I would say ease of navigation and, if you are selling, a clear and simple way for clients to order from your site. I used to do advertising. Keep it simple and uncluttered, carry a quality product, give them a reason to buy, and make the purchase as simple as possible.
Simplicity, consistency, tasteful presentation of the images and intuitive navigation. All of these things make it easier for the viewer to focus on and appreciate the images. Images displayed should be of the highest quality. If for personal or professional reasons lower quality images are going to be displayed, I personally like to see them segregated from the rest so as not to dilute the impact of the premium images (something I'm working to improve while redesigning my own site).
This is obviously very subjective, but.... one of the best designed sites, imo, is Jim Brandenburg's site. One of the worst is Art Wolfe's site. Nothing against Art - I find his work inspiring, but his site is a mess and the presentation of his images is pretty weak.
The KISS principle. I think too many site designers spend way too much time and energy on bells and whistles that their sites become cumbersome and unintuitive to use and often distract from the subject matter (images, for us photographers). I think you found a great balance in your design.
Beyond that, I also like richness of content (as opposed to fancy animation and other gimmicks). I want enough there to keep me exploring and discovering for a while, and wanting to come back for more.
Finally, if it's a site that offers something for sale, I want the order process to be quick and easy. Push a button, put in your payment information and the goods are on the way. I try to avoid sites that make you register and store your personal data, or ones that make you call in or mail/fax an order.
Guy
Posted by Bill Chambers on April 23, 2007 at 8:52 AM
I think I would "ditto" the above comments. Simplicity, elegance, ease of navigation all top the list for me.
Rick Dunn listed Jim Brandenburg's site as a great one and I would agree. However, Rick himself has one the nicest sites I've seen as well. Extremely well designed and very attractive IMO. His site is HERE
Posted by Mary Dennis on April 23, 2007 at 9:02 AM
I just want to second Bill's comment about Rick Dunn's website. It's one of the most visually pleasing, well-thought out and navigable designs that I have seen. Elegant, in a word. And a very good example, in my mind, of a great website.
What content do you, and others see as relevant? Is it different what a photographer wants to see to vs what a consumer, gallery owner, or art show visitor wants to see? (Maybe I need 3 websites)
I've looked at Jim's, Art's, Tom Mangelsen's, Ken Duncan's (overload), and many more, including many from this site including Guy's, Rick's and many others.
I've thought about photo tips, and more technical details, but since I don't do workshops (though I've been asked) I'm not really targeting other photographer, so I have to wonder if that takes some of the magic from the art? Do buyers want to know what lens and aperture I used, or would they be more interetested in the emotional content of the moment, and the time, patience, and tribulations that it takes to get the shot.
I'm wondering about information about the area, such as the type of formation and what cave, or when a certain bridge in a photo was built, but does that now take away from the image? I'm thinking the blog might be a way to include such stuff, without overloading the images with information.
I know there is no clear answer. . .
Posted by Josh Anderson on April 23, 2007 at 9:47 AM
What makes a great website? Presentation, first and foremost. Your website is where you showcase your work. So you want to show it the best way possible. You can have an easy to navigate and well designed website but if there is a mix of good and mediocre shots in it then interests wanes. Show only your best, as you would at a gallery. I like the frames used by Bill Chambers and Guy Tal. It helps me to visualize what the photograph will look like framed on the wall. That is very useful for prospective buyers. If you have the ability to write that is a plus. I would like to see websites that have photo illustrated articles, NPN style. It adds interest and variety to the site and the photos have more to them than meets the eye Does the illustrated articles in National Geographic take away from the images accompanying them? I think you have tremendous potential in that area.
Rob: it sounds like you need to define HOW you want to market yourself and your photography and TO WHOM you intend to market before starting your design. If your desire is to sell prints to "art"/photography buyers/collectors, then forget the technicals and reporting the "tribulations that it takes to get the shot". Most people buy prints based on THEIR connection to the image or the impact it has upon them. The lens you chose or just how wet/cold you got you making the photograph is generally of little importance in someone else's decision to buy.
My best advice is to keep your website on track and don't dilute it with stuff extraneous to its purpose. Edit ruthlessly, present only your best work, and present only what will help you sell the work. Everything else leads to potential navigational trouble.
