Web design: Comments invited

[Donald]

Having taken part in a Webinar on the subject yesterday, with the Photographer Academy, I undertook a re-design of my website today. My site is hosted by SmugMug.

I'd very much welcome peer review and to hear what you think. Does it work? Is it easy to follow? Are the right things there? What's missing? etc. And anything else you can think of.

So, this is your invitation. Please let me know how you rate it.

The website address is www.dmackimages.org

EDIT - I should add. I am a traditionalist at heart. There are some really contemporary website templates out there that work wonderfully for other, but that's just not me, nor does it suit my images. So, whilst I've tried to go a bit more contemporary, there's nothing too radical I don't think!

[xpatUSA]

I'd very much welcome peer review and to hear what you think. Does it work? Is it easy to follow? Are the right things there? What's missing? etc. And anything else you can think of.

So, this is your invitation. Please let me know how you rate it.

The pedant arrives . . .

The only webmasterly thing is that "home" button remains active when you're on the home page. It should be inactive so that, if you click on it, the browser will not re-load the page you're already looking at. Same comment applies to all the other navigation buttons.

Also a bit confusing to see the slide-show running but with the slider and the shift buttons still active.

I do like the simplicity of the site though.

[Donald]

The only webmasterly thing is that "home" button remains active when you're on the home page. It should be inactive so that, if you click on it, the browser will not re-load the page you're already looking at. Same comment applies to all the other navigation buttons.

Yes. I havem't figured out how to do that yet

Also a bit confusing to see the slide-show running but with the slider and the shift buttons still active.

I agree. Still trying to work out how to get rid of that. Can't find where on the 'Carousel' settings that you can get rid of it.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Nice looking site Donald.

Not to be picky but 'in to' should be 'into', or is that an English vs American English thing?
I'm not sure.
I would also recommend proof reading all text by reading it backwards. It's just a thing I have about correct spelling and the ability to find mistakes, too easily at times I'm afraid too. (Like your 'havem't' in the above post.)

[xpatUSA]

Yes. I haven't figured out how to do that yet

I agree. Still trying to work out how to get rid of that. Can't find where on the 'Carousel' settings that you can get rid of it.

I understand. Long ago, I gave up on "potted" free websites where you get a few options but the actual HTML code is produced by their 'intelligent' hosting. Not unlike setting my Panasonic to "IA" or, indeed, not unlike posting here using those handy-dandy buttons at the top of the edit window.

My own answer to that was do the whole of my own site from scratch, mostly in HTML5 . . .

http://tcktek.blogspot.com/2011/09/k...e-updated.html

Too much information I'm sure but here's how the nav bar thing can be done in "real" HTML:



In this example, I left the button as a link, but only to the top of the page. I left it as a link so that it's appearance would not change. Zer are uder vays und means, of course . . .

[Donald]

I understand. Long ago, I gave up on "potted" free websites .

Unfortunately, SmugMug is far from free. HTML is available, but I don't have sufficient knowledge to use that.

[skitterbug]

Yes. I haven't figured out how to do that yet
I agree. Still trying to work out how to get rid of that. Can't find where on the 'Carousel' settings that you can get rid of it.

Does the bottom of this page help with the settings of your Carousel?

I haven't explored your complete website yet to offer an opinion! But I will.....!

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Donald,

Not bad at all, but the following thoughts occurred to me whilst browsing - please consider them my musings, not criticisms - OK, maybe some might be criticisms

I have previously built intranet sites, so I have some knowledge/experience, and no doubt personal prejudices, to bring to this party, don't be discouraged by the quantity below.

A) On the home page; I find the interval and movement speed of the 'banner' is too fast, although this is mitigated by each shot being visible 'through the letterbox' for several cycles; you just have to follow it by eye

B) It also does some odd things when the spacing of the images doesn't match the width of the images and they come out half at a time, or other odd things

C) In both Commercial and Portfolio; the page of thumbnails, they all come out square and while, from a Design aspect, this looks tidier, for photographers (OK, may be it is just me), I dislike the way this completely stuffs up the composition as shot

D) When you dive in to a gallery, I like that the keyboard arrow keys can immediately be used to navigate fore and aft

E) I like that the images have a reference number that can be quoted by a viewer to unambiguously refer to a specific image when necessary UPDATE: This does not seem to be the case; the number is merely a keyword and clicking it gave three sandwich images all with same number

F) When using the mouse to click through images, it is good that the left/right arrows do not move about the screen (with different size/shape images, but it is a shame they are so far apart, if you accidentally click forward too quickly and wish to go back, it's a 'long drag' across the screen to the opposite side. (whereas if they were adjacent each other, centrally below the image, the distance to achieve this would be far smaller) - or I could use the keyboard, I know!

G) I'd like an option to 'view with Lights out' aka over black or dark grey (would need to invert background and text colours, so everything else still readable)

H) Until you get used to the site, the fact that the on screen navigation iconography fades to invisible isn't too helpful and I wonder what happens for tablet users without a mouse to move in order to make them visible.

