| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/08/2005 11:33:17 AM · #26 |
Wow, it's been a while since I got goosebumps looking as somebody's portfolio and my gosh...I got them looking at yours. Your work is amazing!
My personal taste is that I don't care for flash sites. I think that somewhere in my past I read that it was a "don't" but times have changed and it seems like the majority of photography sites do use the flash technology. Pretty groovy program too. Thanks for the link!
|
|
|
|
07/08/2005 11:36:54 AM · #27 |
Barry - I know it's slow for dialup users, sorry.
Alex - Personally I don't like flash sites. I thought I would give it one more chance and PhotoFolio seems to be winning me over a bit. The gentleman that made it, made it real easy to upload new pictures which I really like.
I'm still torn if I will continue to use it or not. The JasonJenkins.com is my personal site so I have some time to decide. The other site that give to customers is pure HTML, no FLASH. |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 11:42:10 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Jason:
Barry - I know it's slow for dialup users, sorry.
Alex - Personally I don't like flash sites. I thought I would give it one more chance and PhotoFolio seems to be winning me over a bit. The gentleman that made it, made it real easy to upload new pictures which I really like.
I'm still torn if I will continue to use it or not. The JasonJenkins.com is my personal site so I have some time to decide. The other site that give to customers is pure HTML, no FLASH. |
why not have 2 sites. a html and a flash? maybe too much hastle for you????
Actually looking at the //www.jasonjenkins.com/ , this seems alot quicker, better looking.
Message edited by author 2005-07-08 11:45:03.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2005 12:30:38 PM · #29 |
Hmm...maybe I will try PhotoFolio...I really do like the very simple look of my site, though (once I fix it up properly).
I know nothing about building a website so this (or the PhotoFolio one - thanks for the link, Jason!) will hold me over until I learn...
Next up, business cards...
[/url]
Message edited by author 2005-07-08 12:31:53.
[/url] |
|
|
|
07/08/2005 01:39:51 PM · #30 |
I bought a php photo gallery called Photokorn that I integrated into my website. You can check it out at //www.bryanbrazil.com.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 08:06:42 PM · #31 |
| I downloaded simpleviewer and it seemed to work well on my website. Then I found a tool called Simpleviewer Admin and from reading about it, it sounds like a very heplful tool. But I cant get it to work, has anybody tried using this? |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 08:32:18 PM · #32 |
I use it for my photo a day site (link in sig) but I haven't updated it in ages :( Gonna start again next year I think.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 08:58:04 PM · #33 |
| Simpleviewer admin...I tried it, but went back to Simpleviewer because I was having problems. Also, I don't like the front page on the Admin version. |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 09:17:50 PM · #34 |
is it really that easy? i really havent explored the website making world and if it is that easy im going to give it a try.
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 09:46:26 PM · #35 |
Wow... I love the way the images fade into view. It appears to work especially well on images with strong emphasis on the "light".
I don't care much for flash... but it obviously makes for an awesome show! Thanks for sharing!
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 10:46:52 PM · #36 |
Okay, just did some switching to the Photofolio thing...thanks for the tip, Jason!
Still some stuff to work out, but check it out...
//www.mikeschneider.ca |
|
|
|
07/13/2005 10:59:39 PM · #37 |
gorgeous shots and your webpage has a very nice layout
|
|
|
|
07/13/2005 11:17:01 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by alexsaberi:
Originally posted by Jason:
Barry - I know it's slow for dialup users, sorry.
Alex - Personally I don't like flash sites. I thought I would give it one more chance and PhotoFolio seems to be winning me over a bit. The gentleman that made it, made it real easy to upload new pictures which I really like.
I'm still torn if I will continue to use it or not. The JasonJenkins.com is my personal site so I have some time to decide. The other site that give to customers is pure HTML, no FLASH. |
why not have 2 sites. a html and a flash? maybe too much hastle for you????
Actually looking at the //www.jasonjenkins.com/ , this seems alot quicker, better looking. |
I know this is off topic, but those racing pictures on jasonjenkins have really great looking color. Some of the richest color I've seen in a while. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 01:17:00 AM · #39 |
ok, that would explain my confusion.
