Please pull apart my website, would you give me a job?

rgrebby

rgrebby

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,835
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Since someone else got a lot of good feedback on their site I thought I would try and get the same kind of feedback.

Although i am not producing a product, do you think my site is reasonable enough to get a job as a photographer, assistant, 2nd, or otherwise.

Are the pictures on the header page the ones I should use?
Are there photos they just do not work?
Any really amazingly obvious errors?

I realise the site is in flash and that some people have real problems with it but a lot of the sites I see are flash and work very well.

Anyway, Thank you in advance for taking time to view it and im interested in any comments and criticism you want to throw at me.

www.richardgrebby.co.uk
 
Just had a very quick look Richard because sometimes that is the best way to do this. After all, those first impressions count.

I love the use of the signature, very personal and I love that, not so sure about the colour but I could live with it.

The only image I found to be a little out of place was the fox. Not sure exactly where it fits.

I also like the statement that this is what you are. Photographer, filmaker....... good statement.

overall, thumbs up :)
 
Its flash, meaning I cant use my back button, and I like my back button.

It takes too long to load, I left before it loaded. (but came back cos I was looking at it for you :D)

The visual layout and appearance is stunning though.

The samples of your portfolio are very good too.
 
Not sure pluckley will be too happy about their 'dicumentary'

Don't like the noises either, gets in the way of the music I'm listening too at the moment.

Other than that, fine really. Maybe a few more photo's would be nice but that's just me being interested!
 
You are one BRAVE MAN! (putting your site up for review, that is)

First impressions are a very professional looking front page but then the flash kicks in. I know you prefer to use it but websites of today need to be accessible and by going down the flash route you are going to reduce your audience - sorry.

Flash components can be very impressive but a LOT of potential visitors won't wait around to appreciate your efforts even if their systems can cope with it.

Just my opinion, hope the rest of the reviews go well......;)

Cheers, :thumbs:

Neil
 
load time very very slow because of flash. on front page it says click an image but you can only click on 2 central ones. You will lose visitors with the time flash takes to load IMHO.
 
The text is too small and the anti-aliasing makes it hard to read, esp. on a high res screen.

I like the fact that there's not hundreds of shots just a selection that (mostly) show a coherent theme/style but they all seem a little dark to me - are you using a calibrated display?

Change the page title - indexc isn't very description, esp. for the search engines.
 
I totally disagree about the loadtimes and the lose of visitors due to the site being developed using flash. Almost everyone has a decent rate broadband now, and the site took seconds to load on my 8Mb. Flash is accepted by most these days.

The site is not system intensive either, so there's no problem there. I do agree the button soundfiles you've used are annoying, but apart from that, it's very slick and works well.
 
TheKrikkitWars said:
Its flash, meaning I cant use my back button, and I like my back button.
Click to expand...

Have to agree, I find Flash very irritating. If you were using it for animation I can understand, but you're displaying still pictures.

And sounds... You don't need sounds... When somebody is browsing your site when they should be working, the last thing they need is your website making them the centre of attention.

Some great images and the layout is good - just ditch the Flash and it'll be great :thumbs:

Steve
 
neo2810 said:
I totally disagree about the loadtimes and the lose of visitors due to the site being developed using flash. Almost everyone has a decent rate broadband now, and the site took seconds to load on my 8Mb. Flash is accepted by most these days.

The site is not system intensive either, so there's no problem there. I do agree the button soundfiles you've used are annoying, but apart from that, it's very slick and works well.
Click to expand...

If everyone had a REAL 8 Mb link then fine but they don't...

some like flash some don't - could you offer a SIMPLE html page? - no frames, no javascript, no css, no active content of any kind and give this as an option on the entry page, lots of people out there still have slow computers and connections - just ask your grand parents - in laws etc
 
Thanks for the all the info, keep it coming, I'll make some changes tomorrow.

As for the simple html page, yeah I was thinking about doing that, maybe even changing the whole page to html but I haven't used dreamweaver much so its getting my head around it.
 
Richard, before I have a good look at your site and appraise it, it would be helpful if you could let me/us know exactly what you are aiming to achieve from the website as it's a little vague in your original post.
 
Defiance said:
Richard, before I have a good look at your site and appraise it, it would be helpful if you could let me/us know exactly what you are aiming to achieve from the website as it's a little vague in your original post.
Click to expand...

Mainly photography work as either an assistant or as a 2nd.
General work where my photography, identity, past experience and anything else would be considered.
I hope that helps, I suppose it still is a little vague, the website itself is a point of interest where I can send people that wish to see the types of work i have been involved in and the ability that I have. A portfolio if you will.
 
I think at a first look, my thoughts are as follows:

It is a very nicely constructed website indeed, but it does nothing to sell you. For example, on the intro screen you say who you are and what you are, but not what you have to sell and therefore it only serves as an online portfolio to those you refer to it.

