I've got a new site - all comments gratefully received...
Discussion
Hi all, I have been posting the odd image on here for a while, and I have now taken the plunge and set up an account with the image file (brilliant btw 
)
I have a domain, and some images in place.
Before I push the "go" button, and start promoting the site, please can you have a look around, and see what you think - do you like the colours, layout etc...
www.apictureofsuffolk.com
All comments gratefully received (& I have a thick skin!)
Many thanks,
Chris
) I have a domain, and some images in place.
Before I push the "go" button, and start promoting the site, please can you have a look around, and see what you think - do you like the colours, layout etc...
www.apictureofsuffolk.com
All comments gratefully received (& I have a thick skin!)
Many thanks,
Chris
first the mistakes that i have noticed which is more important than colours etc:
1) in the suffolk images gallery the pic "the_voices" is posted twice exactly the same. i assume that you dont mean to do that?
2) again in the suffolk images gallery the description is "Images frim Iken, Woodbridge, Aldeburgh and Snape Maltings". typo i assume?
other things:
at a quick glance over the suffolk images gallery (eg, just going onto it and clicking "slideshow" ) it misses out the 7 images that you have put in other subheadings (the royal hospital and woodbridge images). not necessarily a major problem, but they just probably wont get viewed as much as the others.
under every picture it says that "all images have been watermarked" but not all of them have. not a problem, but i am a perfectionist and get very picky with my own stuff like this. personally i would think it better to either have watermarks on all of them or on none of them just to keep it uniform.
are your borders the same on all the pics? im not sure. that too is probably just me being picky but it would annoy me.
in terms of the overall site, i like the slideshow capability, that is nice. but teh pics are all very small on my settings (i know that you have to think of people running very old cpus etc but i am only running mine at 1152x864 on a 17inch screen).
im not a great fan of that green on grey, but that is personal preference. to me it is just a bit harsh on the eyes.
the font for the front page and title is a bit odd. wouldnt be my first choice.
the only other thing would be the lack of pictures in the "car photos" album and the second wedding album. i dont know why but albums with only 2 and 4 photos in them make the whole site seem like it isnt finished.
sorry for a long post, and sorry if it all seems very critical (i like the actual pictures a lot), but you asked for my opinions.
>> Edited by speedychrissie on Saturday 20th May 17:39
1) in the suffolk images gallery the pic "the_voices" is posted twice exactly the same. i assume that you dont mean to do that?
2) again in the suffolk images gallery the description is "Images frim Iken, Woodbridge, Aldeburgh and Snape Maltings". typo i assume?
other things:
at a quick glance over the suffolk images gallery (eg, just going onto it and clicking "slideshow" ) it misses out the 7 images that you have put in other subheadings (the royal hospital and woodbridge images). not necessarily a major problem, but they just probably wont get viewed as much as the others.
under every picture it says that "all images have been watermarked" but not all of them have. not a problem, but i am a perfectionist and get very picky with my own stuff like this. personally i would think it better to either have watermarks on all of them or on none of them just to keep it uniform.
are your borders the same on all the pics? im not sure. that too is probably just me being picky but it would annoy me.
in terms of the overall site, i like the slideshow capability, that is nice. but teh pics are all very small on my settings (i know that you have to think of people running very old cpus etc but i am only running mine at 1152x864 on a 17inch screen).
im not a great fan of that green on grey, but that is personal preference. to me it is just a bit harsh on the eyes.
the font for the front page and title is a bit odd. wouldnt be my first choice.
the only other thing would be the lack of pictures in the "car photos" album and the second wedding album. i dont know why but albums with only 2 and 4 photos in them make the whole site seem like it isnt finished.
sorry for a long post, and sorry if it all seems very critical (i like the actual pictures a lot), but you asked for my opinions.
>> Edited by speedychrissie on Saturday 20th May 17:39
Hi there.
Many thanks for your input.
I'm changing the spelling error now.
I'll remove the duplicate image now as well.
The pictures in the RHS & Woodbridge galleries have a different URL pointing to them, hence the separate galleries.
The borders should be tha same on all the images...
I am also unsure about the font choices & will probably do some changes tomorrow!
The watermarks are there on most of my galleries, apart from one of the weddings - they didn't want a watermark...I'll probably move the wedding pics to adifferent loaction, they went up there as a test rather than finished content!
Many, many thanks for that & please keep the feedback coming.
Cheers, Chris
Many thanks for your input.
I'm changing the spelling error now.
I'll remove the duplicate image now as well.
The pictures in the RHS & Woodbridge galleries have a different URL pointing to them, hence the separate galleries.
The borders should be tha same on all the images...
I am also unsure about the font choices & will probably do some changes tomorrow!
The watermarks are there on most of my galleries, apart from one of the weddings - they didn't want a watermark...I'll probably move the wedding pics to adifferent loaction, they went up there as a test rather than finished content!
Many, many thanks for that & please keep the feedback coming.
Cheers, Chris
Few comments - just my humble opinions...
What's the point of the site? If you are trying to sell the pictures then they are way to small for people to judge the quality of the images. If it's just for viewing then the watermarks are far to intrusive. Either stick to the low quality, or use high quality with a watermark. You just look paraniod....
The background of the title graphic is a different colour (#4a4a4a) to the HTML background (#555555) - it therefore doesn't blend in.
Why haven't you anti-aliased the text of the main title or welcome graphic? Not sure about the bits of white in the blue text on the front page either?
Hope that helps.
J
What's the point of the site? If you are trying to sell the pictures then they are way to small for people to judge the quality of the images. If it's just for viewing then the watermarks are far to intrusive. Either stick to the low quality, or use high quality with a watermark. You just look paraniod....
The background of the title graphic is a different colour (#4a4a4a) to the HTML background (#555555) - it therefore doesn't blend in.
Why haven't you anti-aliased the text of the main title or welcome graphic? Not sure about the bits of white in the blue text on the front page either?
Hope that helps.
J
joust said:
Few comments - just my humble opinions...
What's the point of the site? If you are trying to sell the pictures then they are way to small for people to judge the quality of the images. If it's just for viewing then the watermarks are far to intrusive. Either stick to the low quality, or use high quality with a watermark. You just look paraniod....
I have used the default settings from the image file. I didn't want to take the images much bigger for the slideshow or thumbnails, as they fill my screen OK, and I didn't want too much scrolling. The image file watermark I'll remove today - it's not been well received by anyone!!!
joust said:
The background of the title graphic is a different colour (#4a4a4a) to the HTML background (#555555) - it therefore doesn't blend in.
I'll change that today. Thanks.
joust said:
Why haven't you anti-aliased the text of the main title or welcome graphic? Not sure about the bits of white in the blue text on the front page either?
I'll have a look at that text, as I thought I had anti-aliased it when I put it on the images...
joust said:
Hope that helps.
Yes - much appreciated,
Chris
>> Edited by chris.mapey on Monday 22 May 13:55
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff