Posted by David Kjaer on November 29, 2007 at 6:14 AM
One reason I have not been very active on the forum recently is I have been busy working on a new website which is now on line.
From the outset I said to the company who built the site that I wanted it to have clean lines and be very easy to navigate which I feel they have achieved.
I chose the BG colour to be the same as used in Adobe Photoshop being neutral which aids picture researchers in assessing it's suitability whilst still showing off the image quite well. I also said I wanted no other strong colour on the page which might compete with the image for you attention. I hope that this combination has not made it's overall appearance a little bland!
Unlike many sites I have decided not to limit it to 30 or so of my best images but to try and show a cross section of my work 'warts and all' Eventually I hope to have in excess of 2,500 images on the site.
To date I have only uploaded a few hundred but over the coming weeks will be busy adding more images. The many thousands of images I have on transparency will take longer to select and scan.
Also note above search where it says 'all' this will be for a keyword search but is not active at the moment as I have not really been adding keywords at this stage as I feel it more important to populate the galleries as many have no images in them at this stage.
I know at the moment a few minor bugs are still being addressed so I am not sure if this might effect speed and access at times.
David
Posted by John Varley on November 29, 2007 at 6:42 AM
HI David - only just had a quick look at the introductory slideshow - looks fine on my MB. Super pics - will have a proper look later - will be a treat
Looks good David. One point that immediately bothers me is the use of flash. I love flash but with IE you now have to click the control before you can use it. This means to select one of your pages - gallery, biography, sales etc you have to click once to activate it and then again to select a page. Ask the website designer to fix this - there are ways around it. Will have a better look later, thanks, Tristan
Looking good to me, they seem to have done a splendid job.
All the best & speak soon
Phil
Posted by Paul Hillion on November 29, 2007 at 7:21 AM
Had a quick look during my tea break David and first impressions were that it looks great - although I think it'd maybe look better with a black BG. Three other points, firstly what Tristan said, secondly I think your sub-gallery headings look a little messy and would maybe look better contained in drop down menus activated by the 5 main gallery headings. Lastly I always like to see some shot info etc with an image.
Will have a better look tonight and have bookmarked you as you have some amazing photographs there
Posted by David Kjaer on November 29, 2007 at 7:28 AM
Hi Paul
Thanks for the input. Just to pick up on your last point, when I post on UKNP I always include 'shot info' but my site is aimed at the commercial market who will have no interest in this information. Also it means additional work for me and in a small way the extra text adds clutter!
David
Posted by Chris Lloyd on November 29, 2007 at 7:32 AM
Looking great to me also David. Great images and also a nice, simplistic page design.
Chris.
Posted by Philip Kirkham on November 29, 2007 at 7:37 AM
Hello David
It's a nice "clean" uncluttered web site with superb images. I do agree with Paul though, about some text making it a little more interesting. I altered my site to have less text showing and I must say that I regret it.
Best wishes
Phil
Posted by Graeme Lee on November 29, 2007 at 8:57 AM
Hi David,
Well there's no doubting the quality of the images. Simply stunning! The site as a whole looks great. Very professional, as it should look!. Personally I'm not a fan of thumbnails as I'm really lazy surfing the etc and prefer to scroll, but appreciate that can't be done on a stock website. It all works really well. I particularly like the random images fading and appearing...nice touch. The flash navigation is ok. You have to click twice, but for the unlazy ones, that's probably fine.
The lack of information on each image for me is the only downside, but that's because I'm a photographer and I'm interested in that element as well. But like you say, the reason for your website is commercial and they have no inetrest at all whether it's f11, iso 200 and a 500mm lens, so I totally see your angle...... and you're right, it will save you oodles of time unless you keep the exif data in and have that info dragged out into a frontend table or something. Maybe worth looking at, although all my web processed images have the exif knocked out and it mean a mammoth task to redo them just for that. I too am developing my website, so I know how time consuming everything is..and I have just 5 images Look forward to looking in again when you have more stuff uploaded
Posted by Paul Hillion on November 29, 2007 at 9:38 AM
David, I take back what I said about having a black bg, looking at it again it looks great as it is
Me and some colleagues have just spent our afternoon teabreak admiring your work - wonderful stuff
Website looks great, professional and very easy to use.
A wonderful and varied collection of superb images.
I shall certainly be returning frequently to check out any new material and to gain inspiration.
If your deer gallery, in particular,gets an unusually high number of views, you'll know exactly who's responsible
Posted by Pete Etheridge on November 29, 2007 at 10:08 AM
David,
A great site and I think much better without detailed photographic information for each image. I don't know whether you've considered a lighbox for potential clients? When I've bought images in the past, I've much prefered this facility, or having an image code number to avoid potential confusion.
