currently

and the size of my mortgage...! The website is NOT 100% finished yet

(so please consider this if a link or two doesn't work) but I'd like

some feedback while I'm still developing it,

 

The "Prices" section of the website is blank for the very good reason

that I'm struggling to set a price. It's hard to balance being too

cheap and selling yourself short and being too expensive and getting

no customers. The really difficult decision I'm having is whether to

be "free" for a portrait session but charge more for the photographs

or to charge a fee for the session (maybe with a free photograph) and

charge less for the additional prints. I'm leaning towards the

latter option...

 

My approach to the website was:

- keep it user friendly

- have a 'conversational' tone to the website (hopefully showing I'm

a nice, approachable, friendly chap to deal with!)

 

All constructive feedback will be gratefully received!

 

Thanks,

 

Gary

 

www.photosbygary.co.uk

[4volt]

The site is quite well done, it's simple and professional looking.

 

Two things that may need alittle attention in my opinion are:

 

1. Some of your galleries are very small or aren't there, I'm sure you already know about that.

 

2. The logo is rather pixelated, you may want to save it as GIF format, or use a higher quality setting on your JPG.

 

The FAQ question: Why whould I hire you was a good touch I think :)

[gary_smith15]

Thanks for the feedback Jeremy - some of the gallery pictures are quite small so maybe I should select a few higher resolution pictures to put in there. The problem I have with some of the wedding photos is that they're scanned from prints so not the best quality...!

 

I think I might re-work my logos too - I like the simple style but agree that they do look a bit pixelated and detract from the overall quality of the site.

 

Cheers

 

Gary

[david_m]

The photos on the website are very weak. Some of the wedding photos are very bad. Awful shadows on the faces. You will need MUCH better photos to showcase your photography skills. Also, you cannot build a photography business via just a website. A website is just one component of many that will be needed. You will also need local advertising and personal contacts. Good luck with your enterprise but remember you will be competing with very experienced photographers and will need something to distinguish yourself from the competition.

[bj_bignell]

Your website is a good start, simple and attractive. Feels casual and friendly. I liked the Portrait Ideas section, showing alternatives.

 

I don't like that the links for the Children and Families galleries are dead; very discouraging and has an unprofessional appearance. No link is better than a dead link. Also, it'd be nice to have each thumbnail for each Gallery clickable, as well as having the text link below.

 

And a simple correction: It should be "FAQ", not "FAQ's". FAQ is an abbreviation for Frequently Asked Questions, which already contains the plural. Even it it was plural, it'd be "FAQs" without the apostrophe. The apostrophe is possesive, or used in abbreviations, but never plural.

 

The Grammar Police strike again! :D Save this link for future reference: http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html

[twmeyer]

<i>I take as many as possible during the session - because I use digital I don't have film costs to worry about!</i><p>Following this logic, you should also remark that you don't care how much time it takes for you to edit the pictures or how fast your equipment ages. After all, digital equipment hasn't really changed much in the last 5 years, has it? And it certainly doesn't wear out (sarcastic smiley face goes *here*) <p>Take as many pictures as you like during a session, but don't say it doesn't matter because there's no film costs. Time is <i>the</i> most valuable commodity you have. Next is the incredibly expensive equipment you bought last year that is already superceded by what the guy next door just bought his kid for graduation. Digital photography is more expense than film, in time <i>and</i> equipment.<p>Also, I wonder why your portfolio pages only use a narrow strip at the left edge of the monitor, especially since the rest of the monitor is "free". For that matter, your entire website only uses a portion of my monitor. Anyone who uses a laptop, or sets their resolution above 800 pixels wide sees mostly a white screen. This is not the hallmark of a professional website.<p><i>"Please note that the image quality is lower on the website than the photographs are in

