DIY Website Design Software [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

scrichton

10-Jun-2007, 15:56

Photoshop is great, iWeb, Aperture even. Plus the Open Source multi-platform NVU (nvu.com)

All are pretty much WYSIWYG. iWeb and Photoshop are horribly powerful, but that involves scratching the surface properly.

I personally just hard code everything as I have to do more custom apps for people (yes I work in "new" media I'm sad to say) Although I have though I should really do a personal page soon. So iWeb will be my first choice from a point of view of ease and sheer laziness.

Or like a lot of people do now. Use Wordpress blogging and customise the look of it. I love wordpress.

JavaDuke

10-Jun-2007, 16:09

Bob,

Unfortunately most of the existing software available today does require some HTML and CSS knowledge. Perhaps the best way for you would be to use WordPress blog to publish your photos on the web and Google checkout or PayPal if you want to sell your photos online. Or, if you prefer, you can use JAlbum to create your galleries.
Or just have someone design and build the site for you. :) Check my web site, if you like it, I can make something like this for you. PM me for details.

Duncwarw

10-Jun-2007, 17:35

I'll bet you're glad you asked.;)

Since I haven't seen a Mac since I left the Amiga 2000 behind, I can't comment on stuff in that world, but my two cents....

Microsoft Front Page strikes me as the easiest web page builder I've seen. Click the tabs for Design, HTML, and Preview. Design view just lets you put things where you want and pick blackground colors and fonts, etcetera.

I use Dreamweaver but sometimes Front Page because it's just easier for some elements.

IMO, you really don't need to understand HTML or otherwise be a programmer to build a website. Photoshop gives you the ability to sort of automatically build online galleries but why complicate matters when you can download free programs that will generate whole directories of web-appropriate images with a couple of clicks?

kjsphotography

10-Jun-2007, 19:16

I offer a software that is completely customizable and I can also host it for you. It has an integrated shopping cart with paypal, ready to go. You can modify it very easily and it is geared towards artist.

I have plans that include hosting that start at $25 a month, or you can chose to outright buy it and host it on the ISP of your choosing.

http://artsoft.kjsphotography.com

You do not need to know HTML or programming to use it and updating your content is extremely easy.

Just in case you were interested,

Kevin

Daniel Geiger

10-Jun-2007, 20:28

I also use Dreamweaver and like it quite a bit. Not sure about pre-cooked templates, but you can make your own templates and apply them to multiple pages for consistent look, which I use quite a bit. Re shopping chart, as far as I understand, that is something that depends more on the hosting service. Larger outlets do offer that, but you have to fiddle around a bit, like with feedback forms or similar options that involve cgi scripts. I know that my hosting company offer some templates that are adjusted in their on-line web-editor. So that might be yet another option. Not sure what you want to spend for hosting. Mine costs around $100/year with about 50 e-mail accounts, ftp option, 50GB storage, 750GB transfer/month, shopping cart options, templates, English speaking tech support, the works.

Sounds like you want something on the simpler side without spending a whole lot. So check with the highschool kids in your neighborhood. Particularly, get the kid to do the framework, and have it done in such a way that it can easily be modified by yourself.

roteague

10-Jun-2007, 23:33

If you don't want to spend the time learning how to build HTML pages or maintain them, I would go with a solution like Kevin's. $25 a month is quite reasonable, considering what you are getting.

J Peterson

11-Jun-2007, 07:11

templates are naff generally. There meant to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Dreamweaver is great. You really don't need to know any HTML to jump into it. I didn't even use a tutorial or manual and I could figure it out quite simply. When you do need some code, a quick google search has usually solved it for me.

BradS

11-Jun-2007, 09:10

Oh, my...I'm still building the few websites I maintain with vi (well...actually, gvim).

Hugh Sakols

11-Jun-2007, 12:01

I'm going to rebuild my site using softpress freeway 4. I have generated my web galleries using iview media pro (now microsoft expressions). Don't pay too much to get you site hosted. I think i-Web is too expensive. I use hosting from a small orange - I believe it is $30.oo a year.