As you suggest, a blog (if you choose) is a way to report all the other fluff that is of greater interest to photographers.
Posted by David Senesac on April 23, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Unless one is an established photographer with good name repution, a website is pretty much just a convenient vehicle for post exhibition sales. Thus there are not a bunch of rich people searching online galleries looking for great images from unknowns they've never personally inspected the work of so they can press online credit card buttons. A common misconception of many getting into this. The reason is one cannot evaluate great prints online, period, though it is easy to note what is likely just a mediocre though nice image.
For those selling low cost prints in art fairs to complement their business with an online presence, one can list or show anything on a site one displays under a tent to assist buyers that just grabbed a business card. However at least for higher priced fine art images one is marketing via an online gallery, its better to only put up outstanding images. Far too many photographers with websites just have a few better images then dilute them even more by way too many nice though not outstanding images. At least for outdoor landscapes, there is a lot of competion with higher quality material. .David
Posted by Rob Coomer on April 23, 2007 at 10:17 PM
Thanks for the feedback and I agree with most of it.
I do the local art show scene to build name recognition and exposure, but my goal is eventually sales through gallery representation.
I don't currently offer sales on my site, other than calendars and a few other small items so as not to compete with galleries that do or would carry my work.
At the moment, my site is mainly for exposure and to supply the gallery that carries my work, another portfolio to show. Seldom are people looking for my best work I've learned, they want an image of. . .a certain covered bridge, the stream the grew up near, the lake where they fish, in a certain orientation, with a certain color. . .at least on the local scene, Not bad, but not the image I would choose to showcase. I guess I could do hidden portfolios for that. Is this the difference between ego and marketing? You alway hear the most successful artists aren't the best, but maybe that's not what most buyers are looking for. . .
Maybe in 10 years, people will seek out my work, but until then, I am stuck somewhere in the middle. At the moment my site needs to look good, but be very functional, especially on the content management side due to other full time job constraints. (a design firm)
I currently deal with mostly local galleries and small shops, but as I am looking to reach out and have been told by other larger galleries that I NEED to get out to certain areas, my site may become a portfolio for them to see my work, after receiving a card or other promotional piece. (maybe I do need 2 sites)
But galleries are used to dealing with such, most traditional artists have really weak sites, if at all. I'm in an art center with over 150 other artists, and I can count on one hand the number of decent sites I have seen from them. Some galleries prefer you don't have a website. Collectors won't come to me, they go to their gallery and the gallery's website. Art show visitors will visit my site and may buy if they saw it at a show and have a good feel for my work.
I'm also posting these questions to other groups to see what viewers form different backgrounds look for.
Posted by Carl Donohue on April 24, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Hey Rob
I'm not the most technically savvy guy (Michael Gordon and Guy Tal, stop laughing), but I'll offer up my 2 centavos.
Define what the purpose of your site is. The answer to your question hinges upon that definition. A site aimed at garnering gallery exhibits is going to be very different, and wil require very different functions and presentations, than a stock photo site. Go to Getty.com or Alamy or Stockfoto or Acclaim Images or istockphoto and examine their sites .. then look at sites like terragalleria or worldfoto or alaskaphotographics .. then look at Eric Fredine's site. Theyre all very different - they aim to serve different purposes.
One big thing is how are you garnering visitors? Are you trying to get folks come to you via google, or are you trying to bring them in directly (cards, flyers, etc)? The method that is likely to be more successful for you will hold a lot of weight in how you go about designing your site.
IMO, navigation is super important. Aesthetics are important, but navigation is critical. It's what I've struggled with most in designing my 2 sites.
Cheers
Carl
Posted by Rob Coomer on April 24, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Honestly, I am torn in 2 directions, one is more immediate. Prints sales is what I am working towards.
My rural images, farmscapes, and landscapes make money for me at the local gallery, special events, and art shows.
My cave photography is my art, it makes people stop in their tracks and stare. They run off and bring back others to see them, then they walk away admiring, but not buying, or they buy a rural print. The galleries tell me the same thing.
I believe my cave work is my path to the higher end art gallery shows. I'm working on an idea for a body of large prints aimed directly at galleries, museums, and conservancies. That project will have it's own website and portfolio. Having just said that, that does relieve pressure from my general website to be the do all, be all.