When I do find what you are selling under 'my services' I would say that this is a 'brainstormed' list of mixed and incoherent products and services, and does not highlight or showcase what you are most seeking to achieve from the site. The services you offer are also vaguely presented and buried too deeply in the site.

I agree with the others that flash can be slow on a broadband connection. On a 1mb connection the intro page and transition to the site were too slow, although the main body of the site works very well. As all the others have said, lose the sound.

The pictures you have on the site are a random and somewhat eclectic mix, although very well taken. They are also somewhat 'dark' in look, feel, and atmosphere. They do not appear to connect the person looking at the site to the particular skills, services or products you are selling. I'm not sure what kind of buyer would want to see these.

I really like the 'about me' section although it is too wordy and needs to be a more punchy and a bit more like a CV, showcasing your experience, skills and qualifications.

The 'news' section is boring and achieves nothing for me (sorry !).

I hope this helps. You have done really well so far, and with lots more focus on what you are trying to acheive, you could end up with and excellent website.

If you are seriously looking to sell, then I can pm some stuff I posted at the weekend which may help you with this if you want.
 
I like flash-not sure what speed others are running at but i have broadband and I think most of us do now. My pc is about 4 years old and it came up very fast for me.

Not sure what work you are looking for-as others said to me not enough content for what you want to do maybe. What market are you aiming at-the wedding market as I saw this on there but no wedding pics.

I don't have a problem with your site or your photography-but not sure if you would get work from it. Maybe I didnt delve deep enough-but I saw mainly everyday pics and nothing topic heavy-as in advertising-products-weddings.

Hope I have been fair?
 
I got to your front page and was instantly presented with ..

please disable any popup blockers

Bye!

minimum recommended screen resolution 1024 x 768 px.

Oh dear.. Bye!

this site requires flash player 6 or later.

As an self respecting bot or spider trying to index your site would say.. Bye!


other than that i thought the front page was better than most and I would have gone furthur until you listed three good reasons for me to leave :) so I left :)

notice the smileys. I mean what I type but in a nice way :)
 
I have no aversion to flash in general, but trust me, not everyone is using a broadband connection and you will lose people too impatient to wait out the loading times. It's down to you whether you want your site to be all encompassing or somewhat excluding. I forget who said it but flash is great for animations. For galleries there are many javascript alternatives...

oh, and keep in mind if your visitor doesn't already have flash installed they will have to go through the download/install process which again may put them off.
 
I like the site, my only nitpick is that there are a few "errors", mainly erratic capitalization on the"About Me" page and my bette noir, inappropriate apostrophes on that page and the"Services" one- the plural of XL1 is XL1s not XL1's and that of DVD is DVDs, not DVD's - the apostrophe implies that the DVD posseses something, not that there is, in fact, more than one DVD :bang:

Those minor issues aside :thumbs::thumbs:
 
KIPAX said:
minimum recommended screen resolution 1024 x 768 px.
Click to expand...

Nothng unusual in that resolution these days. If it's a requirement then fair do's, but as a recommendation I think it's valid. I recommend 1024 on my site, but mainly because I think it presents better, not because you need it.

My photo's are 800 pixels longest edge but auto resizing for smaller screens. If you think about it, viewing an 800 pixel landscape photo on a 1024 resolution only leaves 100 pixels either side. On an 800 resolution it invokes scroll bars etc.
 
hepburn said:
I have no aversion to flash in general, but trust me, not everyone is using a broadband connection and you will lose people too impatient to wait out the loading times. It's down to you whether you want your site to be all encompassing or somewhat excluding. I forget who said it but flash is great for animations. For galleries there are many javascript alternatives...

oh, and keep in mind if your visitor doesn't already have flash installed they will have to go through the download/install process which again may put them off.
Click to expand...

I disagree again (but in a nice, non confrontational way :D)

As a showcase portfolio site, flash (done well) will have much more impact than html/css. For a gallery style site, yes, html/css/java is the way to go. This is a showcase portfolio site, and therefore the flash works well to add punch. Potential employers will more than likely be on faster connections and usually have a little more patience than Joe Bloggs...
 
hepburn said:
Nothng unusual in that resolution these days. .
Click to expand...

I thought people would get the point but it seems to ahve been missed:)

The point wasnt that resolution. it wouldnt make any difference what resolution was listed.. the point is that it shouldnt be resolution dependant or work better at a certain resolution. how many people looking for a photographer know what there resolution is or what it even means.

a good website will work in all resolutions, on all web browsers and on whatever hardware people are using.. from mobile phone to an old atari or a mega PC.. The only reason for it not to work is pure laziness on the part of the person building the website. I am quite happy to debate and win that argument with anyone who cares to say different :)

It can be compared to having a shop on the high street and only letting in people with black or brown shoes because thats what most people wear.