Scott Kathe

11-Jun-2007, 12:25

Hugh,

Why did/are you using Microsoft Expressions to put together your web galleries and Softpress Freeway 4 to put together your site? From what I just read it looks like you can put together your site with Expressions and skip Freeway 4. Is Expressions difficult to use to make a web site? I use a PC at home but my wife just got a Mac laptop so now I can use the best affordable program regardless of platform-I really did not like GoLive.

Scott

QT Luong

11-Jun-2007, 12:56

> I really did not like GoLive.
Neither Adobe did :-)

Since I code my site using emacs (a bit more sophisticated than vi but not much :-)), I cannot really help directly with the question, however I'd suggest thinking more about your goals.

In particular, if you do not want to learn a simple language like HTML, I would think you may be better served looking for a hosted photo gallery, rather than trying to design and then maintain your own site. Many photographers also overestimate the importance of providing e-commerce tools, and therefore deal with more complexity than necessary. Unless you get lots of orders, people can just email you.

Greg Miller

11-Jun-2007, 13:42

There are some problems with software like FrontPage , Dreamwaever,... Here are a few:

1) Their "preview" functions can only emulate real browsers. There will be a day when what you see in the preview does not match what really happens in Internet Explorer (some or all of the various versions being used), FireFox, Safari,... If you do not know CSS & HTML well you are pretty much hosed at that point. Even if the preview matches the page as seen on one of the available browsers, it will not look right in another. Only a sound understanding of CSS can help you with this.

2) The applications write their own code. It may work when you first build a page, but if you modify the page much, sometimes the code gets pretty twisted. You will pull your hair out trying to fix problems at that point.

3) The most common technique for architecting a web site/page is to first build the structure with CSS, ands then add the content with HTML referring to the CSS. This is a model that is not intuitive, nor readily emulated using Dreameaver or FrontPage.

Scott Kathe

11-Jun-2007, 13:43

I don't want to hijack this thread but I hand coded my first site using the book HTML GOODIES by Joe Burns and it was a LOT of fun. The site was pretty basic and not very sophisticated but very functional. I spent a LOT more time using GoLive to put together my 'improved' site than the hand coded site. I like photography more than building web sites so I've decided to spend as little time with web site design so I can spend more time with photography. That being said, my site is outdated, it is all 135 stuff from before I succumbed to large format several years ago. I'd like to think my photography has improved since then with many thanks to this group. It's time to redo the site and I want to do the best job I can with the least amount of time taken away from photography, that's why this thread is of interest to me.

Scott

Photomax

11-Jun-2007, 14:55

Interesting thread.

There are so many ways of doing this: creating a website that serves one's own interest. Like the saying goes "if you are going to do something then do it well."

There are cheap (or sometimes expensive) templates that can be effective or not. These suffer from overuse and can look generic: fine for some people but for an artist or photographer looking to set his/her work apart these systems look like the proverbial "seen that style somewhere before..."

There are all kinds of WYSIWYG programs that help create sites. Dreamweaver and GoLive are the two big kids on the block. They offer a dazzling array of features and can produce sites with rich content and custom features. The downside is they cost $400 and it takes a big time investment to learn how the program works. If you have little design sensibility then all you have really done is learn software. You still need to come up with a unique design that speaks to your own style. I purchased and learned Dreamweaver but in the end I found the program got in my way. I dumped it.

These programs and templates sometimes generate crummy code and may not do a good job of supporting Modern Standards Design which is the big thing these days.

So, what's the solution? I think the best coding for a site is lean HTML and CSS. This stuff can be hard to learn from the ground floor. Why not take that $400 and apply it more effectively and hire a guy to set up some custom HTML & CSS for you? You then learn how YOUR hand crafted site works. GET to know how the code and CSS works. This might seem daunting at first but figuring out how a well built site works is a lot easier than building one from scratch. By hiring a pro at the beginning you will have a great foundation from which you can expand. Adding paragraphs, galleries and images is pretty easy. The corner stone of Modern Standards Design is the complete separation of content from the presentation. Once the CSS (the presentation) has been built it is much easier to add or edit the actual content. This method eliminates any need for Frames, Tables, Flash or Javascript. This is the cleanest, most efficient method as the code is greatly reduced.

Hit me offline if you want to discuss this more (in person...)