Right now, I will take visitors any way I can get them. Word of mouth, articles in local newspapers, and seeing my art somewhere on display is how they find me now. I'm not pushing for sale on my site, though that could always change.
Posted by Carl Donohue on April 24, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Hey Rob,
Maybe you can use a more general website as also a portal into a more specific section that presents your art.
I definitely think you can do reasonably well selling prints off a website. Maybe not high end stuff, but everyday prints, for sure.
All that being the case, you said
"Right now, I will take visitors any way I can get them. Word of mouth, articles in local newspapers, and seeing my art somewhere on display is how they find me now. I'm not pushing for sale on my site, though that could always change."
So what exactly is the purpose of the site? Just to get them to see your work and come out to a show? And who are the people you want to visit?
Realistically, at my prices, I don't think anyone would buy a print from me without already having seen my work. If they saw an article about me, or saw a couple of pieces of my work at a small show, it's a way for them to see more. It's a resource, just like a business card or a brochure to get them to come to my studio on Final fridays, or visit the gallery to see my work, or to stop by the coffee shop, book store, or outdoor outfitter that sells my calendars. I started doing the art shows to help build my sales at a small rural gallery. It worked, but it was too little, too late, they were already struggling so the increase in peolpe looking for my work wasn't enough for them and eventually closed. I really hated loosing them.
The goal for the website is to get people to:
A: Recognize my name. Name recognition goes a long way, and you have to see it a lot before you actually remember it.
B: As a non threatening way for people to become familiar with my subjects, images and feel that I have a connection or passion for my subjects. If you don't know what I have, what chance do I have to sell something to you if you decide you want a barn image to hang over your couch?
C: Visit the locations that have taken a chance, or believe in me enough to carry / sell my work. Once you decide you want it, you need to know where to buy it or order it.
I would prefer for people to buy a print from the gallery than to call me at the moment. Yeah I may make more if you buy from me, but if my work sells, the gallery has incentive to show more of my work and hopefully sell more.
D: As I network with other artists and other subjects, it allows others to show and see my work, just like passing on my business card, but better.
E: As a way for the local gallery to show more of my work, they only have room for about 6 of my framed prints. I was surprised to hear they have shown my site to people asking about my work. In the past they wouldn't do that. If i did have online ordering on the site, they probably wouldn't use the site, since people may choose to go direct. Even if they don't show my site, they can pull off the images as an electronic portfolio.
As I do get more exposure I may add a price list. If I get lots of traffic, I may add ordering for small prints or rolled prints. Since my current gallery would use the same price list taht may not be an issue and they support me going to area art shows because they know I send people away with my card and theirs. The trouble is, if you start showing in a retail gallery, and I have talked to some, they frown at artists competing with them. I've done several art business workshops and they stressed that same point that many galleries don't want their artists to have online sales or pricing.
I've only been pushing my work for about 3 years, and I'm surprised that people are already recognizing my name. I was in an outdoor shop showing the owner one of my calendars. A complete stranger walked up, a started looking at it too. When I went to introduce myself, she knew who I was and knew my work, had read about me, and seen one of my exhibits. . .now i just need to convert that into sales. . .
When I do start approaching the out of state galleries, I will use a portfolio site built just for them, and to support the viewing of an exhibition.
Posted by Carl Donohue on April 25, 2007 at 10:28 AM
Hey Rob
It sounds like you have a pretty good handle on what you need the website to do, at this point. If I were you, I'd print out the list you just made, and keep it posted by the computer monitor as you ugo throuh the designing part of it, and continually ask does it work for those needs. Between that and following some of the great davice you've been given in the first half of this thread and I'm sure your site will work just fine. Good luck with it.
Cheers
Carl
Posted by Rob Coomer on April 25, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Discussion
18 repliesWhat makes a great website? (besides the beauty of the images)
I would say ease of navigation and, if you are selling, a clear and simple way for clients to order from your site. I used to do advertising. Keep it simple and uncluttered, carry a quality product, give them a reason to buy, and make the purchase as simple as possible.
Hope this helps,
Johnnie
This is obviously very subjective, but.... one of the best designed sites, imo, is Jim Brandenburg's site. One of the worst is Art Wolfe's site. Nothing against Art - I find his work inspiring, but his site is a mess and the presentation of his images is pretty weak.
