Forums >
General Industry >
Photographs = poor web designers?
Im an amateur photographer (hobbiest), I often find myself looking at other photographers websites both amateur and pro and seldom find a decent looking website. How can a photographer with a great eye for photos be so poor in designing a site to showcase their great work? I wont state any examples, but does anyone notice this trend? Jun 02 06 07:07 am Link Most photographers dont know anything about web programming. Thus they get it done by someone else. Some are good, some bad. Some of us are never satisfied and are always looking for improvements that balance simplicity with impact. There are some sites that I think look great, but are a pig to navigate, and others that look simple yet you can navigate easily. Finally, the quality of the shots bares no resemblence to the quality of the site any more than the BHP of your car indicates your ability to drive it. I wrote my own site. Its easy to navigate but lacks punch I think and I'm not happy with the gallery at the moment. However, I woudl rather shoot than edit web pages so it does the job for now. Jun 02 06 07:22 am Link Fluffytek wrote: www.makiclan.com Jun 02 06 07:39 am Link David Maki wrote: I'm glad you like it, its very ...... Flash. Jun 02 06 07:55 am Link I find most photographer's sites more than lacking and less than attractive. Come on guys (and girls) if you want something to look professional then get a professional to do the job. It's your image that the site is presenting. If you want to use a PD version of some $40 html editor then that's what the public will see. You could also probably use some house paint and a roller to paint your car but that's not very professional either is it? Jun 02 06 08:04 am Link JoJo Suicide wrote: And just as many model's sites suck too. Jun 02 06 08:13 am Link http://www.elizabethshoemaker.com/ It helps having a friend who believes in your work and is dyyyyynamite with design and coding. The admin back end is just as functionally elegant. Jun 02 06 10:36 am Link Jun 02 06 10:40 am Link ChrisHughes wrote: Web design and photography skills don't necessarily coincide. Most photographers, myself included, know web design on a need-to-know basis. We master just what we need to and no more. Jun 02 06 10:40 am Link Generalizing as usual. I am a photographer and webdesigner. I started doing websites back in 1999. I started doing them when I needed my own website which was a html. My site curently is in Flash. www.legacys-photo.com and another site that I did for a mua on here. www.stefani-nicole.com. While you do want a site that is going to grab the viewer's attention, you still want to keep your website simple. There is nothing worst than a bunch of special effects star wars crap going on. You'll loose a potential client. Jun 02 06 10:48 am Link Legacys 7 wrote: Holy cow...I got through 10% loading and clicked back... Jun 02 06 10:54 am Link James Jackson wrote: Well, I never had anyone address that issue to me at all when they view my work. Not unless they are non broadband users. speaking of websites, your website crashed my browser. Jun 02 06 10:57 am Link Legacys 7 wrote: Nope, I'm a broadband user, I just don't like black screens with white lettering and nothing going on. Legacys 7 wrote: Well that's a first for me as well Jun 02 06 12:12 pm Link James Jackson wrote: Me too. Jun 02 06 12:16 pm Link Fluffytek wrote: Me too... If you sit through the loooonnnng load time, it's pretty flashy... I didn't see any navigation... just a slide show (or a long intro)... I didn't give it time to do anything else! Great images though! Jun 02 06 12:21 pm Link 10MB websites for the lose. Jun 02 06 12:23 pm Link dissolvegirl wrote: could you clarify? Jun 02 06 12:57 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: Somthing like 75% of the country is still on dial-up. I always have to tell people that when I'm making them site. Us broadband+ users always forget that. Jun 02 06 01:04 pm Link James Jackson wrote: Legacys 7 wrote: Nope, I'm a broadband user, I just don't like black screens with white lettering and nothing going on. Preference for you. Like I said, it's a first for me that I got this feedback like this. To answer your question, I was using Firefox when it happened to me. It crashed it and I had I restart the brower again. Jun 02 06 01:04 pm Link A.Fox wrote: I know, which is best to have a html site as a backup for dial-up users. Jun 02 06 01:07 pm Link Jun 02 06 01:10 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: It's always good to have feedback. Perhaps a load movie with low rez previews of the great work they'll see inside would be helpful? Legacys 7 wrote: Strange...I tested in Firefox as well. Were there any other sites open at the time? Did it give you any error? Are