Max

Hugh Sakols

11-Jun-2007, 15:30

Why did/are you using Microsoft Expressions to put together your web galleries and Softpress Freeway 4 to put together your site? From what I just read it looks like you can put together your site with Expressions and skip Freeway 4. Is Expressions difficult to use to make a web site?

Scott,
From what I have seen Freeway is a straight forward WYSIWYG web design package that is quite powerful. I plan on using Freeway instead of dreamweaver for designing all pages except my portfolio pages. I also want to use it to create a web site for work. Unfortunately Microsoft Expressions doesn not run on PC's - it is just a spin off of Iview Media Pro which was designed for mac users. However, Expressions will evolve into microsoft's full digital asset manager hopefully keeping iview's basic structure. Essentially one can generate a web portfolio page with the push of a button. However, I will attempt to edit the web template. I'm still researching how to do that. My html skills only consist of cutting and pasting code that I like.

John Brady

11-Jun-2007, 15:30

I can strongly reccomend Kevin Saitta's program. He has developed a very comprehensive yet easy to use solution for the professional photographer. He has lots of features and you are able to choose the ones you want. Kevin is constantly updating the program.

If you are trying to keep it simple, professional and affordable plus support one of our own large format guy's this is a good choice.
___________________
www.timeandlight.com

Marko

11-Jun-2007, 17:39

So, what's the solution? I think the best coding for a site is lean HTML and CSS. This stuff can be hard to learn from the ground floor. Why not take that $400 and apply it more effectively and hire a guy to set up some custom HTML & CSS for you?

This is possibly the best advice given in this thread.

Asking for an application that can create a web page without desire to learn HTML is the same as asking for a camera that can create great photographs without a user having to learn any of the boring photography stuff...

Actually, cameras like that do exist - they're called point & shoot cameras. The quality of photographs they produce is about the same as the quality of web pages that these applications will produce for you.

I've been doing web design and development professionally for more than a decade now and I think I tried all the push-button applications trying to save time and effort, including DreamWeaver and GoLive. I trashed them all and settled on BBEdit on the Mac side and HomeSite on the PC side. Neither of them produces any code, they just enable me to produce and manipulate it efficiently. But I can write HTML and CSS faster than I can write letters...

If you don't want to bother with that, but you want to have a site that will represent you and your work, your best bet would be to do the same thing that I would do if I needed to have professional photos done - hire a pro.

I guarantee you that in the end it will be less expensive and far less aggravating than any other alternative. Not to mention better looking and more functional.

Just my $0.02

roteague

11-Jun-2007, 22:40

Why did/are you using Microsoft Expressions

Expressions is an updated version of FrontPage. However, unlike FrontPage, it is very CSS centric. CSS isn't something you pickup overnight, although it is the best way to build a website.

There are some problems with software like FrontPage , Dreamwaever,... Here are a few:

1) Their "preview" functions can only emulate real browsers. There will be a day when what you see in the preview does not match what really happens in Internet Explorer

Actually, the preview pane in FrontPage is Internet Explorer, or rather its rendering engine.

Greg Miller

12-Jun-2007, 04:52

Actually, the preview pane in FrontPage is Internet Explorer, or rather its rendering engine.

I was speaking generically about this class of software. FrontPage uses either the version of IE that you had when you installed FrontPage or it uses the latest version of IE installed on your computer (I'm not sure which). But:

1) You still do not see what the page looks like in other browsers (or other versions of IE) which can be very different since IE does not adhere closely to w3c standards for interpretation of HTML and CSS (yes, there is the "preview in broswer" function but I believe that very few users of FP are aware of this or even the need to view the page in various browsers).

2) The IE preview pane is less than full screen which can result in inaccurate rendering when using CSS floats or HTML tables (depending on configuration of the tables).

3) The preview pane does not handle "server side includes" (SSI) (which should be used for coding efficiency sake for common elements like headers, nav bars, footers,...)

4) The preview pane does not handle scripts well (such as the code generated by FrontPage when creating effects such as rollover and flyouts).

Frank Petronio

12-Jun-2007, 05:32

Custom design is always best; hiring a good designer and coder to put together your site properly is almost always worth the money when you decide to get serious. Being clean and minimal is harder than it looks.

