Dennis, we updated the "instruction statement" that appears above the thumbnails, as well as installing tool tips for when you hover the cursor above photo title.
The emoticons are still there, now found in the menu of the rich text box.
I'm not sold on this new image pop up presentation. The area enclosing an image is important to the image appearance. Having an image superimposed over other information (even darkened) detracts from the image.
Igor, the 720 photos are still presented as they always were on the comments screen and the large photos pretty much cover everything under them. We're hoping everyone will find it a good mix of the new and old.
In the comments section, the dark gray bg for the name of the commenter and their signature block make reading extremely difficult.
Dennis, I read this again and am not sure what you're referring to: nothing has changed where you are indicating.
Try refreshing your browser, you may have viewed a page when DtP was under the hood.
Posted by Allen Brooks on April 6, 2015 at 6:16 PM
What Dennis is referring to is that when you write a comment and it is initially posted and you scroll down to view your comment, your name and some other information is darkened out and difficult to read. Once you leave and go back everything is like it was before.
It wasn't initially obvious that to see the large image, one clicks on the smaller image. Perhaps this needs to be indicated somewhere.
When I click on the small icon I get a 720px image pop up over the forum board with arrows that allow me to scroll fowards and backwards through other 720px images. This does not look that good in my opinion. It would be better to have the 720px images not as popups but with a full page dedicated to it with the ability to scroll through them. I can understand that this was done to add functionality to the existing NPN framework but it is inferior to what the competitors have.
Jim, a lot to look at here. I like the site look and for the most part the way things are functioning that I've tried so far. No doubt it will take me time to get things a bit "automatic" again, but that is just a bit of usage more so then anything.
I'm sure some of the bugs mentioned are just small items to look into, and again, just something to tweak a bit.
But, overall the gray backgrounds to me enhance the viewing of the images tremendously. I was not sure about the image sizes on the larger viewing, are those still at 1200 or did they get increased to 1400 at this point? Regardless, they look really good to me.
Congratulations on the facelift and operational changes........
Really LOVE going to someone's gallery and clicking through their 720px images in the pop-up window! Great way to see a lot of images and get a good taste for their style w/o having to click from page to page.
I think I have an idea as to why my personal gallery isn't working correctly. I went to the POP gallery and I noticed the same behavior on my images posted there. I think the issue may be related to the fact that my gallery images are stored on my website and added to NPN via "Enter URL address of .jpg photo", rather than being uploaded to NPN.
Does anyone else who uses "Enter URL address of .jpg photo" to post their images see this...?
1. The thumbnails on my index page is not clickable.
2. The 720 px image on the comment page is not clickable to bring up the (large) image viewer.
When I click on a thumbnail to open the image and then click on that image to see the large image, it just goes to the next image. How do I see the large image?
Oh wait. I get it. First click on NAME of the photo, not the photo. That goes to the photo/comment page and THEN click on the photo to see the large photo. I wonder what happens if the poster did not provide a name for the photo.
Not sure others are having a similar issue, but when I leave a comment all the comment entries and my newly added one turns the page dark all except the comments. If I exit the image entirely and go back it returns back to a normal look. Might be just me at this point as I did not see anyone else mention that item.
Jim, I also noticed that right click still allows a download of the large images. It actually allows saving the entire page the image included at 500k on the one I tried. Was that to be disabled at some point?
Having the same problem others mentioned when making a comment. Looks great until you make a comment then it's a mashup of dark grey and bright white which clearly is not intended.
Otherwise - this is fantastic. So awesome to be able to scroll through the images and see them clutter free. It's a lot more engaging and the comment box is much improved.
Paul, new maximum file sizes as of right now are 500kb for the 720s and the large are 1600/1MB.
For me, getting file sizes under the size limit was sometimes problematic. I usually posted much smaller than 720 and 1200 so as to avoid loss of quality. I am sure looking forward to the new size limits, and this is a great enhancement to the site.
Beginning to like the new-look NPN.
When we go to photographer's gallery, we can directly access 720s with the help of arrow. I was just wondering if we could directly access 1200s, same way?!
Jagdeep Rajput
1. I uploaded both a small and large version of an image to NPN (POP), and things work as advertised. So, I think my issue is due to my previous images being referenced from my site.
2. The screen shot shows what I see after posting a comment, which I think is what Paul and others are seeing.
@ Luke, I did see Jim's note earlier on the file sizes. Which is great and should showcase the images better then ever. I just find any right click an issue but also fully understand there is no way to prevent a screen print either.