All in all, a slick impressive website!
Pete
Posted by Steve Makin on November 29, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Posted by Paul Everett on November 29, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Lovely images and nice design, I agree with Tristan's point about flash. I am viewing it at work and its not working properly for me (no doubt due to restrictions here). If you want it accessible to everyone then perhaps there is a simpler way. As you can tell I am no IT/web designer techie, but am just reporting what I can see (or not see!).
Well done anyway, it looks a fine website.
Paul
Posted by writepic on November 29, 2007 at 11:10 AM
superb images david,
i'm sure you will get excellent sales as long as you get the traffic through your site. agree re flash control buttons, slightly annoying.
regards,
mark
Posted by Larry Corbett on November 29, 2007 at 12:11 PM
A visual feast David
I especially like the clean simple design and the way you've laid out the gallery pages..not sure about the title "other critters" though, maybe "other life forms" ??
Nature photography at it's best, sheer class and your sure to get alot of hits, commercial or otherwise..once you get the site on to the search engines..you'll find over time it will find it's own way on to the ask/google sites..mine did I only have to type my name on google and my website comes up aws 2nd on the list, same at ask etc..looking at the meta data for your site everything seems to be in order..
can't wait to have a proper look at your site when I get home from work
Posted by Ian Andrews on November 29, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Some great images on a clean site that works quickly. The only niggle would be the navigation buttons which, as said, need two clicks to operate in I.E.!
On one of my sites there is a reader in the background that can read keywords from the exif, thus saving adding them at a later date. It may well save you a lot of time in the long run if you can get your IT bods to add something similar. It gives the search engine something to find!
Regards
Ian
Posted by Steve Makin on November 29, 2007 at 3:40 PM
I think I must be losing the plot, i cant see any icon in Davids original post, this is what I see, please tell me I'm wong here
Message posted by David Kjaer on 11/29/07 at 11:14 am GMT
One reason I have not been very active on the forum recently is I have been busy working on a new website which is now on line.
From the outset I said to the company who built the site that I wanted it to have clean lines and be very easy to navigate which I feel they have achieved.
I chose the BG colour to be the same as used in Adobe Photoshop being neutral which aids picture researchers in accessing it's suitability whilst still showing off the image quite well. I also said I wanted no other strong colour on the page which might compete with the image for you attention. I hope that this combination has not made it's overall appearance a little bland!
Unlike many sites I have decided not to limit it to 30 or so of my best images but to try and show a cross section of my work 'warts and all' Eventually I hope to have in excess of 2,500 images on the site.
To date I have only uploaded a few hundred but over the coming weeks will be busy adding more images. The many thousands of images I have on transparency will take longer to select and scan.
Also note above search where it says 'all' this will be for a keyword search but is not active at the moment as I have not really been adding keywords at this stage as I feel it more important to populate the galleries as many have no images in them at this stage.
I know at the moment a few minor bugs are still being addressed so I am not sure if this might effect speed and access at times.
There's a row of icons at the bottom of everybody's post, i.e. email, portfolio, allposts, www, NPN member, etc
Posted by Steve Makin on November 29, 2007 at 4:04 PM
got it thanks Justin
Posted by Andy Astbury on November 29, 2007 at 4:37 PM
Simple, clean and slick David
Flash buttons are a pain in IE and some of the galleries are showing 'broken' links/missing images in Firefox, your web guy will soon fix those points though.
Posted by Chas Spradbery on November 30, 2007 at 3:24 AM
Nice looking site that shows off your images well - a couple of minor points..
There is no way to return to your home page from any of the other pages
The landscape and enviro link doesn't work (or has no images associated with it)
Posted by Mark Fellowes on November 30, 2007 at 4:39 AM
Fantastic site - definitely has an elegance to it. My only suggestion is that if people click your banner that they are returned to your homepage - visitors will want to find their way there regularly, but there isn't an obvious way to get there.
Mark
Posted by Jim Greenfield on November 30, 2007 at 5:04 AM
I know nothing about web design but it all seems very slick and professional to me. The main point however is that the shots are outstanding!
Posted by Mark sellings on November 30, 2007 at 5:39 AM
Hi David,
What a great collection of images you have! I personally am not sure about the site itself, my nits being:
1) The top bar whilst establishing your brand and providing some 'space' for the design to breathe, does seem pretty redundant, and mid level navigation has pretty much died a death nowadays, so why not move your navigation bar into the top right of your header? I found there was too much scrolling around to do just to get the navigation buttons in view (I use 1024 x 768).