The truth is that websites can be made to work on everything .. It may mean a different experience for different users, It may mean a lot more work for the developer which offset against how many people it effects may not seem worth it... But that doesn't alter the facts.

there... the long answer... how was it for you? :)
 
I took a look at your site while the other feedback was going on and I like it.
My only crit is speed. I have vodafone broadband and if I can only pick up a slower signal it does take a while to load. :(
 
KIPAX said:
a good website will work in all resolutions, on all web browsers and on whatever hardware people are using.. from mobile phone to an old atari or a mega PC.. The only reason for it not to work is pure laziness on the part of the person building the website. I am quite happy to debate and win that argument with anyone who cares to say different :)
Click to expand...

I'll bite ..

I have a flash site - which some people dislike, which probably doesn't look great at all resolutions, certainly doesn't work on every web browsing device ever created, and also has music ... which some people dislike. I don't care.

'all resolutions, on all web browsers and on whatever hardware people are using.. from mobile phone to an old atari or a mega PC'


Catering to the lowest common denominator is one way of looking at the world ... but you are looking purely from the view of an end-user.

An alternative would be to say that a good website fulfils the purpose which the website creator intended. Mine is to showcase my work in a certain way in order to create enough interest for enough people to contact me in order to make a living from my photography.

I get 10 times more wedding enquiries than I ever want to shoot in a year. For me it's a good site.

Some people won't like / can't access my site - it doesn't matter to me - my photography is not trying to be all things to all men, and neither does a site need to be - it need to fulfil the purpose for which it was created.

Duncan
 
WeddingHack said:
I'll bite ..
Click to expand...

Luverly :)

WeddingHack said:
Mine is to showcase my work in a certain way in order to create enough interest for enough people to contact me in order to make a living from my photography.
Click to expand...


great ..I cant think of a better reason for a website :)

WeddingHack said:
Some people won't like / can't access my site - it doesn't matter to me
Click to expand...

Hows your foot..... now you just shot yourself in it?

How can you have those two statements in the same post ?

You could make your website work for everyone you agree that.. You haven't because you can't be bothered is what your saying... How is that not agreeing with me?

Yer not very good at this arguing lark are you :) :) :)
 
Great looking website but....

"Click To Enter" pages aren't search engine meaning you wont get very high on google and the likes.

Like other have said its flash. You eally should think about offering an alternative HTML version. Not everyone is on 8mb broadband, far from it infact. I know plenty of people that still use dial up. Waiting for that to load on dial up won't be good! Whilst the a lot of people are on broadband - do you really want to exclude say 10% of perspective clients just because they can't access the site?

Also, again to do with SEO there are no meta tags on your page! You need to have keywords and description put in as a minimum if you want go get listed. Also, the page title isn't really relevant.

Also, with the short video clips - rather thean having them open in a new page why not stay all on one page?

G
 
And back to the OPs question ...

If your intent for the site is to convince an photographer to employ you then I would say it doesn't work - there's not enough work on there to come to a conclusion.

Personally I like the more moody / grimy stuff you are displaying on there, the flowers and foxes distract from that. The other stuff displays a taste and style you seem to like more - you might want to take a look at Joey Lawrences work as a direction forward.
 
KIPAX said:
Luverly :)
You could make your website work for everyone you agree that.. You haven't because you can't be bothered is what your saying... How is that not agreeing with me?
Click to expand...

It's not because I can't be bothered, it's because I don't need to - there's a difference. The flash / music / whatever on the site creates a certain browsing experience that I want my potential clients to have. Some won't like it / can't access it.

It is impossible for me to create a site than absolutely everyone can access and still retain the experience that I want. So I have to accept some losses - if these losses equate to not enough customers coming through the door then there is a problem which needs to be addressed.

As it is, there is not that problem, so I don't need to change the site. My time and effort can be put into other areas.
 
I had a look at your website the other day and liked it, except for the noises. I am not a huge fan of Flash and what you have there can be done without flash.

I think my general rule fo thumb is if it can be done in standard HTML/CSS then dont use flash, if however its heavy on the multimedia side then sure build it in flash.

KIPAX said:
a good website will work in all resolutions, on all web browsers and on whatever hardware people are using.. from mobile phone to an old atari or a mega PC.. The only reason for it not to work is pure laziness on the part of the person building the website. I am quite happy to debate and win that argument with anyone who cares to say different :)

It can be compared to having a shop on the high street and only letting in people with black or brown shoes because thats what most people wear.

The truth is that websites can be made to work on everything ..
Click to expand...

can I take a bite at this too :D accessibility is probably one of the hardest things to make work for a website. But you cant make a website that uses new technology work on everything and thats the truth. What you can do is make your website intelligent to the point it picks the site depending on the browser, but this means that instead of designing 1 website you are now designing 2 or 3 or 5 etc.