However, downloading an image with a right click shows up for me as a full size 500k at this point, and would assume-ably be 1 meg in the future.
I think originally the right click was allowed as a training tool for those who wanted to download an image and work on it, but I do not recall it providing the full size file. Maybe it has in the past and I did not notice. I've only tried as a test and found no reason to work another persons project.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 7, 2015 at 11:37 AM
The post a reply screen and edit screens have been fixed!
There are still some other bugs we're squishing though: most notably the bottom of the thumbnails screen where the bottom graphics are detached, and the ugly Post a Photo screen. These should be taken care of today as well.
BTW, the Post A Photo screen will be sporting a new, easier-to-view and intuitive layout. Here's a mock-up of what it should end up looking like.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 7, 2015 at 12:25 PM
Paul, depending on the browser used, right-click brings up a HTML dialog - not an image dialog (Save photo as) - but you can still save the document and all of its contents.
At the end of the day, no matter what we do, any photo placed online is up for grabs. Best bet remains a watermark for any photo you want to post online and provide some theft deterrence.
I have a comment on a different aspect of the new UI in the critiquing galleries - nothing to do with how it operates once you're "inside it", but rather the appearance of the gallery pages when you first enter them. I don't mind the "blocky" grey appearance of the thumbnails within the gallery, but the banner and everything ABOVE the new gray segments looks like it's from a different website. In other words, you have two completely different "looks and feels" going on within a single page - the "old" style banner (without even any form of bounding box or defining boundaries on the right side of the page) and the new look and feel below. Now the white top and side bars look harsh (relative to the thumbnail section and secondary nav bar). In short - it looks kinda "half done" and with competing styles that haven't been integrated together.
But perhaps more graphic UI changes are going to be rolled out (complete with a banner that works better with what's below) and my comment is jumping the gun??
+1 on Brad's observation...that was my immediate "reaction" as well. I'm pleased by the desire to make the site environment have more features and a fresh look. The preview feature definitely allows you to scroll galleries quickly! Of course it allows a bypass around the poster's web links, etc. though. Guess most change is...well, change! ;)
Site is still not the most responsive or multiple device friendly (computer vs tablet vs smartphones) but changing to a more responsive platform would surely be problematic given the archives and prior gallery structure.
Thanks so much for all your work, Jim! NPN is THE best online community for encouragement and development in nature photography IMO. Great to see the steps forward on this front as well.
Posted by Luke Ormand on April 8, 2015 at 10:32 AM
I find myself in agreement with Brad's observations, as well.
Another concern I have is with the preview feature. I wonder if the ability to scroll through the images without seeing the photographer's notes and any comments will lead to a further reduction in comments and also lessen the potential for learning, as well as losing the personal touch that makes NPN so valuable.
--P
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 8, 2015 at 12:45 PM
Thanks to all for your comments!
Sometimes, the tail wags the dog. In this case, we wanted to enhance the presentation of the photography and in the process, created the "visual discord" Brad mentions. Though we're stuck with a white background, I will be working on the header graphics in an attempt to make them more harmonious with the new gallery look without creating visual discord in other areas of the site.
Preston's concern above is a bit more difficult to answer, but here are a few of my thoughts/observations;
1. Based on site analytics, the HUGE majority of site traffic goes to these three places: landscape gallery, avian gallery and wildlife gallery.
2. the HUGE majority of site visits are from non-members
3. Based on my conversations with people I personally know who visit the site as non-members, the most common (though not exclusive) reason they visit is to simply enjoy the photos - they don't come to learn anything about photography. For many of these people, they don't know the difference between a shutter button and a compact flash card, but they sure are in awe of the photos (and rightfully so)!
So those who visit NPN can be broken down primarily into two groups: (1) those who surf in to enjoy the photos our members post and (2) members who join NPN to be part of the community and enhance their nature photography skills.
For the first group, the new access to the 720s direct from the thumbnails will enhance their enjoyment of the site, which should cultivate more traffic to the site and more exposure for our members' work. Hint - tastefully placing your name/company name/website address directly on the photo has never been a bad idea!
For the second group (members), they now know to click the photo title to get to the "meat and potatoes" they're here for: learning from the comments and photos of others. In that regard, the flow has not changed at all and the updates made for larger files, an improved viewing experience and a better text editor will hopefully enhance their experience/enjoyment as well.
