Jump to content

exposurebits

Members
  • Posts

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by exposurebits

  1. <p>Here are my thoughts on this.</p>

    <p>You are going to create a brand name in your name and this is huge issue. All your marketing efforts going to be centered around your name.</p>

    <p>Your name would appear in the copyright notice on every image even if you decide to do business under some other name.</p>

    <p>If you decide to use your name as the business entity you find things easier with regard to the ownership of the images. This copyright issue is little tricky especially when you create images how and when you work for your company. I you decide to use your company name as the copyrights holder then it is still going to be your name.</p>

    <p>You will get similar advantages about the copyrights for the images you are going to create before going pro.</p>

    <p>Hope that helps.</p>

     

  2. <p>Hi Scott, <br /><br />First of all, thanks for your kind words on my work. I take any input seriously and you certainly provided some valuable suggestions. <br /><br />Regarding, the Emotive gallery, I was not very sure and it was certainly not there in the original plan. I am still kind of experimenting with the overall message of the site and from that perspective this gallery is little off the track. There are some good and bad arguments about putting other stuff in a business website especially when it comes to selling art and its related services. You know all that. Obviously my objective is not to give any conflicting or deviating messages through my site. As I said I am still experimenting with few things on the site and hopefully it will take good shape in few weeks. Your input is definitely valuable. <br /><br />Image re-ordering is a continuous process for me and I will keep changing it as I get more feedbacks on different images and create some new ones. <br /><br />Regarding the beauty portfolio I have a tons of images to be edited and hopefully in few weeks it will be a better portfolio. Editing takes a long time compared to shooting. Especially the selection process is time consuming for me. Sometimes I do go for that extra mile when it comes to editing as I am learning new things about this process and I think the knowledge would come in handy someday. But thanks for your cautious warning on not targeting to be retoucher!<br /><br />Regarding the performance I am still working on it. Hopefully things will improve soon.<br /><br />Once again, thanks for your time and suggestions, Scott. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  3. <p>Does anyone know how to submit a photo to Canon USA for their consideration in using in their ads or something? <br /><br />Few of my friends have suggested that I should submit my landing page image</a> to Canon and I have no clue. Googling did not help much. <br /><br />Would appreciate any help. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit <br /><b>Signature URL removed. Not allowed per photo.net Terms of Use.</b></p>
  4. <p>Hi David, <br /><br />First of all, thanks so much for your time and thoughts on my website. Regarding the day job I believe you are referring to my "Information" page on my site, right? <br /><br />I think most photographers get into the commercial aspects of it while still hanging onto something for the obvious mundane reason! <br /><br />Regarding the image loading time, yes, I am aware of it and still working on it. You are right that the site downloads images sequentially. I think your experience during your afternoon visit might be due to the fact that the images were already cached. <br /><br />Anyway, I do appreciate your time, patience and thoughts. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  5. <p>Hi Janne,</p>

    <p>I am thinking exactly the way you are thinking about the image format and quality. I will probably try the size you mentioned and see how the site feels on a smaller display.<br /><br />I don't believe in putting in watermarks as they get in the way of viewing the images. I also like big images as they have different impacts on the viewer's mind that one cannot have with tiny images. So, thanks, Janne, for your encouraging words on that.</p>

    <p>Regards,<br />Abhijit</p>

    <p> </p>

  6. <p>Thanks, Janne, once again for your thoughts. I am already considering downsizing the images due to the fact that I sort of compromised the compositional quality of the imges a bit to conform to the format. You feedback gives me another reason to move in that direction.</p>

    <p>Thanks for your time!</p>

    <p>Regards,<br />Abhijit</p>

     