If 95% of my visitors have the expierence on my website that i had intended then great, its a shame to loose the 5% sure, but my site isnt business critical.

and there is the rub... if your site is business critical then you have to make sure your site is accessible to as near 100% of people as possible, 10,000 visitors 500 cant view your stie correctly will leave, that drops vistor to sale conversion rates.
 
ok, no nothing bout programming but looking at your site, seems to load pretty quick for me, would prefer a menu tab across the top or down the side as opposed to click the image.

text is a little small on the menu. sound is really irritating, definetly not needed.

when in gallery the thumbnails show oyu nothing bout the image which is a little annoying, you also dont have a next back button for scrolling through the photos in the gallery, i made it through three photos before these two points would have sent me elsewhere.
Your galleries look like they could do with breaking up into the relevant sections as opposed to gallery1, gallery 2. eg: wedding, portrait, pets etc... so people can see the relevant photos to what they want.
about tab, you have misspelt available. perhaps worht making it clickable to take you to that section on the website.


i like your signature at the top, but i find the white swirly things slightly distracting. i also think you could make the frame slightly bigger to add space inside(but not overly a problem)

hope that helps

edit: more wedding shots would help:thumbs:
 
foz said:
can I take a bite at this too :D accessibility is probably one of the hardest things to make work for a website. But you cant make a website that uses new technology work on everything and thats the truth.
Click to expand...

eeerm no one said you could.. I even explained that the experience would be different for different users.. so your agreeing with me.. But as a photographer looking for business is the target to make people like your website using bells and whistles or to attract customers...

foz said:
What you can do is make your website intelligent to the point it picks the site depending on the browser, but this means that instead of designing 1 website you are now designing 2 or 3 or 5 etc.
Click to expand...

again your agreeing wiht me.. your saying it can be done but you think thats too much work. in my book thats just posh for a lazy approach

foz said:
and there is the rub... if your site is business critical then you have to make sure your site is accessible to as near 100% of people as possible, 10,000 visitors 500 cant view your stie correctly will leave, that drops vistor to sale conversion rates.
Click to expand...

your the second person to try and debate the point wiht me then go on to 100% agree with me :)
 
WeddingHack said:
It's not because I can't be bothered, it's because I don't need to - there's a difference. The flash / music / whatever on the site creates a certain browsing experience that I want my potential clients to have. Some won't like it / can't access it.

It is impossible for me to create a site than absolutely everyone can access and still retain the experience that I want. So I have to accept some losses - if these losses equate to not enough customers coming through the door then there is a problem which needs to be addressed.

As it is, there is not that problem, so I don't need to change the site. My time and effort can be put into other areas.
Click to expand...

Still need to fix that repeating homepage problem though!!! I want to see your site, and cant :)

Gary.
 
i agree with kipax btw, a brilliant website will work on anything, there will be more work involved to get the finished result. a good website will work on the majority. this for me isnt about the look but more the programming involved.
weddinghack, your website looks good and i like it. but wouldnt know how good your shots were if it didnt work, thus i wouldnt have been a customer. you say that you get enough work off it and are happy, so to you the extra cost/time involved in building a "better"(as in better programmed) website isnt worth it.

i hope that makes sense:thinking:.
 
My 2p.

Flash is great when used correctly, and to everyone saying Flash Sites cannot get high rankings in Google (which I have probably said in the past), a load of crap - they can, it's just harder.

I think Photographic Galleries are perfectly suited to a flash style site, the transitions are good, the animations smooth and allow the photos to melt into view etc. I therefore think anyone wantind to use flash should do so....

However. Please do not presume everyone will like it :) Have an HTML / TURN FLASH OFF button that is easy to access. Not only will this help get you even more clients, it will allow you to build that all important Search Engine Friendly site.

As I said, just my 2p. I reckon if I ever make it to a level where I am able to earn pocket money at the weekend using my camera, I would have a flash gallery site, with a fully featured HTML counterpart.

Gary.
 
WeddingHack said:
Click on the words Gary, not the picture.
Click to expand...

But you see, if you hadn't been here to tell me!! :)

Sorry not trying to be argumentitive, but as a user experience, it would be better if the pics were not clickable, or led to somewhere. And by the way, you are one talented guy. Jesus are your pics awesome.

Gary.
 
fletch5 said:
you say that you get enough work off it and are happy, so to you the extra cost/time involved in building a "better"(as in better programmed) website isnt worth it.

i hope that makes sense:thinking:.
Click to expand...

Exactly - it's the old 80/20 rule.
 
EdinburghGary said:
But you see, if you hadn't been here to tell me!! :)

Sorry not trying to be argumentitive, but as a user experience, it would be better if the pics were not clickable, or led to somewhere. And by the way, you are one talented guy. Jesus are your pics awesome.

Gary.
Click to expand...

I'm on it ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top