A final point in regards to how all those surfers are finding us: try Googling the following phrases;
Did you notice a certain site consistently appearing at or near the top of the search results?
We may not be the prettiest or most modern site on the Internet, but I cannot think of another nature photography site with SEO like NPN. So our goal at 15 years in and moving forward is simple: to make those visits worthwhile and enjoyable, and to provide a first-class showcase for our members' work - all while providing a rich learning environment for those who are here to hone their photography skills.
Sounds great, Jim. Now all I have to do is learn the difference between clicking on the image (to get the 720 px view) and clicking on the name (to get to the comments page)...maybe in another 50 - 100 clicks. (Can anyone here say "slow learner".)
Jim, I can't wait to see what else you have up your sleeve, because the presentation of all sizes of the images with the dark backgrounds just looks fantastic!
Maybe I am a slow learner, too, but I think the "slide show" feel of the 720-pixel images has spoiled me already. I am so spoiled that I want more. The following note to a wildlifer friend that I invited to look at NPN sums it up: "I wish there were a way to view the larger images sequentially the way you can see the 720 pixel versions, but as far as I can see it takes three mouse clicks to get to the next large image: (1) click on the X to close the large image; (2) click on the arrow above the 720 px image to get to the next image; and then (3) click on the next 720 px image to bring up the larger version of that one. As is, the NPN site is still a great place to view the 720-pixel versions of lots of images. You should try it on the Avian and Wildlife Galleries (and any others you want to see, including “all photos.”
Wayne, thanks for the feedback! I'm going to try this look for the header and footer, which I think could look really nice on NPN. Sort of interesting/appropriate I stumbled across that link while searching for ideas....
We could access the large files (instead of the 720) direct from the thumbnails. That said, the reason for going with the 720 was more for consistency than anything else. I'm seeing some large files now being sized to 1600 pixels, others have no large file at all. In a toggle-through slide show, I thought it would be awkward having the size of the photo change so drastically from click to click.
That's an interesting "look", Jim, in addition to being an article every wildlife photographer should read. We drive past "Animals of Montana" between our house and Bozeman and I've always wondered about their Grizzlies. After reading the article, I'm glad we've never stopped.
I agree with your logic on the 720 scrolling. Do site visitors get access to the comments and larger versions? (I think I should know, but don't.) It seems reasonable to me to think in terms of casual visitors, who only look at the 720 px images, serious visitors, who look at comments and larger versions, and members.
BTW, both the 720px and the larger images sure look a lot better, showing much more detail with the new software.
Posted by Keith Bauer on April 9, 2015 at 12:45 PM
I'm seeing a color difference on some images between the 720 px version and the larger version accessed by clicking on the 720 px version. (In some cases it is still the same size, but still has a color difference).
This looks like the same issue that I've mentioned before. The old software was not honoring and embedding the color space from the 1200 px version and generating a 720 px version. For that reason, when it came up I always recommended NOT allowing the NPN software to generate the 720 px version. Looks like the same issue is still happening between the 1600 px and the 720.
Let me first say that I'm excited about the changes to the NPN site. I agree with most of the early comments in that there are some issues that need to be worked out and I'm sure they will be addressed. There's always that adjustment period to deal with. Jim's reply and explanation was very satisfying as he obviously has put a lot of thought and hard work into this project. I am confident that his dedication and the dialogue between himself and the members will produce the best NPN site we could hope for. Although I'm still in my first year as an NPN member, I have found the experience extremely rewarding and look forward to learning a lot more from the membership here. That's my 2 cents, thanks!
Thanks Jim,
1. That "look" does appear to be more modern-looking than the current NPN header. Something somewhat similar might work very well.
2. Yes, I do see the rationale for more uniform image size by sticking with the 720-pixel views directly from the thumbnails. When I was wishing for the ability to "side-scroll" through LARGE images, I was thinking of having that ability after already being at a large image view. In this case, I sent my friend a link to my personal gallery, and wanted him to see the large images with the same ease as seeing the 720-pixel images. (instead of clicking back to the 720/comment screen, clicking on the next image, and then clicking again to see the next large image) If viewers could stay with the large images once they were already there, it would be nice, but that's just an "extra" wish after you spoiled me already! Not a big deal if the programming is a problem. I am VERY happy with the improvements you already made!