actual print. This is to speed up the images loading over the internet."</i><p> This statement is totally bogus. There are plenty of fast loading websites with images that contain both highlight <i>and</i> shadow detail (your wedding images have neither). Try it, you'll like it. Your vacation pictures have full tonal range, why not the weddings? <p>It seems that you have built this site to attract customers that can't afford a high speed connection and want to save money by hiring a photographer that is cheaper because he doesn't use film... not a good clientele for a professional photographer who wants to be in business to <i>make</i> money. Perhaps I mistake your motives for making photographs as professional, since you say <i>"The satisfaction from my work comes when you say "That's a lovely photograph"</i>. To get this satisfaction does not require you to present yourself as a professional. You could just be a guy with a day job that makes good photographs. You need to decide which it's going to be. It's hard to make a living as a photographer... t

[gary_smith15]

Again, thanks to all for the constructive feedback. All very valid points, especially around the quality of the wedding photos (since they were scanned from film on a relatively old scanner I am not happy with the results so I may just take them off the website).

 

Lots of good stuff for me to work on and to think about.

 

Gary

[stephen_allan]

Hi Gary, I would concur with the comments above.

 

The site is clean, easy to navigate, and fast. If you are going to use it for marketing, put the best of your images up there (I do like the portrait ideas section - good USP).

 

One thing that grated on my eye though. If you are goung to mask out backgrounds for images, I would go for something subtler, such as reducing the contrast wrt the subject, or slight lightening/darkening wrt the subject. Masking to white is rather stark, and it is difficult to get a good clean line around the subject, which will not be as noticeable with a subtler transition.

 

It is a good time to start thinking, and working toward it though, while you do not have to depend upon income from photography alone.

 

Best of luck

 

Steve

[jairy hunter]

Gary,

 

I like the simple look to the website. It's easy to navigate (the parts that have active links).

You do have some skill, that's obvious.

 

Regarding the copy-or verbage on your site, though, I would suggest working on it a bit.

It's hard to generate stuff about yourself that doesn't sound goofy (you should read my

brochure--blech!). Your style is conversational and that's fine, but I would recommend a

more professional-sounding bent to the tone of the information, if that makes any sense.

It seems you are trying too hard to sell yourself. Case in point is all the information on

"portrait ideas." I may be totally off base, but I would not give away all my trade secrets! ie

showing how everything is done. People can find that themselves in books and websites,

and I don't think clients really care about all that--they want to see the finished image.

 

Show them, don't tell them, some examples of your technological skill.

 

Then again, just my opinion.

 

Good luck, you should do well!

 

J.

[gary_smith15]

Again - great constructive feedback, thanks. I think you're probably right about the 'Portrait ideas' section - show the potential clients WHAT can be done but not HOW to do it!!

[olivier_koning]

Hi Gary,

 

Here's my honest opinion:

 

Your opening page is a bit redundant and immediately identifies you as a "children photographer". For instance there's no need to repeat what's already in the "About Me" link (which usually comes last). Also, your choice of photos looks repetitive and does not incite the viewer (myself at least) to know what you're all about. An opening page should "wet" the viewer's appetite and not give off too much unnecessary information, which leads to my second point.

 

Quality is ALWAYS preferable to Quantity. Your portrait gallery sections and sub-sections are excruciatingly tedious to look at, not to mention repetitive. "Children", "Families" and "Adults" are all about Portraiture. A potential client does not care "how much" you can shoot, but how WELL you shoot. A single image can "sell" a photographer. Show your absolute best work, even if it means five images only under a single "Portraiture" category. "Less Is More", like the saying says.

 

Your "Travel" section suffers from the same problem. You are showing your professional work (aren't you?), not your vacation snapshots and personal travelogue. I do like your Bellagio shot and a couple of more images (I'd suggest images from other towns/cities as well), but they do not stand out amid the too many forgettable shots, which really sums-up my issues regarding your featured work and website.

 

Finally, I do agree with other comments about your choice of wording ("Portrait Ideas" for instance, sounds vague and amateurish).

 

No one says website design is easy. Please accept my criticism as purely "constructive", and good luck!