I downloaded simpleviewer and have been playing with it, though currently, it just loads to the flash, then blows up, don't know if it's my images or what, then I realize that the layout I really liked, is in this new photofolio. Bleh, That's what I get for getting excited on the first couple posts. Will dig back into it tomorrow, as it's getting late. Thanks for the tips all, I've been looking for something along these lines for a bit, as I'm way too lazy to update my own website, and something like this makes it easy. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 06:41:57 AM · #40 |
Mike
what file size are the photos you are uploading ? do you resize/compress them first
they seem to be taking a long time to load for the size they are
or are you on a slow server
|
|
|
|
07/14/2005 06:54:53 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
What happens if the visitor to your site doesn't have Flash installed? |
It should detect it and offer to download.
Perhaps I should make a simple .html version as well for non-flashers? I figured most internet users are flashified by now...especially those looking at my portfolio. Something to think about, though... |
What if a user is on a slow connection?
For instance, when I am out of town most places, my cell phone connection, which I use mainly for connecting to the servers at the office, typically nets me a 14.4 connection. If I am lucky, I will get a digital "Broadband" connection which is just about 56k actual up and down.
Then there are fullt time dial-up users.
Flash can take a looooong time on a slow link.
Anyway, there are plenty of reasons not to use Flash as the only setup for a website. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 07:55:04 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Flash can take a looooong time on a slow link.
Anyway, there are plenty of reasons not to use Flash as the only setup for a website. |
Good point, but it is definitely becoming the norm for Portfolio websites of photographers.
I agree, if my site becomes an "order prints here" site then I will likely make some major changes (and invest some money) so that the website will be customized and easy/user-friendly. Right now, the purpose of my site will be as a portfolio for other photographers/photo editors to take a look at.
As for the resizing question, I can't remember what size they are. I think in most cases they are just 600 pix wide but I'll have to doublecheck all of that.
I'm also working on a better banner for the side. I'd actually like to create a nice simple logo...one for "Mike Schneider" (for editorial/documentary work) and one for ThatCloudThere.Com (for stock/landscapes/prints). I'm hoping to get someone to create some logos for me that look like Vectors...that's for later.
Edit: One more thing...the Photofolio site really brings out the best of your photos as it fades from low contrast/low saturation to full contrast/saturation of your photos. It really helps make them look sharp, as if they are jumping off the page when you view them which is another fantastic thing about that program.
Edit 2: One more thing...the long loading times. I figured it out, these are my files simply pulled off of my computer so they have been saved at full resolution which means the files are much too big. I'll fix that.
Message edited by author 2005-07-14 07:58:54. |
|
|
|
07/14/2005 10:52:20 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Edit: One more thing...the Photofolio site really brings out the best of your photos as it fades from low contrast/low saturation to full contrast/saturation of your photos. It really helps make them look sharp, as if they are jumping off the page when you view them which is another fantastic thing about that program.
|
I believe that you can accomplish the low to full effect using a spot of DHTML and CSS. Write once and use it to bracket all your photos.
I will have to look into that.
IMHO, a good photo will stand on its own, whether or not it has some flashy bling-bling setup to display it. |
|
|
|
07/15/2005 08:05:12 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Edit: One more thing...the Photofolio site really brings out the best of your photos as it fades from low contrast/low saturation to full contrast/saturation of your photos. It really helps make them look sharp, as if they are jumping off the page when you view them which is another fantastic thing about that program.
|
I believe that you can accomplish the low to full effect using a spot of DHTML and CSS. Write once and use it to bracket all your photos.
I will have to look into that.
IMHO, a good photo will stand on its own, whether or not it has some flashy bling-bling setup to display it. |
Of course it will...a good photo will also make an impact on newsprint but that doesn't mean I would send a clip to an art gallery instead of a nice print.
Why not use the tools that I have, particularily if they're free? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 06:39:50 AM EDT.