... although I do agree with the previous suggestion that it would be an improvement to make the instructions for new and occasional viewers more noticeable. Specifically:
1. "Click Thumbnail to View Image - Click Title to View Photo Details & Comments" should stand out more; and you could even say something like "Click Thumbnail to View Image - Click Title to View Photo Details & Comments AND SEE EVEN LARGER IMAGES."
2. For new or sporadic users, I also think it would help to add a note somewhat similar to the old one to "click here for larger image" under the image in the details/comments screen to tell people they can click on the image to see it even larger (something like "CLICK IMAGE TO SEE A LARGER VERSION"). Without that guidance, many people would never see those spectacular larger images!
I would like to make a suggestion about the scrolling feature for both the 720px and large version based upon my previous suggestion. Make this scroll page feature a full page entity with left and right scroll arrows and a toggle that takes you back to the main white image page with all of the comments. This gives the user an opportunity to see each image to it's fullest advantage and then click on the thread with the comments if so desired. This gives the option to scrolling through 720px comment pages or scroll through the 720px images on their own.
Paul and Steve, thanks - I like it too! I'll be working on this for the rest of the day, but hopefully it will be "mostly there" by the time I drop.....
Jim, I really like the look and feel of the new header and footer. The pages look much cleaner. My only nit, and a minor one, is the green color of the content header on the 'forum' pages: It looks a little out of key.
Jim, an item I noticed just poking around is that the page advance is only at the top in the galleries and not at the bottom. I think in the forums it's both top and bottom still. I think it was always top and bottom in both?.....not sure on that item.
Paul, the bottom box was giving us fits. As a result, we canned it and placed a Top of Page link in the bottom nav bar. Not ideal, but it did clean up the bottom of the page. Hit the Top of Page link to use the box at the top.
Posted by Lorna Taylor on April 10, 2015 at 2:55 PM
I just opened the site and at first was not sure about the new changes ,but WOW when you click on a thumbnail took my breath away ! They images just felt like a piece of art and love the side key to scroll ,each image now stands on it's own and it is stunning to see them ,the thumbnails don't do them justice ! Well done !!
Posted by Lorna Taylor on April 10, 2015 at 3:01 PM
Just saw the new pinning button , now I am truly in love !!! I have become addicted to pintrest this winter after dealing with multi lung infections and bored out of my tree, it is like photographers crack !!!
Posted by Luke Ormand on April 10, 2015 at 8:21 PM
Jim,
When looking at all the images in the main gallery the view numbers seemed very low... I clicked on an image (720 pixels) and scrolled through a bunch. Closed the picture window and re-loaded. View numbers are the same.
Is it safe to assume that if you click the thumbnail and the 720 pixel image is generated it is not counted as a "view"?
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 10, 2015 at 8:28 PM
Luke, that is something I need to investigate - I'll have more answers next week.
But previously the only time a view was counted was when the comments page was accessed directly from the thumbnail - no counts when scrolling though the comments screens. That remains the same and it appears that viewing the photo via the lightbox does not count either.
So, views were under-counted before and even more significantly now. We'll see what we can do to address that.
It has taken me a while to look through the site and all the changes but wow. What an improvement. The site has a great modern feel and the images in the forums and the galleries look fantastic. Thanks Jim!
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 12, 2015 at 6:29 PM
I just wanted to thank Jim for fixing the issue with my personal gallery. The issue was directly related to the fact that my 720 px images were referenced from my website, so the new updates couldn't resolve them. Therefore, the image viewer would not display them. Now, it's all good!
If you have images in your personal gallery that are referenced from an external site, please let Jim know so that he can fix it.
Also, it's best, going forward, to upload your images directly to the NPN server, rather than have them on an external site.
Thanks again, Jim!
--P
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 14, 2015 at 7:50 PM
Preston, you are welcome!
With each change comes unexpected complications, but usually nothing that cannot be resolved. It should be noted that now, even when you link to a photo via URL, the photo is uploaded to the server in order to make all site features functional. You will see the new dialog on the upload screen next to the field you enter the photo's URL: "Upload a 720-pixel intermediate .jpg photo via URL link."
Thanks to all for your suggestions, patience and support! The next round of updates will focus on the forums, including the Rich Text editor and some aesthetic tweaks to make the forums more visually consistent with the galleries. But before the next round can proceed, we will need to pay for the updates already made, so now it's more important than ever to promote NPN membership. We will be contacting past members with the news of the site improvements with the hope that they will find it worth their while to participate once again.