2) I agree about the flash navigation - seems pretty pointless to me as its not like the sliding bars stay where they are to indicate what page you are on anyway - to be honest this is what in the trade we call 'flash for flash's sake' and I think you'd be better off either applying the IE fix as mentioned above (http://www.amarasoftware.com/flash-problem.htm), or ditching the flash navigation altogether.
Other than that, you've done the hard work by getting the site together, and now its just the 'tinkering' part - like I say you've got so many stunning images you could have just stuck them all on a single page and people would still come!
Nice one
Mark
ps no offence meant with any opinions, just my tuppence worth
Posted by Elliott Neep on November 30, 2007 at 12:58 PM
Hi David,
I've been through the site a few times now. On the whole, I like it. Its functional, easy-to-use and clean. I would agree that the flash use for the menu is a bit pointless and a touch gimmicky. Personally, I would lose the flash. Search engines will not follow flash links. They will arrive at your homepage and probably fail to index the other pages. Speaking of which, I checked your source info and you meta tags for description and keywords are currently empty.
As for flash not being understood or working - this is a commercial site and you are right to expect image researchers to have flash enabled and be working with at least 19" screens.
The main image rotation is a nice touch and really puts the emphasis on quality images. Its a format that I have played around with in the past. The one thing I did notice is that you (as a surfer) are tempted to just click the 'next' link rather than use the thumbnails. Probably just me.
The images are fantastic. The sharpness level and colours are spot on. The background is also best kept neutral to make the imagery ping out. Purely from an aesthetic point of view, I feel the panels are floating a bit, so maybe the addition of a border around the frame for the site? Also, have you considered a lightbox or unique, identifiable image numbers so buyers can make accurate selections?
As a former web designer, I can appreciate the complexities of finding a format that suits the majority. I think you have done well to focus on the commercial aspect of the site and therefore the expected audience. You will never please everyone
Discussion
28 repliesFrom the outset I said to the company who built the site that I wanted it to have clean lines and be very easy to navigate which I feel they have achieved.
I chose the BG colour to be the same as used in Adobe Photoshop being neutral which aids picture researchers in assessing it's suitability whilst still showing off the image quite well. I also said I wanted no other strong colour on the page which might compete with the image for you attention. I hope that this combination has not made it's overall appearance a little bland!
Unlike many sites I have decided not to limit it to 30 or so of my best images but to try and show a cross section of my work 'warts and all' Eventually I hope to have in excess of 2,500 images on the site.
To date I have only uploaded a few hundred but over the coming weeks will be busy adding more images. The many thousands of images I have on transparency will take longer to select and scan.
Also note above search where it says 'all' this will be for a keyword search but is not active at the moment as I have not really been adding keywords at this stage as I feel it more important to populate the galleries as many have no images in them at this stage.
I know at the moment a few minor bugs are still being addressed so I am not sure if this might effect speed and access at times.
David
Looking good to me, they seem to have done a splendid job.
All the best & speak soon
Phil
Will have a better look tonight and have bookmarked you as you have some amazing photographs there
No problems on Mac Safari.
Thanks for the input. Just to pick up on your last point, when I post on UKNP I always include 'shot info' but my site is aimed at the commercial market who will have no interest in this information. Also it means additional work for me and in a small way the extra text adds clutter!
David
Chris.
It's a nice "clean" uncluttered web site with superb images. I do agree with Paul though, about some text making it a little more interesting. I altered my site to have less text showing and I must say that I regret it.
Best wishes
Phil
Well there's no doubting the quality of the images. Simply stunning! The site as a whole looks great. Very professional, as it should look!. Personally I'm not a fan of thumbnails as I'm really lazy surfing the etc and prefer to scroll, but appreciate that can't be done on a stock website. It all works really well. I particularly like the random images fading and appearing...nice touch. The flash navigation is ok. You have to click twice, but for the unlazy ones, that's probably fine.
The lack of information on each image for me is the only downside, but that's because I'm a photographer and I'm interested in that element as well. But like you say, the reason for your website is commercial and they have no inetrest at all whether it's f11, iso 200 and a 500mm lens, so I totally see your angle...... and you're right, it will save you oodles of time unless you keep the exif data in and have that info dragged out into a frontend table or something. Maybe worth looking at, although all my web processed images have the exif knocked out and it mean a mammoth task to redo them just for that. I too am developing my website, so I know how time consuming everything is..and I have just 5 images
Me and some colleagues have just spent our afternoon teabreak admiring your work - wonderful stuff
Website looks great, professional and very easy to use.
A wonderful and varied collection of superb images.
I shall certainly be returning frequently to check out any new material and to gain inspiration.
If your deer gallery, in particular,gets an unusually high number of views, you'll know exactly who's responsible
A great site and I think much better without detailed photographic information for each image. I don't know whether you've considered a lighbox for potential clients? When I've bought images in the past, I've much prefered this facility, or having an image code number to avoid potential confusion.
