| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/04/2010 08:13:21 PM · #1 |
Trying to decide on which type of site is best. I've had "Site 1" for a year now, but im starting to find flash to be cluttered and messy. Might just be because im bored of it though.
"Site 2" isn't complete, just a quick mock up.
Site 1
Site 2
Thanks
Message edited by author 2010-04-04 20:14:00. |
|
|
|
04/04/2010 08:24:26 PM · #2 |
While I don't really like the flash navigation, I currently like site 1 better. Reasons:
1) Black vs white background. For text based sites, white backgrounds rule. But for photographic sites, pictures just look nicer with a black background.
2) More thumbnails on a page of site 1. Maybe it's because it's just a mockup, but I like as many thumbnails as possible.
3) Better navigation. I do definitely like the next/prev and "back to [subject]" on site 2, but site 1's overall navigation is cleaner.
I do like the font choices better on site 2. Easier to read. |
|
|
|
04/04/2010 08:24:27 PM · #3 |
| Quick 1 second glance... I like the //www.jayaphoto.com/ better. |
|
|
|
04/05/2010 07:29:20 AM · #4 |
| Ino the first site looks better but I think the second 'feels' better? Anymore opinions? |
|
|
|
04/05/2010 07:34:05 AM · #5 |
| I prefer Site 2, primarily because it loads so much quicker. But also because it has a nice clean feel to it. However, I do think they are both pretty good. |
|
|
|
04/05/2010 07:42:27 AM · #6 |
I prefair the flash site.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2010 06:34:20 AM · #7 |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 06:41:02 AM · #8 |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 06:52:44 AM · #9 |
I found the grey words on the white background extremely hard to read. But it's early and I haven't turned the lights on yet -- only the computer screen. But I think it could be a big issue for some people.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2010 07:22:28 AM · #10 |
| Call me a bitch, but "prefair" irks me way too much to even look at it :-( |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 09:28:52 AM · #11 |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 09:40:25 AM · #12 |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 09:51:05 AM · #13 |
I have mixed feelings. In general, I don't like sites that force me into "next" or "previous" views of single images with no stable overview of what's coming. On the other hand, I also don't like sites where I can't click a "next" at all without diving back into the thumbs.
In your new site, the small images get completely lost in all that white space. I don't think white's a good choice for image display anyway, but they'd be lost whatever color space they were floating in.
I guess I'd prefer a panel of thumbs and the image opening alongside/above the thumbs, so you can click next/previous OR click on another thumb...
In the current black site the way the opened image is superimposed directly on the thumbs looks real busy, not good at all; and it locks out the underlying thumbs from being selected next.
All thats aid, the new site is MUCH more responsive, which is good.
R. |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 10:10:24 AM · #14 |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 10:13:09 AM · #15 |
I agree with Bear; I don't like going in blind. Hadn't thought about that aspect, because I looked at the ones with all the previews, so I knew what was coming. But I am definitely less likely to look if I don't have an overall preview.
Message edited by author 2010-04-06 10:13:17.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2010 11:22:40 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I agree with Bear; I don't like going in blind. Hadn't thought about that aspect, because I looked at the ones with all the previews, so I knew what was coming. But I am definitely less likely to look if I don't have an overall preview. |
Okay I agree with this, do you think it is to much to expect the viewer to click on "back to.." to go back to the thumbnail page? |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 11:30:50 AM · #17 |
I am a web designer by trade (and degree), and I definitely prefer site 1. The black background helps give more focus to your images. My only suggestion, is to make your secondary landing pages more uniform. I like the layout of "other" and "people" much better than "landscape". Also, giving people the option of viewing the site without flash should be an option. Most will look at the flash site, but there are a few out there who have a slow connection or don't like to view sites in flash.
Roseann |
|
|
|
04/06/2010 12:00:50 PM · #18 |
Site 1 is very nice, but some photos load too slowly (I timed one of the images to eight seconds)(and I have 10 mbit). The semi-large previews on page "people" and "other" load quick enough - see if you can have that kind of quality images pop up first, to then be replaced by the full-res a few seconds later.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2010 07:27:15 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by JayA:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I agree with Bear; I don't like going in blind. Hadn't thought about that aspect, because I looked at the ones with all the previews, so I knew what was coming. But I am definitely less likely to look if I don't have an overall preview. |
Okay I agree with this, do you think it is to much to expect the viewer to click on "back to.." to go back to the thumbnail page? |
Yes, I do. You're counting on the viewer to be entranced and do double the number of necessary clicks. I could view twice as many photos if I didn't have to go back to the thumbnails each time.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2010 07:40:56 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Yes, I do. You're counting on the viewer to be entranced and do double the number of necessary clicks. I could view twice as many photos if I didn't have to go back to the thumbnails each time. |
Absolutely. It's a major turnoff to have to back up to the beginning, remember where you were, and navigate onwards from there.
R. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 06:34:24 AM EDT.