Thanks again to all for your encouragement and support!
I must admit I find it annoying to click on the images and a little photo pops up. Then I have to go back click the title and then click the image to see the large version. Why are we not presenting the large image when people click on the image the first time. Yes...you like it enough to want to see it...so here...let me show you a small version .....doesn't make the most sense to me...when you click on it....bam...open up the large version for people to admire that's why we're clicking on it.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 17, 2015 at 6:40 AM
Gary, having the thumbnail link directly to the large photo was our original intention. But there were a couple of potential issues doing so;
1. If no large photo was uploaded, the 720 would be rendered. When using the Lightbox to toggle though the photos slide show style, there would be large changes in size from photo-to-photo which we felt would be undesirable.
2. The large photo has always been intended to be used as the source of the critique, so keeping it exclusively where it has always been (on the comments screen) made the most sense.
As is always the case with such decisions, there are compromises involved.
Finally, I would not consider a 720 pixel photo as "little" especially those in portrait orientation. Even to this day, the majority of popular screen resolutions are 900 pixels or less vertically, which 720 pixels fills nicely (bear in mind the browser bar uses a little of that space). So unless you are using a huge, high-resolution monitor, the intermediate photo in our opinion works quite well for that "first view" and more-casual viewing by those surfing in.
Here's a link to screen res statistics that will shed more light on this;
Note that the 1366 X 768 is now the most popular screen size.
Posted by Igor Doncov on April 17, 2015 at 10:50 AM
Don't know if this is on your todo list.
Would you please consider adding a 'last updated' date to each image on the main page. Some of us like to read what others have written on an image and don't want to click on images whose comments we have already read.
Igor
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 17, 2015 at 11:37 AM
Igor, you can sort the thumbnails by date of last reply which works well for that purpose.
Posted by Igor Doncov on April 17, 2015 at 12:54 PM
Jim, that still does not provide a reference time. I don't know whether to even click on the first one or how far back to go to see where I left off. You have to read down to the last comment to see if anything has been added.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 18, 2015 at 6:54 AM
Adding a line below the thumbnail for date/time of last comment would not be difficult to do. In fact, we were going to add a "View Comments" link as well but instead decided to use the title to avoid any further clutter under the thumbnail.
So, the date/time could be added, but we also want to avoid a "bunch of stuff" appearing under each thumbnail. I am open to suggestions on what everyone thinks is the most necessary info to have there and what could be removed or moved to the comments screen.
I think the thumb info is fine as is, for the reason you stated. You could add the date/time of the last comment in the 'comments screen'. I think this would be the most appropriate place for that info.
--P
Posted by Igor Doncov on April 19, 2015 at 4:07 PM
Perhaps when the main page is sorted by post the images should display date posted and when sorted by comment then should display the date of last comment. That provides the information that matches the request. That makes sense to me.
Posted by Jim Erhardt on April 20, 2015 at 6:51 AM
Igor, that is a great suggestion! I will add it to our list of proposed Phase 2 updates to investigate and see what would be involved.
Discussion
68 repliesIn the comments section, the dark gray bg for the name of the commenter and their signature block make reading extremely difficult.
Also, I lost my little block of cute emoticons.
I notice that this page is still in the old format, so maybe we're just half way implemented and this stuff will be fixed as you go?
The emoticons are still there, now found in the menu of the rich text box.
The rich text will be applied to the forums next.
Dennis, I read this again and am not sure what you're referring to: nothing has changed where you are indicating.
Try refreshing your browser, you may have viewed a page when DtP was under the hood.
It wasn't initially obvious that to see the large image, one clicks on the smaller image. Perhaps this needs to be indicated somewhere.
Allen, we'll add something to the screen to make it more obvious!
1. The thumbnails on my index page is not clickable.
2. The 720 px image on the comment page is not clickable to bring up the (large) image viewer.
Also, on the image upload page, the black text in the dark banner is nearly impossible to read.
I think the enhanced rich text comment box is a good thing and goes very well with the other nice enhancements.
Will the rich text editor be added to the discussion forums, as well? That would be nice.
Thanks to you and DtP for your efforts!
--P
When I click on the small icon I get a 720px image pop up over the forum board with arrows that allow me to scroll fowards and backwards through other 720px images. This does not look that good in my opinion. It would be better to have the 720px images not as popups but with a full page dedicated to it with the ability to scroll through them. I can understand that this was done to add functionality to the existing NPN framework but it is inferior to what the competitors have.