Beyond that, I also like richness of content (as opposed to fancy animation and other gimmicks). I want enough there to keep me exploring and discovering for a while, and wanting to come back for more.
Finally, if it's a site that offers something for sale, I want the order process to be quick and easy. Push a button, put in your payment information and the goods are on the way. I try to avoid sites that make you register and store your personal data, or ones that make you call in or mail/fax an order.
Guy
Rick Dunn listed Jim Brandenburg's site as a great one and I would agree. However, Rick himself has one the nicest sites I've seen as well. Extremely well designed and very attractive IMO. His site is HERE
I've looked at Jim's, Art's, Tom Mangelsen's, Ken Duncan's (overload), and many more, including many from this site including Guy's, Rick's and many others.
I've thought about photo tips, and more technical details, but since I don't do workshops (though I've been asked) I'm not really targeting other photographer, so I have to wonder if that takes some of the magic from the art? Do buyers want to know what lens and aperture I used, or would they be more interetested in the emotional content of the moment, and the time, patience, and tribulations that it takes to get the shot.
I'm wondering about information about the area, such as the type of formation and what cave, or when a certain bridge in a photo was built, but does that now take away from the image? I'm thinking the blog might be a way to include such stuff, without overloading the images with information.
I know there is no clear answer. . .
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
My best advice is to keep your website on track and don't dilute it with stuff extraneous to its purpose. Edit ruthlessly, present only your best work, and present only what will help you sell the work. Everything else leads to potential navigational trouble.
As you suggest, a blog (if you choose) is a way to report all the other fluff that is of greater interest to photographers.
For those selling low cost prints in art fairs to complement their business with an online presence, one can list or show anything on a site one displays under a tent to assist buyers that just grabbed a business card. However at least for higher priced fine art images one is marketing via an online gallery, its better to only put up outstanding images. Far too many photographers with websites just have a few better images then dilute them even more by way too many nice though not outstanding images. At least for outdoor landscapes, there is a lot of competion with higher quality material. .David
I do the local art show scene to build name recognition and exposure, but my goal is eventually sales through gallery representation.
I don't currently offer sales on my site, other than calendars and a few other small items so as not to compete with galleries that do or would carry my work.
At the moment, my site is mainly for exposure and to supply the gallery that carries my work, another portfolio to show. Seldom are people looking for my best work I've learned, they want an image of. . .a certain covered bridge, the stream the grew up near, the lake where they fish, in a certain orientation, with a certain color. . .at least on the local scene, Not bad, but not the image I would choose to showcase. I guess I could do hidden portfolios for that. Is this the difference between ego and marketing? You alway hear the most successful artists aren't the best, but maybe that's not what most buyers are looking for. . .
Maybe in 10 years, people will seek out my work, but until then, I am stuck somewhere in the middle. At the moment my site needs to look good, but be very functional, especially on the content management side due to other full time job constraints. (a design firm)
I currently deal with mostly local galleries and small shops, but as I am looking to reach out and have been told by other larger galleries that I NEED to get out to certain areas, my site may become a portfolio for them to see my work, after receiving a card or other promotional piece. (maybe I do need 2 sites)
But galleries are used to dealing with such, most traditional artists have really weak sites, if at all. I'm in an art center with over 150 other artists, and I can count on one hand the number of decent sites I have seen from them. Some galleries prefer you don't have a website. Collectors won't come to me, they go to their gallery and the gallery's website. Art show visitors will visit my site and may buy if they saw it at a show and have a good feel for my work.
I'm also posting these questions to other groups to see what viewers form different backgrounds look for.
I'm not the most technically savvy guy (Michael Gordon and Guy Tal, stop laughing), but I'll offer up my 2 centavos.
Define what the purpose of your site is. The answer to your question hinges upon that definition. A site aimed at garnering gallery exhibits is going to be very different, and wil require very different functions and presentations, than a stock photo site. Go to Getty.com or Alamy or Stockfoto or Acclaim Images or istockphoto and examine their sites .. then look at sites like terragalleria or worldfoto or alaskaphotographics .. then look at Eric Fredine's site. Theyre all very different - they aim to serve different purposes.
