ScottMcLeod wrote:
I disagree with the comment "I dont like that site http://www.photopacifica.com the navigation on it is very poor."
I wouldn't say it's very poor, but it could be slightly better. It's a basic site, and the navigation choices needed are not complicated. But when you go into a gallery and then click on a photo, you only have three choices - the next photo, the previous photo or home. What about back to the thumbnails of that particular gallery in case you don't want to go through them all one by one? That's the only real negative, and it's easily fixed.
I'm not taking of design here, just navigation. I don't care much for the very busy, or very "flash-y" sites. Simplicity is good, as long as it oozes style I don't have a web site at the moment, so I'm all talk, but I'll let you know when I do, so you can all laugh
Just linking up my website to see what others think of it. I still need to do some work about adding a journalism section and cleaning up some code (it will be entirely server-side dynamic before too long) but I'd like to see some comments about what I have so far... The first page was done by a friend, and I have since gutted it and shaped it into the rest of my site that you can see today...
BTW, in the future, I plan on killing B&W photos on the main page along with Misc Photos, and getting in some other things there like Photojournalism & Event Photography. And sports will actually go only to sports instead of everything...it is a work in progress...
I am working with a web designer to redesign my website. As you all know, a professional designer costs a truckload, but I imagine like most things associated with photography, it is an investment!
I have always thought of the site as something dedicated to showcasing my images, but it is clear the present design detracts from the images.
Charles Miller's is one of the BEST FMer sites I've seen in terms of navigation and the work itself (wasn't that the point of this thread, as opposed to voting for ourselves?) Here it is:
As a professional web designer and developer, I see about 90% of the listed sites have broken basic usability principles or have disregarded the needs of the user, which really is the shame in it all. Alienate a user whether it's one user or twenty one of them, and you've possibly lost revenue.
It is possible to do plug-in checks and redirect a user to a non-flash site, whether that site be a simple one page site, or a full blown HTML site, driven by a database, etc. One person said it best, where you must look at it as a business investment and expense to help promote yourself.
What is really unfortunate was how many sites I saw that had such strong photography but such a poorly designed site that didn't compliment it, or showcase it.
eeprete wrote:
As a professional web designer and developer, I see about 90% of the listed sites have broken basic usability principles or have disregarded the needs of the user, which really is the shame in it all. Alienate a user whether it's one user or twenty one of them, and you've possibly lost revenue.
It is possible to do plug-in checks and redirect a user to a non-flash site, whether that site be a simple one page site, or a full blown HTML site, driven by a database, etc. One person said it best, where you must look at it as a business investment and expense to help promote yourself.
What is really unfortunate was how many sites I saw that had such strong photography but such a poorly designed site that didn't compliment it, or showcase it....Show more →
Do you have a site or an example? Or links to a site that explains what the basics of webdesign are?
I don't have a web site at the moment, so I'm all talk, but I'll let you know when I do, so you can all laugh 