you tabbed browsing or windowed browsing? Did it crash when you went to the home page or when you clicked to enter the site or on one of the gallery pages or on the contact or bio page? Jun 02 06 01:13 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: I'm on broadband, but the load time on your site is still really substantial. Plus combining that kind of load time with an intro is just more time your potential clients spend sitting around waiting to get into your site. Jun 02 06 01:16 pm Link James Jackson wrote: Tested in firefox...works for me. Jun 02 06 01:17 pm Link dissolvegirl wrote: I have to agree... on business class DSL, it was taking approximately 1 sec per % loaded which puts the load time at around 1 and 1/2 minutes!!! Then I noticed the intro with the bird and what I assumed to be a slideshow of images.... In my humble opinion, that's simply too much. If I were a client I would not wait. Web viewers are fickle. I would have made it through about 10% of the load and closed it if I were just casually viewing.... But like I said earlier.... Great images!!! Jun 02 06 01:22 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: 10MB is too damn big. Jun 02 06 01:30 pm Link Hm, I'm a model so I guess I don't count... but I did design my own portfolio and I don't think it's crappy. ![]() Jun 02 06 01:32 pm Link im think im not to shabby at it cus i have a design background and have been designing sites for awhile .. at this very moment i am workin on my new website.. Jun 02 06 01:37 pm Link Aein wrote: Looks nice, I'd like to offer a word of advice, if you wouldn't like any, please don't read below: Jun 02 06 01:39 pm Link Ok as of the flash thing..............awsome fun and cool however I say keep it simple.............. www.caylephotography.net and let your work do the speaking on the other hand I am thinking of adding flash to this design what do you guys think Jun 02 06 01:44 pm Link http://www.MichaelRomeoStudio.com Dont Need to say more Jun 02 06 01:45 pm Link Jun 02 06 02:00 pm Link James Jackson wrote: Legacys 7 wrote: It's always good to have feedback. Perhaps a load movie with low rez previews of the great work they'll see inside would be helpful? it crashed when i pushed the enter page. Jun 02 06 02:06 pm Link Louis Cayle wrote: Ditto here. I like it simple but maybe would like to add some simple flash. Sill under construction. I think it is loading too slow. Comments welcome. Jun 02 06 02:07 pm Link Lee Dowse wrote: Actually, speed is going to vary for different reasosns. I use broadband and my site cruises. But remember not all broadband users are going to have the same speed expeirence. Example, at school we use a T3 connection fast as hell but slow as dial-up when school is in because of traffic. Once school clears out, it's like turning a page in a book. what I'll do is do a preload on each page. This will make it easier. As for navigation, my navigation is very simple. I'll do a preload for each page. Jun 02 06 02:12 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: I'm sitting at work on a T1 line. It took 1min 20 sec. to load. At 75% I lost interest but in the interest of this thread I waited while doing other things. I thought the site was nice but a little over the top with the flash. The wait time is a killer though. Jun 02 06 02:40 pm Link Legacys 7 wrote: That may be true, but regardless... many "high-speed" users are complaining about your load time (including a T1 user).... Rather than be defensive, maybe just take the constructive criticism and simply revamp the site to make it more user friendly. I personally can't speak for the navigation because I never even got to the navigation. The slow download/long intro were simply too much to sit through. If several people are saying the same thing, think about how many potential clients feel the same way.... You could be losing business without even realizing it. Just tryin' to help. Oh... and did I mention.... Great images!!! Jun 02 06 02:50 pm Link http://www.fleshandcolor.com I designed my own. Its not the best, but i am happy with it. But just because someone is a photographer doesnt mean they know webdesign. However I do think if your serious and can't build a decent site yourself you should show some interest in your own work by having someone display it properly. Jun 02 06 03:07 pm Link ChrisHughes wrote: I don't know if hey go hand in hand. I have seen good and bad. Perhaps one reason for a good photog with a bad website is this. Photography takes some creativity; web design takes detailed (some say nerdy) knowledge of html, java and all that. Crativity on the one hand and exactitude with scientific knowledge of website design, on the other hand, don't always go together. Jun 02 06 03:13 pm Link Lee Dowse wrote: Whoa, Jun 02 06 03:30 pm Link |