New Website

[Frank Petronio]

I figure the place to get creative and do something unique is with your content, not the user-interface. To gain viewers you need to engage them rapidly and confusing them with the interface detracts them from looking at the images themselves.

Think of a Western book model. Once you deviate from the Left-hand binding, Left-to-Right, Top-to-Bottom reading method of laying it out, the book design becomes the most important thing to a new reader. That's great for the designer but not so wonderful for your content.

To me, the artist's statement is the art work here, the pictures not so much. So it really could just be a statement and a scroll of static pictures, you could do it all on Tumbler template and reach 10000x more people.

I'm not in love with the artist's statement myself, I just see that is where you put your efforts.

[Mike Anderson]

I definitely don't like the scroll-wrap-around (hit the bottom and it jumps back to the top) - it's too unexpected and disorienting and doesn't serve much of a purpose that I can see.

The page numbers can be obfuscated by images - major mistake IMO. One solution is to put them in a vertical array off to the side where they can't overlap with an image. I'd also make the page # indication more substantial like a highlighted block or rectangle instead of a feint underline.

The starting-in-the-middle-of-the-page doesn't bother me.

I would work on page loading time - there might be some tricks to have some initial images appear more quickly so you don't need the "please wait" sign.

...Mike

[patapuss]

With your statement in mind; that your primary interest lies in technical functionality over artistic content is puzzling to someone like me.
Maybe I'm just too underdeveloped to have access to such work. No matter.

At this juncture, I have committed to the content of the series and am well aware of how the images function. I have hung the images in a gallery and had my opening. However, my website is brand new and still has some kinks to be resolved. In my OP, I provided a link with a request for feedback on the site's functionality. I figured this forum would be full of tech-savvy people who could give good/constructive criticism on how I can improve upon the existing site. I did not anticipate nor request a critique, or in your case, a complete dismissal of the work. If you would like to open a critique of the work I will gladly start a new thread in which you can speak your mind. However, my OP clearly asks for suggestions on how well the site functions.

[patapuss]

I would work on page loading time - there might be some tricks to have some initial images appear more quickly so you don't need the "please wait" sign.

I agree. I will bring this up with the designer. I'm not sure why the images are taking so long to load. They are sized to 72dpi and are not that large. Thank you for your suggestions.

[Ed Kelsey]

what part of "it functions for shit" didn't you understand?

[Mike Anderson]

I agree. I will bring this up with the designer. I'm not sure why the images are taking so long to load. They are sized to 72dpi and are not that large. Thank you for your suggestions.

I think the images are being resize by the browser, so I'm guessing every image is resized before any are displayed.

Another thing, when the window is resized the scroll jumps around - strange behavior.

...Mike

[kev curry]

Maybe I'm missing the point but why would anyone want to give ''notice to the minute details of often overlooked spaces'' like traffic cones and power lines and garbage bins etc etc? I can put these things into an environmental, political and social context but I don't think thats your intention here. I just don't get it.
People routinely filter out the monotony of everyday life for good reason, its dull and monotonous as your images testify.

I did not anticipate nor request a critique, or in your case, a complete dismissal of the work.

I didn't completely dismiss the work. I asked what I thought/think is a valid question (quoted above).

Maybe you would have received my above comments less personally if I had used the word ''show'' instead of ''testify''. Maybe that would have made it clearer that my focus was centered more on the monotony of the things photographed rather than the photographs themselves?

I'm still stuck on understanding where the inherent value is in consciously driving peoples attention to the mundane prosaic debris that clutters everyday life. I generally look for some useful social function when pondering artistic endeavors; I'm struggling here. No offence.

I'm doing it again, offering unsolicited comments on content.

[J. Fada]

Are you a photographer or a designer? Quite frankly I can't get past the poor interface to look at the images, which are poorly rendered by the design/designer. There is no excuse for your designer to design something that makes your photographs look like crap, (i.e. using low res. fuzzy images, improperly sized to the screen). The scroll aspect makes almost no sense on the vertical and it is quite annoying. And whose idea was it to make the images draggable? Not good.

I understand that you (or your designer more likely) is trying to be innovative and you should be applauded for the effort, but the site falls flat for showing off your images which is the sole purpose of having a website if you are a photographer. Your designer might be trying to make a portfolio piece showcasing his design instead of showcasing your images.

The upside is that in general you have a good vibe going on with the other elements. If you changed the way the images were displayed, as in smaller and sharper and one at a time on the screen, you would have a nice website. You could perhaps change the scrolling to horizontal and one at a time with a click instead of dragging a scrollbar.

[sully75]

Basically innovative websites where you have to hunt around to see the actual photographs just plain suck. They are unprofessional. If you were forwarding this on to someone to show them your work, and they had limited time, they would (if they made it past the url name) would have clicked out of it in the 10 seconds it took them to try to find an image.

I'm not sure what the design offers over something like a flickr river page, except with your site, you can't actually scroll through the pictures.

Many of them are really soft/fuzzy/out of focus, and I'm thinking that is not your intent. So something about the way the site is rendering your photos is not working.

It also just seems like a lot of random photos (some really nice, some pretty generic). It seems like editing it down to a theme would be helpful.

[Ben Syverson]

This thread is an ugly embarrassment to the LFF community. The OP asked for "feedback on the site's functionality," not "a non-constructive critique of the site contents."

It is unbelievably rude to offer critique when none is requested.