Web Page Photo Gallery

[Steven Digges]

Web site help. I just added a photo gallery to my web page. I am a photographer and videographer, not a web page designer. I use Microsoft Front Page to keep it simple because I do not know HTML. My past experience has taught me that what I see on my browser is not necessarily what everyone else sees. I just uploaded the changes and am very disappointed because most of the images look over saturated and underexposed compared to the way they look in Front Page. Is this just on my system? Is this common and should I have known to adjust for this. Almost all of the images were scanned from the original transparencies and tweaked for contrast in Photoshop. I am cringing at the thought of tweaking every one of them again.

I know this is a DV forum but was encouraged the other day when so much interest in photography was expressed here. Would some of you please be kind enough to look at this gallery and give me your feedback? All constructive criticism or input will be appreciated. I am about to do more advertising and I hate the thought of wasting money because my site is not working or looking good.

You can click on my web button or go to

http://www.corporateshow.com

Thanks,

Steve

Chris, I hope it is OK to post this here.

[Mark Moore]

Stephen - I thought the images looked fine, though some looked a bit dark. Could it be the monitor you were viewing them on?

I have worked with FP for awhile. You can also 'tweak' the photo in FP by using the brightness/contrast tools on the picture pallette (which I've done with photos for our site). If the scanned original is fine, you may want to tweak in FP for the web, but I would view the site on another computer/monitor to make sure you are tweaking the way you want.

Good luck.

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

If you have access to the server that hosts your site, you can write a utility using PHP and NetPBM that will apply image tweaks to any served image. (My site does this for image size and gamma.)

A simpler solution, and a labor-saver, would be to find a tweak that you can apply to your whole set of images and then run a batch conversion. Photoshop should be capable of this.

[Steven Digges]

Mark,

I'll try tweaking them in F/P. If it works it will be better than reinserting each one again.

As far as the monitor goes I set them up in F/P and then viewed them from the web all on the same monitor and see the darkness only on the web page.

Thats why I put out the request for others to look at them, is the saturation coming from a web process or is it just what I am seeing?

Thanks for looking.

Steve

[Keith Loh]

1) The font choices you've chosen aren't the best.I would stay away from Serif fonts for web pages. Serif fonts are good for lots and lots of text such as agreements or articles, but for display fonts, try Arial or Verdana.

2) I would actually reduce the size of that camera picture so that you can get all the text you have on that page viewable on a monitor without scrolling. For inside pages scrolling is all right, for the first page you have to worry about giving people the right message. If they don't get the right message at first glance (if it was buried down below the screen size) then you have a problem.

3) I question using the dusty camera as your image. I think it might give the impression that you use old equipment. Maybe if you cleaned it up first? I don't see anything particularly wrong with the image, though. In fact, you should probably expect degraded images on the web and most people expect that as well. When you look at the images on Photoshop, make sure you are looking at them in Optimize mode which gives you a better idea what it looks like when compressed.

[Nigel Moore]

Steven,

I thought your photos were well-balanced.

However, as Alex noted, your site does not do them justice.

For a start, blue text, especially links, on a black background is a big no-no. As is text that is the same colour as your links. It confuses the viewer.

I liked the idea of the camera picture, but not its execution. It was too stark and clipped.

For an idea of how I think your front page could look, see here. For it to really work, you'd need a good photo of the cam with a full lens shot. Could look quite sexy IMO!

[Steven Digges]

Kieth

Good point about the size of the camera image. The camera however is not dusty; it is a wooden sculpture of a camera. I just see it as an icon.

The photos in question are not on the home page, they are in the photo gallery. The link to them is on the home page.

Having people look at something like this before my clients do is great. I am too close to it to see other perspectives. My own wife just e-mailed me and said “why are there only 6 pictures in the gallery, I thought you were working on this for a long time?” There are many more than 6 - one of my fears confirmed – the downside of templates! My hat is off to you guys that write your own code and make a page what you want it to be.

Steve

[Steven Digges]

Nigel,

Your killing me – your showing me a glimpse of what I know my site could be, I however am not the person that can do it. I am an artist, but not an art director or graphic designer (I have worked with enough of both to appreciate them). I envy you guys with multiple talents.

For now I must be the one that does it but that will change when I can afford to hire the right person. I have been in business since 1987 – so far 2003 has been one of my worst years ever. My corporate meeting business is heavily affected by the economy (like most business).

Thanks for the input – I loved your mock-up. Someday it will be sexy!

Steve

[Keith Loh]

To tell you the truth, I don't know what you see as wrong about the photographs in the gallery. I think they look fine!

The photo on the Links page IS blurry, however.

The caption in one of them is wrong, I think. It says "Womans Slalom". Isn't it "Women's Slalom?"

[Steven Digges]

Women's Slalom repaired. Thank you.

Steve