• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Hey! I made a web site!!

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format
Hi all, I've got my website to beta status. The galleries still need to be fully populated, but the overall feel and function are in place. Comments and suggestions are welcome.

Also, anybody that wants to exchange links, please PM me.

http://www.jasonbrunner.com

J Brunner
 
Nice one Jason. Glad to see you stayed away form all that darn flash stuff.

Bruce
 
The web site is good and everything but all I know is that I saw this perfectly round female bottom in your gallery, I pressed it eagerly and I got the "Check Back!" message.
Now Jason, listen to me well. This is either the best marketing trick or the worse. I can't decide whether it makes me want to check back soon or punch you in the face for the dissapointment.
 
Fill the sucker up and then ask. Jeez Louise.

For what is there it looks pretty gosh darn good. As a practical matter you may live to regret using graphical text. Its a bitch to update and the search engines can't read pictures.
 
jd callow said:
For what is there it looks pretty gosh darn good. As a practical matter you may live to regret using graphical text. Its a bitch to update and the search engines can't read pictures.
Click to expand...

Actually updating it, or changing it back is very easy with the design I am using, it only becomes a graphic when I upload it. Its just a check box. My reasoning is that not everybody has these fonts in their computer, so with the graphical text the apearance is consistent from machine to machine. Do you think that it is enough of a non-issue, that I should go back to regular text?
The font is georgia.
 
I really like the straight forward approach - it fits your style well. I also like the navigation and the color scheme. J.D. is right about the graphics, spiders and related robots can't read anything in grahpical format, and you might want to check APUG's meta data for an idea of what other info to put in the meta tag for the crawlers. Let us know when you've got more nudes, er, I mean more photographs up.

- Randy
 

"Check Back" is what we were trying to do.
 

The real issue is spacing. Things can start to move around when different fonts start filling in spaces that are tightly planned. It shouldn't be to much of an issue with Georgia, since those machines which do not have it will substitute (probably) Times. (OK, time for the type guys to chime in and give me lots of grief here.) I don't happen to think it makes that big a difference with a site that uses little text and a serif font. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE IMAGES.

Good looking site, Jason. Classy, understated and, of course, filled with great pictures.
 
Looks very good Jason and I too experienced the same thing as Ari clicking on the nude. Men are pigs and we go immediately to the bare bottom.

Cheers,
Bill
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wfe said:
Looks very good Jason and I too experienced the same thing as Ari clicking on the nude. Men are pigs and we go immediately to the bare bottom.

Cheers,
Bill
Click to expand...
Well, I went immediately to the "Holga" gallery and got the same message, so nyahhh. What would be nice, while waiting for the galleries to be populated, would be enabling the alluring thumbnails to be clicked on for a larger image. In its current form they remain thumbnails and only link to the "Check back" message. Just a thought. Minor nitpick.

The site looks good, navigates easily, and I dig the black background. Very nice.
 
I too apprciate the very clean, almost minimalist, look. I have only minor suggestions:

- comment on the lasting, archival nature of the prints in "about the prints" (even though it's mentioned in the description of each image)
- increase the vertical spacing of the links on the left.
 
Jason,

some lovely images - they make me realise just how much work I have to do to improve my own.
One thought: I wonder whether a thin white border around the pics might help? Some of them tend to get a bit lost in the black background. It might just help them stand out a bit more.

Just my 0.2p worth...



Cheers
 

Jason,
Nice beginning to your website. Clean design and easy to naviigate as others have already noted. In the, About the Print section, you used as much space in the first paragraph telling the viewer what your work "ISN'T" as you did telling them what it "IS." Your use of traditional photgraphy is fine, just don't beat a dead horse over the non-digtal issues. 99% of those visiting will see "traditional photography" and know immediately your approach.
Good luck!
Walker
 
I like it, simple design and easy to navigate, well done.

Peter
 
Thank you every one for your input so far. The comments and suggestions thus far have been very helpful. It is interesting to know what different persons take notice of. I am talking it all under consideration, as the site continues to develop. My goal is to have it "finished" by Jan 1. (It will in a sense, undergo continuos evolution.)



It is most gratifying that folks seem to like the basic design and navigation, and that most comments are directed towards incomplete areas, or content, or small technical issues. It tells me I am on the right track, at least.

Thanks again, and please keep the comments comming.
 

That I'm not so sure of, based on my interactions with non photographers,
and unfortunatly, some who call themselves photographers. So many today seem floored, when they find out I don't use computers or printers. I had one young person come to the darkroom, to see for sure, for their self. Didn't believe it was possible.

Are you saying that anyone that matters will know the difference, and I should disregard the ignorant, as they probably don't care anyway?

Its a good insight, and my aproach to this, regarding the "about the prints" is the text that I am least sure of.
 
Regardless of whether visitors to the site will or will not understand traditional photography, Walker has a point.

I assume that your site is aimed toward a broad audience, and not just the type of folks we find here on APUG. If not aimed toward a broad audience, ignore my comments below.

The "about the print" section comes off a bit negative. You say a lot about what the prints are not, but don't speak to the tonal range, luminosity, texture, etc, etc. All of this may be obvious to those who understand and appreciate silver-based photography, but not to everyone. And even if they do understand, I think you want to be more positive (i.e. why your prints are better, not that others are worse). So you can leave in your current points, but balance them with the positive.

You might want to add some comments on contact printing and the implications it has for the creation of the original image.

I'd even go as far as to state the obvious - that no computer screen can fully convey the subtleties of the real image. My 2 cents.
 
Hi
I like the design to but the pictures are to small in my opinion!
And I learned never to show a homepage bevor it is finished!
I now "pissed" because I used my time to look at something which is not finished yet! ;--))
 
JohnArs said:
Hi
I like the design to but the pictures are to small in my opinion!
And I learned never to show a homepage bevor it is finished!
I now "pissed" because I used my time to look at something which is not finished yet! ;--))
Click to expand...

Well spoken, but it is listed here for input and comment from you folks, who are my peers, before I would waste time heading down the wrong road.

I believe I have chosen a good layout and design, (the right road) and will now finish out the details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register