Frankly, if you aren't a computer person most of these packages (Dreamweaver, GoLive, etc.) will overwhelm you, and based on your questions, frankly... you probably aren't a computer person are you?

Some of the simple package can be pretty powerful. Walter C. has an amazingly decent website that he put together using iWeb; it really showcases how much you can do with the simple packages. The code is not ideal, and the software may lock him into making a narrower range of choices, but still, for what it is, it is pretty darn good.

What I find with nearly everyone who asks me about web development is that they have their priorities backwards. They think they need a website... what they really need is CONTENT. Thinking, editing, and deciding what you really want to have online is so much more important -- and nearly everyone goofs up this part... the website itself is relatively minor compared to the effort of putting something GOOD on a website.

I've been reccomending that new web people start with off-the-shelf web sites to learn what works online and how to edit. Start using Flickr and build a GOOD gallery, editing to flow and make sense. Use a Myspace page to learn how to write "about" yourself. Start using a Blogger acct to build up content, etc.

Now Blogger, Flickr, Myspace are usually ugly, down and dirty looking pages but you can learn a lot about editing and content creation from setting them up and maintaining them. And I'll argue that is the most important thing about having a website.

And heck, I have a friend who is web idiot and wedding photographer. I sat and set up a Myspace acct with her and she was able to post galleries and all that for free, and she got work almost immediately since her myspace page was actually better looking than many dedicated wedding photographer's websites ;-) And for a wedding photographer myspace is the perfect demographic -- early 20-yr olds getting married...

So figure out what you want online -- make it tight and right -- THEN go shopping for a designer/coder and you'll get a much better site, save money, be efficient, all that. Few people do this and they waste and a lot of time and money.

Scott Kathe

12-Jun-2007, 06:10

I tend to be somewhat of a perfectionist, but the older I get the more I let things slide just a bit;) My point is that I want to do my own website and I want it to be easy, well maybe not easy but rewarding so that the effort I put in gets me something in return. I like using a large format camera, sure it takes time but the results are worth it for me. I also shoot with my Nikon F3 once in a while when I want to keep things simple and I almost alway use the camera in manual mode. I never shoot with my SLRs in point and shoot mode. So, by way of analogy I guess I'm looking for a way to put together a web site using a '135 manual mode' philosophy not a 'P&S' philosophy. I'd rather go to the dentist and get my teeth drilled than go back into GoLive to update my site.

Scott

Jorge Gasteazoro

12-Jun-2007, 08:19

I have been using Kevin`s software for more than a year and could not be happier. What he offers for the price is a great deal.

roteague

12-Jun-2007, 12:48

I was speaking generically about this class of software. FrontPage uses either the version of IE that you had when you installed FrontPage or it uses the latest version of IE installed on your computer (I'm not sure which). But:

1) You still do not see what the page looks like in other browsers (or other versions of IE) which can be very different since IE does not adhere closely to w3c standards for interpretation of HTML and CSS (yes, there is the "preview in broswer" function but I believe that very few users of FP are aware of this or even the need to view the page in various browsers).

2) The IE preview pane is less than full screen which can result in inaccurate rendering when using CSS floats or HTML tables (depending on configuration of the tables).

3) The preview pane does not handle "server side includes" (SSI) (which should be used for coding efficiency sake for common elements like headers, nav bars, footers,...)

4) The preview pane does not handle scripts well (such as the code generated by FrontPage when creating effects such as rollover and flyouts).

With FrontPage, a lot depends upon whether you are using the built in webserver, or using IIS. With FrontPage it is best not to use the Preview Pane, instead use the "View in Browser" function (see the file menu), which can support multiple browsers at simulated sizes.

Microsoft Expressions Web is the replacement for FrontPage. I've used both, but not extensively. My main web develpment tool is Microsoft Visual Studio 2005, which is overkill for most users.

roteague

12-Jun-2007, 12:49

I have been using Kevin`s software for more than a year and could not be happier. What he offers for the price is a great deal.

That would be my recommendation as well.