You have the best of both worlds.
New image upload screen will be rolled out in a day or two (the current one has the issues you describe).
I'm sure some of the bugs mentioned are just small items to look into, and again, just something to tweak a bit.
But, overall the gray backgrounds to me enhance the viewing of the images tremendously. I was not sure about the image sizes on the larger viewing, are those still at 1200 or did they get increased to 1400 at this point? Regardless, they look really good to me.
Congratulations on the facelift and operational changes........
No doubt there is some bugs to work out, but we'll get them tracked-down.
New upload page should be live tomorrow!
I think I have an idea as to why my personal gallery isn't working correctly. I went to the POP gallery and I noticed the same behavior on my images posted there. I think the issue may be related to the fact that my gallery images are stored on my website and added to NPN via "Enter URL address of .jpg photo", rather than being uploaded to NPN.
Does anyone else who uses "Enter URL address of .jpg photo" to post their images see this...?
1. The thumbnails on my index page is not clickable.
2. The 720 px image on the comment page is not clickable to bring up the (large) image viewer.
Thanks,
--P
Jim, I also noticed that right click still allows a download of the large images. It actually allows saving the entire page the image included at 500k on the one I tried. Was that to be disabled at some point?
Otherwise - this is fantastic. So awesome to be able to scroll through the images and see them clutter free. It's a lot more engaging and the comment box is much improved.
For me, getting file sizes under the size limit was sometimes problematic. I usually posted much smaller than 720 and 1200 so as to avoid loss of quality. I am sure looking forward to the new size limits, and this is a great enhancement to the site.
When we go to photographer's gallery, we can directly access 720s with the help of arrow. I was just wondering if we could directly access 1200s, same way?!
Jagdeep Rajput
Two things...
1. I uploaded both a small and large version of an image to NPN (POP), and things work as advertised. So, I think my issue is due to my previous images being referenced from my site.
2. The screen shot shows what I see after posting a comment, which I think is what Paul and others are seeing.
--P
Exactly..........thanks, Preston.
@ Luke, I did see Jim's note earlier on the file sizes. Which is great and should showcase the images better then ever. I just find any right click an issue but also fully understand there is no way to prevent a screen print either.
However, downloading an image with a right click shows up for me as a full size 500k at this point, and would assume-ably be 1 meg in the future.
I think originally the right click was allowed as a training tool for those who wanted to download an image and work on it, but I do not recall it providing the full size file. Maybe it has in the past and I did not notice. I've only tried as a test and found no reason to work another persons project.
There are still some other bugs we're squishing though: most notably the bottom of the thumbnails screen where the bottom graphics are detached, and the ugly Post a Photo screen. These should be taken care of today as well.
BTW, the Post A Photo screen will be sporting a new, easier-to-view and intuitive layout. Here's a mock-up of what it should end up looking like.
At the end of the day, no matter what we do, any photo placed online is up for grabs. Best bet remains a watermark for any photo you want to post online and provide some theft deterrence.
--P
I have a comment on a different aspect of the new UI in the critiquing galleries - nothing to do with how it operates once you're "inside it", but rather the appearance of the gallery pages when you first enter them. I don't mind the "blocky" grey appearance of the thumbnails within the gallery, but the banner and everything ABOVE the new gray segments looks like it's from a different website. In other words, you have two completely different "looks and feels" going on within a single page - the "old" style banner (without even any form of bounding box or defining boundaries on the right side of the page) and the new look and feel below. Now the white top and side bars look harsh (relative to the thumbnail section and secondary nav bar). In short - it looks kinda "half done" and with competing styles that haven't been integrated together.
But perhaps more graphic UI changes are going to be rolled out (complete with a banner that works better with what's below) and my comment is jumping the gun??
Cheers...
Brad
Site is still not the most responsive or multiple device friendly (computer vs tablet vs smartphones) but changing to a more responsive platform would surely be problematic given the archives and prior gallery structure.
Thanks so much for all your work, Jim! NPN is THE best online community for encouragement and development in nature photography IMO. Great to see the steps forward on this front as well.
Another concern I have is with the preview feature. I wonder if the ability to scroll through the images without seeing the photographer's notes and any comments will lead to a further reduction in comments and also lessen the potential for learning, as well as losing the personal touch that makes NPN so valuable.