  7. <p>Hi Janne, <br /><br />Thanks for your time and helpful meticulous review of my site. I did change the code and that must have improved the loading performance. <br /><br />The images I have on the site are of 16:9 format with 1024 pixel width. These days most of the PC displays and laptops have at least 1024 pixels on the horizontal side. This is probably more true for all those involved in this business, photographers, art directors, art buyers and what not. Very few have smaller displays for mobility purpose. So, I think the size would be just fine. But I do appreciate your cautious feedback on that. <br /><br />Regarding the text brightness, I just increased it a bit as I got few comments on that including yours. <br /><br />I have CSS MouseOver color change for the top/bottom menu/texts. It was little subtle. Just increased a bit for both top and bottom. <br /><br />The text size for slideshow/next/prev looks fine to me on all my 4 monitors. If I decrease a bit they don't look alright. But I certainly appreciate your feedback on that. <br /><br />I think, all 3, Mike, Damon and you have made some excellent suggestions and I am grateful for your time and advice. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  8. <p>Thanks, Damon, appreciate your help. I just implemented some code that should help load the page fast. <br /><br />I was actually looking for a similar solution as you stated. But could not really figure out how to load images in the background that would be needed for other pages. I was reading some forum and they said something called 'post-onload download' might help. But that might need some good Javascript knowledge to implement. <br /><br />I finally went ahead with deferring the loading of all the images. So, it will display the page first and then continue downloaing the other images. <br /><br />Anyway, truly appreciate your time and help. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  9. <p>Hi Damon, <br /><br />Thanks for your time and thoughts on my website. I explored the flash option as well and I even created some dynamic slideshows in the same format as my current website is. But did not like the flash version much. There are pros and cons of using flash and I thought of not using it for many reasons. <br /><br />The grey text I have looks ok to me on my color corrected LaCie 321 monitor. The next grey level that is compatible with html looks little screaming for my taste. But I appreciate the feedback. <br /><br />I am glad you like some of the images. Appreciate your kind words as well. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  10. <p>Hi Mike, <br /><br />Thanks so much for taking the time to review and comments on my website. Truly appreciate it. <br /><br />I am aware of the the problem with download time and it's really bugging me. I have fast (25 mbps) connection and I personally don't feel it. It's generally in the range of 2-5 seconds. But I would imagine that it would be frustrating for someone with slower connection. I am working on it. I don't think there is no easy solution to it. <br /><br />Thanks for your time and kind words on my work. <br /><br />Regards, <br />Abhijit</p>
  11. <p>I am exploring the possibility of having a career in photography. So, I put together a <a href="http://www.exposurebits.com" target="_blank">website</a>. I would appreciate your thoughts on this. I am specifically looking for feedback on the following aspects of the site. <br /><br />1. <strong>Design:</strong> Your general impression about the overall look and feel <br />2. <strong>Ease of use:</strong> Your navigational experience <br />3. <strong>Performance:</strong> Page loading, image loading, portfolio loading, etc. <br />4. <strong>Other</strong> thoughts you might have on my website. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.exposurebits.com" target="_blank">www.exposurebits.com</a> <br /><br />Thanks for your time and thoughts in advance.</p>
  12. <p>What are the options do I have if I don't want to use plastic or plastic-like sleeves for mounting my images in the portfolio. The portfolio that I have is for 11x14 landscape images and it has hinge to hold the images.</p>

    <p>Do you make holes on the printed image?</p>

    <p>Do you get your image printed on paper that has holes on it?</p>

    <p>Do you glue your image on some larger sheet and then make holes for mounting?</p>

    <p>What do you guys do? What do the pros do for professional presentation?</p>

    <p>I would appreciate any help.</p>

    <p>Regards,<br />Abhijit</p>

  13. Thanks, Niel, for your time and response.

    </br>

    </br>

    I heard that LaCie is rebranded NEC 90 series. A 21" NEC would cost about 480 less than LaCie 21". Not sure what is the justification for the price difference.

    </br>

    </br>

    ACD is out and EIZO is too costly for me. It would be either LaCie or NEC. Now the question is whihc model and what size! That is waht I am trying to get feedback on from this post.

    </br>

    </br>

    NEC 26" supports 93.8% of Adobe RGB 98. But I read that it has some issue with the angle of view. You can read it on this link under the performance section.

    </br>

    </br>

    <a href="http://www.necdisplay.com/NewsAndMediaCenter/Award/?award=8fd861a7-fb6d-4fef-8710-24810a58a4cb" target="_blank">MacWorld Review</a>

    </br>

    </br>

    Thanks,

    </br>

    Abhijit

  14. Thanks, Morrie and Phil. Although I like the real estate of NEC 26" but I am concerned about the angle of view and dot pitch. Not sure if it really makes that much of a difference from 0.27 (21") to 0.29 (26").

     

    Some folks said that the PS menus are very hard to read at 0.27. It would be nice to see these models somewhere at the showrooms. But they are not available here nearby.

     

    I went to see ACD 23" but did not like the look and feel. I guess I am not an Apple guy. The sales person at Fry's could not even change the display picture for me to check.

     

    Anyway, thanks for your time.

     

    Regards,

    Abhijit

×
×
  • Create New...