Greg Miller

12-Jun-2007, 13:06

With FrontPage, a lot depends upon whether you are using the built in webserver, or using IIS. With FrontPage it is best not to use the Preview Pane, instead use the "View in Browser" function (see the file menu), which can support multiple browsers at simulated sizes.

Microsoft Expressions Web is the replacement for FrontPage. I've used both, but not extensively. My main web develpment tool is Microsoft Visual Studio 2005, which is overkill for most users.

None of this fits well with the original poster. Which is why I was discouraging the use of this class of software for his purposes.

For my purposes this class of software creates more problems than it solves. So I just work with native CSS and HTML at this point. But this again is not relevant to the original poster.

neil poulsen

11-Jul-2007, 03:50

I just finished using iWeb. Everything was working well in the "WYSIWIG", simulation mode. Very smooth.

But, then I generated the website into a directory on my computer. Splat! It doesn't work right and it doesn't look right. Fonts get changed, some links don't work, even text gets altered from the simulation mode. And, even though I brought in jpg images, they all got converted to png's. There's nothing fancy in what I did, only pictures and text-based links. Etc.

I used Dreamweaver to create one site; took me an unbelieveable number of hours. It works OK, now. Of course, I'm not that skilled at CSS, etc. Just kind of struggled along. And I agree with another comment. The software (like Dreamweaver) that generates and modifies HTML code as one goes along ends up with very twisted HTML code. Then, one needs to try to straighten all out all the HTML, which goes against the idea of having a code generator in the first place.

I would think that having software that operates in it's own simulation mode and then CORRECTLY creates fresh HTML code each when one's ready to publish the website would be better. This is like iWeb, but of course, one wants something that works!

Scott Knowles

11-Jul-2007, 05:55

Lots of different and excellent advice. I could easily add my own to the mix but I would just like to say that you're putting the cart before the horse. First, you need to define what you want your Website to do and then define the look and navigation of it. This is usually done on paper where you outline the Website for features, function, navigation, etc. and then storyboard the look. After that the tools you want to use define how, or who in some cases, does the work. But without a plan and design you'll spend hours redesigning and redoing.

And if you don't want to learn either html/css code or wysiwyg programs, then the best way is take your plan and design to a Web/graphics designer and have them code it up while showing you how to maintain it. Remember unless you want just a one-off Website, most of the time will be spent on maintenance, updates and upgrades, so plan accordingly. You don't win if you get 6-12 months down the road to see the whole Website doesn't work and won't for the new stuff you want.

And the last advice I got (above given to me and learned) is first, the old kiss principle, and second, focus on the user. The more complex or designed your Website, the harder to keep up. The best designed Website is useless if people don't like or use it. Keep them in mind.

And while I like and use GoLive, it's been dropped in CS3 for Dreamweaver (Adobe bought Dreamweaver). Dumb move to me but GoLive still works by itself outside of CS3. Dreamweaver is good for Website (emphasis on site) development and management, but it's not a Web page design package.

Duncwarw

11-Jul-2007, 06:41

My 2c:

1. HTML etcetera is easy for people who write code.
2. According to the statistics for my site and the two others I maintain, almost nobody is accessing them from a MAC and almost everybody is viewing them in Internet Explorer.
3. From what I've read in many places and seen on my own site, most visitors see your main paige for 30 seconds or less.

This is not intended to be a "slam" or argumentative, but the original poster, I believe, said he wanted it to be easy. Further, it's the IMAGES people come to visit for most of us so a very basic, clean (aka: no fancy background or animations) page with an image and description if you choose is, I think, what works.

I'd be more concerned about the proper sizing and quality of my images than whatever wallpaper was behind them.

IanG

11-Jul-2007, 10:07

The original poster was asking about DIY software, Netscape is still available and free it comes with Netscape's Composer which isn't a bad editor. The new suite Seamonkey is available now, its installed on my PC in the UK, but I've not tried it yet.

Someone else mentioned NVU, again quite reasonable, I use the Portable version on a USB device to edit websites when away and working on someone-else's computer.

Some of the software mentioned in this thread produce pages that don't work well on all screen resolutions, and its important to test your site on different systems, also with IE and Firefox.

Free software (http://www.thefreecountry.com/webmaster/htmleditors.shtml#wysiwyg)

Ian