--P
Sometimes, the tail wags the dog. In this case, we wanted to enhance the presentation of the photography and in the process, created the "visual discord" Brad mentions. Though we're stuck with a white background, I will be working on the header graphics in an attempt to make them more harmonious with the new gallery look without creating visual discord in other areas of the site.
Preston's concern above is a bit more difficult to answer, but here are a few of my thoughts/observations;
1. Based on site analytics, the HUGE majority of site traffic goes to these three places: landscape gallery, avian gallery and wildlife gallery.
2. the HUGE majority of site visits are from non-members
3. Based on my conversations with people I personally know who visit the site as non-members, the most common (though not exclusive) reason they visit is to simply enjoy the photos - they don't come to learn anything about photography. For many of these people, they don't know the difference between a shutter button and a compact flash card, but they sure are in awe of the photos (and rightfully so)!
So those who visit NPN can be broken down primarily into two groups: (1) those who surf in to enjoy the photos our members post and (2) members who join NPN to be part of the community and enhance their nature photography skills.
For the first group, the new access to the 720s direct from the thumbnails will enhance their enjoyment of the site, which should cultivate more traffic to the site and more exposure for our members' work. Hint - tastefully placing your name/company name/website address directly on the photo has never been a bad idea!
For the second group (members), they now know to click the photo title to get to the "meat and potatoes" they're here for: learning from the comments and photos of others. In that regard, the flow has not changed at all and the updates made for larger files, an improved viewing experience and a better text editor will hopefully enhance their experience/enjoyment as well.
A final point in regards to how all those surfers are finding us: try Googling the following phrases;
nature photography
bird photography
nature photo forums
nature photos
nature
landscape photography
wildlife photography
Did you notice a certain site consistently appearing at or near the top of the search results?
We may not be the prettiest or most modern site on the Internet, but I cannot think of another nature photography site with SEO like NPN. So our goal at 15 years in and moving forward is simple: to make those visits worthwhile and enjoyable, and to provide a first-class showcase for our members' work - all while providing a rich learning environment for those who are here to hone their photography skills.
At least this sounds like a good plan to me.
Mark, I know that feeling!
Maybe I am a slow learner, too, but I think the "slide show" feel of the 720-pixel images has spoiled me already. I am so spoiled that I want more. The following note to a wildlifer friend that I invited to look at NPN sums it up: "I wish there were a way to view the larger images sequentially the way you can see the 720 pixel versions, but as far as I can see it takes three mouse clicks to get to the next large image: (1) click on the X to close the large image; (2) click on the arrow above the 720 px image to get to the next image; and then (3) click on the next 720 px image to bring up the larger version of that one. As is, the NPN site is still a great place to view the 720-pixel versions of lots of images. You should try it on the Avian and Wildlife Galleries (and any others you want to see, including “all photos.”
We could access the large files (instead of the 720) direct from the thumbnails. That said, the reason for going with the 720 was more for consistency than anything else. I'm seeing some large files now being sized to 1600 pixels, others have no large file at all. In a toggle-through slide show, I thought it would be awkward having the size of the photo change so drastically from click to click.
Thoughts?
I agree with your logic on the 720 scrolling. Do site visitors get access to the comments and larger versions? (I think I should know, but don't.) It seems reasonable to me to think in terms of casual visitors, who only look at the 720 px images, serious visitors, who look at comments and larger versions, and members.
BTW, both the 720px and the larger images sure look a lot better, showing much more detail with the new software.
This looks like the same issue that I've mentioned before. The old software was not honoring and embedding the color space from the 1200 px version and generating a 720 px version. For that reason, when it came up I always recommended NOT allowing the NPN software to generate the 720 px version. Looks like the same issue is still happening between the 1600 px and the 720.
1. That "look" does appear to be more modern-looking than the current NPN header. Something somewhat similar might work very well.
2. Yes, I do see the rationale for more uniform image size by sticking with the 720-pixel views directly from the thumbnails. When I was wishing for the ability to "side-scroll" through LARGE images, I was thinking of having that ability after already being at a large image view. In this case, I sent my friend a link to my personal gallery, and wanted him to see the large images with the same ease as seeing the 720-pixel images. (instead of clicking back to the 720/comment screen, clicking on the next image, and then clicking again to see the next large image) If viewers could stay with the large images once they were already there, it would be nice, but that's just an "extra" wish after you spoiled me already! Not a big deal if the programming is a problem. I am VERY happy with the improvements you already made!
