Based on a previous discussion of bigger thumbnails, I have mocked-up a new IC Gallery thumbnail page.
Take a look and let me know what you think (Note - this is a mock-up page only and is not functional). If we have a consensus, I will have the thumbnail pages updated to the new design.
Edit - The mock-up page shows only 8 thumbs, the actual thumbnail page will include 48 (vs. the current 50).
Beware the first page effect. I suppose I'm lazy (but are most people). I tend to browse page one only. So, extrapolating my habits to the rest of humanity, I'd say the sooner images roll off page one, the fewer views they will get. If larger thumbnails would mean fewer images on page one, I would recommend NOT going that way.
Pete, I just placed 8 thumbs on the page to get a feel for the look. Total thumbs per page would be 48 vs. the 50 we currently use.
On my 1280 X 1024 res monitor, I can view 12 "big thumbs" versus 16 "small thumbs" on the old style thumbnail page, thus the new thumbs are 100% larger with only 25% reduction in the number that can be effectively viewed at the same time. The new layout packs more than twice the picture pixels in the same amount of space.
I've never used thumbnails as a way to determine which images to view, but it's clear that many--perhaps most--folks do, so the bigger the thumbnail the better, as far as I'm concerned. This is a marked improvement, IMO.
I like the larger thumbs. There is a lot of blank space on the current thumbnail pages. I do like the background on the current thumb pages much better than the white of the mock up. Is it really necessary to include the notion about which gallery the thumbnail is part of? Would that become a link so that viewers could look for similarly categorized photos? Likewise with the date & time it was posted. Is that something of concern to those searching through the thumbnails or would that only appear to the photographer when he/she was editing their portfolio? Just thinking out loud.
Generally I like the larger thumbs. RE: Pete's comments about people only looking at the first page. I had noticed that first page photos generally get more hits but I think it is a matter of whether the viewer finds the majority of images appealing. If 'yes' then they go on to see more on page two. If 'no' then they probably were about to buy from that particular photographer anyway. Making the page larger to include more thumbs would probably not help. Your best bet is to put your strongest images at the top of page one. More thinking out loud.
I would lose the light gray background - it's actually a bit confusing. either all white, or see what it looks like with a thin border around each thumb & info.
And the 48 should be fine, but why not 52? Then you'll pack even more in to the same or less space because there will still be less vertical scrolling. Having watched at least ES&S closely for a couple years, the first page tends to roll over in a matter of 2-3 days.
Jim, at first I was concerned with some of the issues already mentioned here, especially first page "moving on", as it were. But, as you have so clearly defined it truly is a non issue. It sure looks pretty good to me as it is outlined as well as the overall view layed out too.
I like the larger thumbs; my only concern is that the page load speed will be slower. For folks with dial up connections, this might be a serious concern. I'm not sure how many there are, but Hank is Kodiak still uses dial-up, I believe.
I like the larger thumbnails also, but have the same concern as Jim DeWitt for those still on slow dial-up. I know Cindy Mead has a slower connection and I'm sure there are others besides Cindy and Hank. Has anyone tested the new format on a slow connection?
As per your suggestion, the mock-up page has been updated with a faint outline around each thumbnail and information. I think this is important to help show what info goes with what photo.
Even at this larger size, the thumbnails will still be very "light" in terms of file size (they are pretty aggressively compressed). Bear in mind that all of the HTML text and links will still load almost instantly, so there should not be any significant downside for those on slow connections.
Discussion
42 repliesTake a look and let me know what you think (Note - this is a mock-up page only and is not functional). If we have a consensus, I will have the thumbnail pages updated to the new design.
Edit - The mock-up page shows only 8 thumbs, the actual thumbnail page will include 48 (vs. the current 50).
Pete D.
But, heck, I clicked on the monarch image so I could go in and critique it and nothing happened.
On my 1280 X 1024 res monitor, I can view 12 "big thumbs" versus 16 "small thumbs" on the old style thumbnail page, thus the new thumbs are 100% larger with only 25% reduction in the number that can be effectively viewed at the same time. The new layout packs more than twice the picture pixels in the same amount of space.
Generally I like the larger thumbs. RE: Pete's comments about people only looking at the first page. I had noticed that first page photos generally get more hits but I think it is a matter of whether the viewer finds the majority of images appealing. If 'yes' then they go on to see more on page two. If 'no' then they probably were about to buy from that particular photographer anyway. Making the page larger to include more thumbs would probably not help. Your best bet is to put your strongest images at the top of page one. More thinking out loud.
If you select the "Sort Photos By Comment" option the posting time/date are handy to have.
I vote for Greener, and fewer Black, Thumbs. :)
Definitely like the larger thumbnails.
Cheers
Carl
Good to see you.
- Dan.
Kent in SD
I would lose the light gray background - it's actually a bit confusing. either all white, or see what it looks like with a thin border around each thumb & info.
And the 48 should be fine, but why not 52? Then you'll pack even more in to the same or less space because there will still be less vertical scrolling. Having watched at least ES&S closely for a couple years, the first page tends to roll over in a matter of 2-3 days.
Should be a nice upgrade Jim,
Lon
Bruce
I also like the thoughts; Lon has on the thin border around each thumb & info.
Mike
It's a go Houston!
Even at this larger size, the thumbnails will still be very "light" in terms of file size (they are pretty aggressively compressed). Bear in mind that all of the HTML text and links will still load almost instantly, so there should not be any significant downside for those on slow connections.
Thumbs up from me. Go for it.
Brad
Sandy r
As always, expect some "forum wierdness" during this process as something always seems to get broken once we open the hood to make a change...