All in all, a slick impressive website!
Pete
The icon marked www
Andy
Well done anyway, it looks a fine website.
Paul
superb images david,
i'm sure you will get excellent sales as long as you get the traffic through your site. agree re flash control buttons, slightly annoying.
regards,
mark
I especially like the clean simple design and the way you've laid out the gallery pages..not sure about the title "other critters" though, maybe "other life forms" ??
Nature photography at it's best, sheer class and your sure to get alot of hits, commercial or otherwise..once you get the site on to the search engines..you'll find over time it will find it's own way on to the ask/google sites..mine did I only have to type my name on google and my website comes up aws 2nd on the list, same at ask etc..looking at the meta data for your site everything seems to be in order..
can't wait to have a proper look at your site when I get home from work
On one of my sites there is a reader in the background that can read keywords from the exif, thus saving adding them at a later date. It may well save you a lot of time in the long run if you can get your IT bods to add something similar. It gives the search engine something to find!
Regards
Ian
I think I must be losing the plot, i cant see any icon in Davids original post, this is what I see, please tell me I'm wong here
Message posted by David Kjaer on 11/29/07 at 11:14 am GMT
One reason I have not been very active on the forum recently is I have been busy working on a new website which is now on line.
From the outset I said to the company who built the site that I wanted it to have clean lines and be very easy to navigate which I feel they have achieved.
I chose the BG colour to be the same as used in Adobe Photoshop being neutral which aids picture researchers in accessing it's suitability whilst still showing off the image quite well. I also said I wanted no other strong colour on the page which might compete with the image for you attention. I hope that this combination has not made it's overall appearance a little bland!
Unlike many sites I have decided not to limit it to 30 or so of my best images but to try and show a cross section of my work 'warts and all' Eventually I hope to have in excess of 2,500 images on the site.
To date I have only uploaded a few hundred but over the coming weeks will be busy adding more images. The many thousands of images I have on transparency will take longer to select and scan.
Also note above search where it says 'all' this will be for a keyword search but is not active at the moment as I have not really been adding keywords at this stage as I feel it more important to populate the galleries as many have no images in them at this stage.
I know at the moment a few minor bugs are still being addressed so I am not sure if this might effect speed and access at times.
David
David Kjaer
Wiltshire
UK
Flash buttons are a pain in IE and some of the galleries are showing 'broken' links/missing images in Firefox, your web guy will soon fix those points though.
There is no way to return to your home page from any of the other pages
The landscape and enviro link doesn't work (or has no images associated with it)
Mark
What a great collection of images you have! I personally am not sure about the site itself, my nits being:
1) The top bar whilst establishing your brand and providing some 'space' for the design to breathe, does seem pretty redundant, and mid level navigation has pretty much died a death nowadays, so why not move your navigation bar into the top right of your header? I found there was too much scrolling around to do just to get the navigation buttons in view (I use 1024 x 768).
2) I agree about the flash navigation - seems pretty pointless to me as its not like the sliding bars stay where they are to indicate what page you are on anyway - to be honest this is what in the trade we call 'flash for flash's sake' and I think you'd be better off either applying the IE fix as mentioned above (http://www.amarasoftware.com/flash-problem.htm), or ditching the flash navigation altogether.
Other than that, you've done the hard work by getting the site together, and now its just the 'tinkering' part - like I say you've got so many stunning images you could have just stuck them all on a single page and people would still come!
Nice one
Mark
ps no offence meant with any opinions, just my tuppence worth
I've been through the site a few times now. On the whole, I like it. Its functional, easy-to-use and clean. I would agree that the flash use for the menu is a bit pointless and a touch gimmicky. Personally, I would lose the flash. Search engines will not follow flash links. They will arrive at your homepage and probably fail to index the other pages. Speaking of which, I checked your source info and you meta tags for description and keywords are currently empty.
As for flash not being understood or working - this is a commercial site and you are right to expect image researchers to have flash enabled and be working with at least 19" screens.
The main image rotation is a nice touch and really puts the emphasis on quality images. Its a format that I have played around with in the past. The one thing I did notice is that you (as a surfer) are tempted to just click the 'next' link rather than use the thumbnails. Probably just me.
The images are fantastic. The sharpness level and colours are spot on. The background is also best kept neutral to make the imagery ping out. Purely from an aesthetic point of view, I feel the panels are floating a bit, so maybe the addition of a border around the frame for the site? Also, have you considered a lightbox or unique, identifiable image numbers so buyers can make accurate selections?
As a former web designer, I can appreciate the complexities of finding a format that suits the majority. I think you have done well to focus on the commercial aspect of the site and therefore the expected audience.