One big thing is how are you garnering visitors? Are you trying to get folks come to you via google, or are you trying to bring them in directly (cards, flyers, etc)? The method that is likely to be more successful for you will hold a lot of weight in how you go about designing your site.
IMO, navigation is super important. Aesthetics are important, but navigation is critical. It's what I've struggled with most in designing my 2 sites.
Cheers
Carl
My rural images, farmscapes, and landscapes make money for me at the local gallery, special events, and art shows.
My cave photography is my art, it makes people stop in their tracks and stare. They run off and bring back others to see them, then they walk away admiring, but not buying, or they buy a rural print. The galleries tell me the same thing.
I believe my cave work is my path to the higher end art gallery shows. I'm working on an idea for a body of large prints aimed directly at galleries, museums, and conservancies. That project will have it's own website and portfolio. Having just said that, that does relieve pressure from my general website to be the do all, be all.
Right now, I will take visitors any way I can get them. Word of mouth, articles in local newspapers, and seeing my art somewhere on display is how they find me now. I'm not pushing for sale on my site, though that could always change.
Maybe you can use a more general website as also a portal into a more specific section that presents your art.
I definitely think you can do reasonably well selling prints off a website. Maybe not high end stuff, but everyday prints, for sure.
All that being the case, you said
So what exactly is the purpose of the site? Just to get them to see your work and come out to a show? And who are the people you want to visit?
Cheers
Carl
Realistically, at my prices, I don't think anyone would buy a print from me without already having seen my work. If they saw an article about me, or saw a couple of pieces of my work at a small show, it's a way for them to see more. It's a resource, just like a business card or a brochure to get them to come to my studio on Final fridays, or visit the gallery to see my work, or to stop by the coffee shop, book store, or outdoor outfitter that sells my calendars. I started doing the art shows to help build my sales at a small rural gallery. It worked, but it was too little, too late, they were already struggling so the increase in peolpe looking for my work wasn't enough for them and eventually closed. I really hated loosing them.
The goal for the website is to get people to:
A: Recognize my name. Name recognition goes a long way, and you have to see it a lot before you actually remember it.
B: As a non threatening way for people to become familiar with my subjects, images and feel that I have a connection or passion for my subjects. If you don't know what I have, what chance do I have to sell something to you if you decide you want a barn image to hang over your couch?
C: Visit the locations that have taken a chance, or believe in me enough to carry / sell my work. Once you decide you want it, you need to know where to buy it or order it.
I would prefer for people to buy a print from the gallery than to call me at the moment. Yeah I may make more if you buy from me, but if my work sells, the gallery has incentive to show more of my work and hopefully sell more.
D: As I network with other artists and other subjects, it allows others to show and see my work, just like passing on my business card, but better.
E: As a way for the local gallery to show more of my work, they only have room for about 6 of my framed prints. I was surprised to hear they have shown my site to people asking about my work. In the past they wouldn't do that. If i did have online ordering on the site, they probably wouldn't use the site, since people may choose to go direct. Even if they don't show my site, they can pull off the images as an electronic portfolio.
As I do get more exposure I may add a price list. If I get lots of traffic, I may add ordering for small prints or rolled prints. Since my current gallery would use the same price list taht may not be an issue and they support me going to area art shows because they know I send people away with my card and theirs. The trouble is, if you start showing in a retail gallery, and I have talked to some, they frown at artists competing with them. I've done several art business workshops and they stressed that same point that many galleries don't want their artists to have online sales or pricing.
I've only been pushing my work for about 3 years, and I'm surprised that people are already recognizing my name. I was in an outdoor shop showing the owner one of my calendars. A complete stranger walked up, a started looking at it too. When I went to introduce myself, she knew who I was and knew my work, had read about me, and seen one of my exhibits. . .now i just need to convert that into sales. . .
When I do start approaching the out of state galleries, I will use a portfolio site built just for them, and to support the viewing of an exhibition.
It sounds like you have a pretty good handle on what you need the website to do, at this point. If I were you, I'd print out the list you just made, and keep it posted by the computer monitor as you ugo throuh the designing part of it, and continually ask does it work for those needs. Between that and following some of the great davice you've been given in the first half of this thread and I'm sure your site will work just fine. Good luck with it.
Cheers
Carl
This exercise has been a lot of help