Site opinion and ? links

[jay_pomerantz]

<p>Hi. I just finished (never really done!) my site - I'd like comments and also am wondering if I can link to and be linked to other sites? Thanks a lot.<br>

Jay<br>

<a href="http://www.bluewaterprism.com">http://www.bluewaterprism.com</a></p>

 

[geoffs1]

<p>It looks OK, but it loads very slowly for me (over a 40 Mb/s link). You might want to consider examining the file-size of your photos and see if you can't trim down the ones that appear outside galleries to make them load a little faster.<br /> The navigation is pretty intuitive and the word map is an interesting touch.<br /> The layout is a bit tall. On my 1920x1200 screen I need to maximize the browser to see it all (with a typical overhead of tabs and menu bars). Unless you target audience is going to always be on large screen (i.e. no moderately-priced laptops) I would suggest you consider shrinking everything to fit in a 900-1024 high screen; that will help with the loading speeds, too.<br /> Do you have to have the "Photo Website Hosting by SmugMug Pro" at the bottom of the page? Why advertise your hosting company (unless they're giving you something back for the exposure).<br /> I'm also a big fan of posting an e-mail address (rather than the "fill in the form" contact page). My philosophy is to make it as easy as possible for potential clients to reach me.<br /> Unless this post it just an lame excuse to procure cross-links (and it may well be, since this is you first and only post here), I think it's really bad form to be so blatant about it. FWIW, p.net uses the "no_follow" tag on all it's links, so you're not getting any SEO points with Google by posting it here.</p>

<p>Nice photos, BTW...</p>

[tolik_p.]

<p>Well lets see here... As I am in a process in making a site myself, here's a few pointers / critiques that I can give.<br>

- First of all, Geoff says his pages load long; well im at a 35Mb comcast connection and it it loads real fast with no problems at all. I click on a picture and it loads instantly.<br>

- Picture info button is very interesting for "other" photographers, otherwise useless?<br>

- The logo is very "Weak"? it looks like its made in paint (about 20 years ago), not trying to bash at all, just my though. Maybe update the logo?<br>

- The dots in the background are very distracting. Kind of hurts my eyes and they get blurry after looking at them for few seconds.<br>

- The menu bar is very basic.<br>

- Your layout is in fact, large like Geoff said. My screen is 1600px resolution and your layout almost hits it to the fullest. The most common browser resolution used today is 1280x1024, So I would recommend having your website at 900px-1000px wide.<br>

- Slideshows do not work on mobile devices (flash). Use static pages, or find HTML5 or javascript to make the slideshows.<br>

Over all, everything WORKS on your website. Does it have "eye candy"? NO. It is very basic. Today, it seems like everyone want something flashy and "cool". So if you want people to remamber your site, then you will have to work on it. If you just want to show your pictures online without attracting "flashy" attention, then you are fine.<br>

I am not advocating for ProPhoto Blogs, but I just got it, and its EXTREMELY easy to use and get nice looking, modern websites/blogs. Downside, is that it cost $200. Im sure there are other products that will help you with making a better looking site.<br>

Best of luck, and its a good start, what you have. </p>

[jay_pomerantz]

Thanks for the feedback. Despite what Geoff thinks about the motivation to join here (even you started with a first post!), I am interested

in opinions on the site. I separately asked about links as some do that - there is no way to tell on photo.net whether this is a practice or

not. So....thanks for the feedback on the site construct.

 

Jay

[geoffs1]

<p>Jay,<br>

Sorry for the cynicism; it just seems like there is a lot of bad-behavior on the Internet these days.<br>

I checked your site again on my laptop (on a public WiFi connection), and it seems to load pretty quickly. I'm guessing that my old/slow home-computer just had trouble rendering the Flash slide-show.<br>

One suggestion: since vertical screen-space is at a premium, you might want to look at editing your title graphic to make it a bit shorter. You might consider moving the logo to the side. There is also quite a bit of a border around the home-page slide show, removing some of that would help tighten the layout vertically. The same advice for the vertical padding above/below the navigation bar.<br>

One other thing: have you ever tried viewing your site on a mobile phone? Smugmug apparently has a very basic mobile template that makes your site look like a simple gallery.</p>

[jay_pomerantz]

<p>Thanks Geoff. None taken. i understand. As far as the real estate - I also have those concerns. I can try playing with the logo and padding a bit. The slide show is flash and I am looking at changing that for a non flash one and see if that helps. I need to talk to them about the mobile issues - I agree. Could use a little more pizazz there.</p>

<p>Jay</p>

[bagley_crowder2]

<p>I just checked out the site, and I bookmarked it! I enjoyed your photography as both a diver and photographer. I found it easy to navigate and it loaded quickly for me. My one suggestion is to redo your logo so that it is cleaner-- your logo is to "jagged." The appearance of your front page is very important to keep viewers. </p>

<p>Nice work!</p>