... although I do agree with the previous suggestion that it would be an improvement to make the instructions for new and occasional viewers more noticeable. Specifically:
1. "Click Thumbnail to View Image - Click Title to View Photo Details & Comments" should stand out more; and you could even say something like "Click Thumbnail to View Image - Click Title to View Photo Details & Comments AND SEE EVEN LARGER IMAGES."
2. For new or sporadic users, I also think it would help to add a note somewhat similar to the old one to "click here for larger image" under the image in the details/comments screen to tell people they can click on the image to see it even larger (something like "CLICK IMAGE TO SEE A LARGER VERSION"). Without that guidance, many people would never see those spectacular larger images!
.......and the "footer" too.
Looking, good!
--P
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>
Paul, the bottom box was giving us fits. As a result, we canned it and placed a Top of Page link in the bottom nav bar. Not ideal, but it did clean up the bottom of the page. Hit the Top of Page link to use the box at the top.
When looking at all the images in the main gallery the view numbers seemed very low... I clicked on an image (720 pixels) and scrolled through a bunch. Closed the picture window and re-loaded. View numbers are the same.
Is it safe to assume that if you click the thumbnail and the 720 pixel image is generated it is not counted as a "view"?
But previously the only time a view was counted was when the comments page was accessed directly from the thumbnail - no counts when scrolling though the comments screens. That remains the same and it appears that viewing the photo via the lightbox does not count either.
So, views were under-counted before and even more significantly now. We'll see what we can do to address that.
In the text entry box I type some text and then press 'Enter'
The page then jumps down and I have to scroll up to see the text editor again.
This behavior occurs in IE 11 on Windows 7 64 bit.
This behavior does not occur in Fire Fox 37.0.1
Allen, you might want to post your 'bug report' in Jim's "Bug Hunting" thread. I will do the same with my 'bug'.
Added: Allen, the apparent double spacing you are seeing is the way html formats a 'paragraph tag', which is standard for that tag.
--P
If you have images in your personal gallery that are referenced from an external site, please let Jim know so that he can fix it.
Also, it's best, going forward, to upload your images directly to the NPN server, rather than have them on an external site.
Thanks again, Jim!
--P
With each change comes unexpected complications, but usually nothing that cannot be resolved. It should be noted that now, even when you link to a photo via URL, the photo is uploaded to the server in order to make all site features functional. You will see the new dialog on the upload screen next to the field you enter the photo's URL: "Upload a 720-pixel intermediate .jpg photo via URL link."
Thanks to all for your suggestions, patience and support! The next round of updates will focus on the forums, including the Rich Text editor and some aesthetic tweaks to make the forums more visually consistent with the galleries. But before the next round can proceed, we will need to pay for the updates already made, so now it's more important than ever to promote NPN membership. We will be contacting past members with the news of the site improvements with the hope that they will find it worth their while to participate once again.
Thanks again to all for your encouragement and support!
1. If no large photo was uploaded, the 720 would be rendered. When using the Lightbox to toggle though the photos slide show style, there would be large changes in size from photo-to-photo which we felt would be undesirable.
2. The large photo has always been intended to be used as the source of the critique, so keeping it exclusively where it has always been (on the comments screen) made the most sense.
As is always the case with such decisions, there are compromises involved.
Finally, I would not consider a 720 pixel photo as "little" especially those in portrait orientation. Even to this day, the majority of popular screen resolutions are 900 pixels or less vertically, which 720 pixels fills nicely (bear in mind the browser bar uses a little of that space). So unless you are using a huge, high-resolution monitor, the intermediate photo in our opinion works quite well for that "first view" and more-casual viewing by those surfing in.
Here's a link to screen res statistics that will shed more light on this;
http://www.rapidtables.com/web/dev/screen-resolution-statistics.htm
Note that the 1366 X 768 is now the most popular screen size.
Would you please consider adding a 'last updated' date to each image on the main page. Some of us like to read what others have written on an image and don't want to click on images whose comments we have already read.
Igor
So, the date/time could be added, but we also want to avoid a "bunch of stuff" appearing under each thumbnail. I am open to suggestions on what everyone thinks is the most necessary info to have there and what could be removed or moved to the comments screen.
I think the thumb info is fine as is, for the reason you stated. You could add the date/time of the last comment in the 'comments screen'. I think this would be the most appropriate place for that info.
--P