I) There is no apparent 'top level' menu method to navigate to the individual galleries (e.g. "Not Scotland") other than via the link that reveals bottom left when viewing an image that is in the same gallery. Perhaps this is something yet to be added? UPDATE: I just discovered that if you click the 'crumb-trail' words "The Photos" from within Portfolio, you can get a page that shows the Galleries by name I could go in to more here, but ask, or even call me, if you like to discuss things

J) I'm not sure the limited sizing options are worth having: "Small", "0.3 MP (M)", "0.5 MP (L)" and "Fill" - there's very little difference, or none at all, between some (I'd also consider a more consistent naming style)

K) I like that the banner re-orders the images randomly upon each return to the home page

L) It is a shame we cannot click on any of the banner images to open it larger and statically (if that's even a word)

M) Also, the moving banner cannot be stopped, although as there's so little else there to read or view, I guess it matters less

N) I like that in Portfolio, or the individual galleries, moving a mouse over the images reveals an image title (wonder what 'touch-screen only' folks can see; e.g. tablet or mobile phone browsers)


I reviewed this on a 1920 x 1080 monitor in landscape orientation - I could try the site on my small phone screen and/or my vertically oriented monitor if you have considered it being a responsive/scalable design to be accessible and pleasant to use across various platforms, let me know.

I'll stop now (thank heavens).

Hope that was helpful, Dave

[Donald]

Does the bottom of this page help with the settings of your Carousel?

Unfortunately not. Even when you put the 'Navigation Arrows' to 'Off' that bar and arrows still appear at the bottom. I need to contact SmugMug about that.

[Donald]

Hi Donald,

Not bad at all, but the following thoughts occurred to me whilst browsing - please consider them my musings, not criticisms - OK, maybe some might be criticisms

Am working my way through your list, Dave. Enormously helpful.

For example, missed that you could click on the breadcrumb in 'Portfolio' and get back to the other galleries. The idea was to have those hidden so that it's just 'Portfolio' that people can see. Now done that.

A couple of things will need me to come back to you. Probably do that tomorrow. Getting too late now to think clearly.

[Mike Buckley]

I don't have anything to add other than that it's nice to see some images I remember very well despite that it has been so long since I have seen them.

[Shadowman]

Nicely presented, are your prints available in only one format (print only) or are other surfaces (postcard, pillowcase) available? I ask only because while perusing your website I got pulled into the Smugmug portion and it's a bit confusing at first where you actually are. I've been reading about other website hosting services and some offer the option (at a price obviously) of steering your customers directly to only your selections and bypassing your competition.

[Cogito]

Probably covered by Dave's point G. I find the white background EXTREMELY bright.

[rpcrowe]

First of all, the images are awesome - congratulations...

I am wondering if a medium gray background with black lettering (perhaps with a drop shadow) or even a black background with white lettering might not allow more emphasis on the imagery...

Your scrolling banner of images bothers me in two ways... I'd like the images formatted so that partial images would not be occasionally caught at either end... Additionally, the vast majority of the images are square in format while a few are rectangle (especially some of the trail in the forest). These images are not the same height as the square images while the banner scrolls. I would suggest either keep all of the images the same size and format or add borders to the images to make them the same size.

That said, your smugmug presentation has given me an incentive to spruce up my own smugmug site...

[Donald]

Also a bit confusing to see the slide-show running but with the slider and the shift buttons still active

Just to come back on this point.

I contacted SmugMug and helpfully got directed to this reource.

However, the 'killer comment' in there in terms of me using CSS to make the change is - "This won't work in Firefox though, since they don't support it". Guess which browser I use!

[Dave Humphries]

However, the 'killer comment' in there in terms of me using CSS to make the change is - "This won't work in Firefox though, since they don't support it". Guess which browser I use!

Hmmm, that's a very sweeping statement, which is undated, we've no idea when it was written, what version of FF it pertained to (if) when it was true, hence no idea whether it may no longer be true.

I am rather rusty on the current standards and browser support for them (I should catch up), but it may also be that it isn't/wasn't supported (by FF) because messin' with the scroll bars isn't/wasn't part of the 'official' standard(s) then.

[george013]

Just to come back on this point.

I contacted SmugMug and helpfully got directed to this reource.

However, the 'killer comment' in there in terms of me using CSS to make the change is - "This won't work in Firefox though, since they don't support it". Guess which browser I use!

If you want to learn something about webdevelopment then there's off course the www.w3schools.com site. But there're also very informative sites from Mozilla, or FF. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/...web/CSS_basics.
The W3 sites gives info about what will work on what browser and eventually how to deal with it.

My FF gives the message that it prevented the outdated Adobe Flash from running. I know it's on my pc, but where do you use it?

George

[xpatUSA]

Just to come back on this point.

I contacted SmugMug and helpfully got directed to this reource.

However, the 'killer comment' in there in terms of me using CSS to make the change is - "This won't work in Firefox though, since they don't support it". Guess which browser I use!

Same as me, good ole' FF?

As in the past, the killer for me is how much code got generated, just to put up the small amount of content in that link:

Right-click on the page and select "View Page Source" . . .

[xpatUSA]

Hmmm, that's a very sweeping statement, which is undated, we've no idea when it was written, what version of FF it pertained to (if) when it was true, hence no idea whether it may no longer be true.

Especially when the first line of that page's source code is:

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:fb="http://ogp.me/ns/fb#" class="sm-ua-gecko sm-browser-firefox sm-browser-firefox-53 sm-platform-windows sm-user-ui">

Note the browser mentions at the end of the code line above (move the slider all the way to the right).

I am rather rusty on the current standards and browser support for them (I should catch up), but it may also be that it isn't/wasn't supported (by FF) because messin' with the scroll bars isn't/wasn't part of the 'official' standard(s) then.

Maybe so.

[Dave Humphries]

I wouldn't want confuse the web page's source code (date/version/whatever) with the content the author has written, the two could be vastly different Ted.