The good, the bad, the ugly...part 3.

The picture of the lens etc is last to load, so at first I thought it was a newspaper, the banner font made me think that.
NIce layout, like the mouseover effect on the left but you have to many different fonts, especialy the "photography" done in black and red is really hard to read.
YOu did pretty good at putting "the fraser image" in there, I counted 8 times , but only one is text so wouldnt help seacrh engine results.
the changing of the status bar, thankfully Opera doesnt display it, but sadly NS and IE do people like to see where they are going, nothing worse than going to another site or your default email program starting up to display a email message you dont want to write.
in NS4.7 there is a slight vertical line above "personal perspective" (top left).
IS the butterfly a trademark, or company symbol? if not should loose it, hasnt got the same feel as the other pictures.
I'd make all the fonts the same as the left links, well maybe leave the lens rings one as are, just make them smaller.

I went one page in, the personal perspective page, the butterfly image is very flat, very washed out. there is a big grey box at the side, navigation maybe? doesnt diplay on IE, NS or Opera. you have the links across the top, but they are a different font again and very small and hard to read, so about 5 font styles on that page.

NOw on the "services page" the grey box section is now some pictures on a grey/white background with curved tops, looks like there is some missing, the top and bottom curve but end, looks like it wants to go across the page. the images on the grey, two are buttinized, two arent, should make them all the same.
the top section of these pages, where the page name and butterfly is, is to empty, maybe move the butterfly lens to the top right or top left.

the image on the background page dont display, just a grey box, same as the contact page.

As a photography myself there is a lot of information missing, you state film types on the portraits only, no pricing, no sitting fee, packages, how they are offered (displayed), reprints, props, picture sizes, digital ... I realise most work is done on subject/place basis but some basis pricing for people not in the know could be helpful.
even a semi portfolio could be helpful.
not sure about there, but here its very cut throat so every advantage would be helpful.

those thumbnails on the grey section just open as a image, maybe open them as a pop up, or in the same window but with details, who, want, when ... at least a link back would be helpful

-is there such a thing as a "highsrc" attribute? If so I'll be adding it

-The lens and butterfly is a logo(not made by me), hence the reason for different font

-chances are somebody won't be looking for photographers in search engines by typing in 'the fraser image'

-client insisted on the lincoln font at the top but it was difficult to read as the smaller font

-3 of four have the bevel edge on the services page(more difficult to see on the black and white top image), business card didn't look right with a bevel added to it

-agree with you about the mini-portfolio, have previously proposed this to client and he is thinking about it...he's worried about image theft(will probably go for a no right click script, watermarking and folder restrictions to help minimize chances)

-the links across the top are the same font as the larger page names

-client wanted simplicity of design, hence the grey bar on the left on most pages

-grey bar in Netscape is on my list of todo's

-I'm not sure about Opera, but in my ie, the grey bars do appear, what version of ie are you using?

-client didn't want any pricing shown

-in future, large images of thumbnails will lead to their section of portfolio/gallery...hopefully

Thanks for the feedback!

My first impression of the splash page is that it's way too busy. Way too much going on here - fancy fonts, graphics overlaying each other, drop shadows and other effects - it's just too complex looking.

Firstly, get rid of all instances of "The Fraser Image" except for the one in the top logo and the one in the copyright statement (meaning the 6 that appear in that circular graphic). Shrink those drop shadows on the navigation there so they are much closer to the words. You don't need those little tiny words underneath them on mouseover so get rid of those too. Move that navbar down a bit so it aligns along the center with the lens graphic. Also darken the "An owner operated company..." text below the logo - it's too light to read easily.

Clicked on "personal perspective" - this looks rather bare an unfinished in comparison to the splash page. Definitely add some photos here, and do something about that grey bar on the left. A photo of the owner/operator would be nice, especially since the text is written in first person. Also try to find a better place to put that lens logo - it looks out of place where it is. Once again the drop shadows on the navbar are much too big and that text could stand to be a tad bit larger - looks scratchy this way.

More sample photos are definitely needed here - if I was visiting this site it would be because I'm interested in hiring this photographer and I would like to see some samples of his work. Also change all your fonts to a sans-serif.

Overall it's not bad as it is, but it could be great with a few minor changes.

in IE6, 1152x764...

Splash took 30-60 seconds to load on cable. Images don't seem too big so I'm guessing a server glitch?

Too many fonts going, I counted 5 I think.

The drop shadows give things a dingy, smudged quality - especially on the small navigation icons (font doesn't work well at that size either.

I agree that the "portfolio" is kind of thin but I'm quite familiar with how protective photographers are with their images.

Leave my status bar alone! grrr!

oh and someone looking for your client in particular might be likely to type "the fraser image" into a search engine.

taff & megan- not sure why you are referring to it as a splash page?

megan- the main pic on the opening page is a collage and hence is meant to be more complex than just a plain image

taff- true about the search engine, however, my point implied that someone searching for a photographer in general won't use the specific name of the photographer and hence the 8 times 'the fraser image' is listed wasn't an attempt to raise the standing of the page in search engines as implied by 'busy'

taff- I agree, something has to be done with the nav bar's clarity

megan-the circular graphic is a logo(all six repetitions included), not allowed to change

megan-artistic licence allows me to add more things to a web page that what is "needed"

general-did you guys follow through the thumbnails on the services page to the larger images? Wanted to know if it was obvious or if I should place a note somewhere.

Thanks

John

Quote: Originally posted by jagf
taff & megan- not sure why you are referring to it as a splash page?

Figure of speech for a site intro page that is more style than substance. I'm a big defender of splash pages, others consider them a waste of time and bandwidth.

Yes I checked the thumbnails. Are you are aware that the portrait is inverted?

yes, thanks

Quote: Originally posted by jagf

megan- the main pic on the opening page is a collage and hence is meant to be more complex than just a plain image

I realize that - what I was saying was that IMHO it's too complex especially when compared to the rest of the design. Maybe if you just faded out that text some... I think there needs to be more of a balance between complex graphics and simple design...

Quote: Originally posted by jagf

megan-the circular graphic is a logo(all six repetitions included), not allowed to change

It looks fine on the main pages - the lens with the butterfly image.. oh, I see, the text has to be part of that. Too bad. I also said, though, that the positioning could be better on the body pages - seems kind of lost over there by itself.

Quote: Originally posted by jagf

megan-artistic licence allows me to add more things to a web page that what is "needed"

I don't know where this is coming from - I was trying to say that there should be a little more in the body of the site - more images to really show off what the photographer is capable of and give people a stronger idea of what they can get from him.

I'm sorry you did not appreciate my comments. I will refrain from commenting further on your work.

I think most of it's been said and you have replied that the clients wants this & that or it's their logo, but to me the site is way to grey & boring and the fonts don't do much for me at all, especially the links on the inner pages which actually become hard to read and I think the drop shadows are just too much and don't help the dull feeling. The ones that say home & contact, I think look better.

I would change the general font to something like Ariel or Veranda as this would make the text cleaner looking and easier to read.

The grey bar thingy, does it have to be grey? Maybe change it to the blue of the butterfly to give the site a bit of colour. Are you going to put images on each page on this bar?

Perhaps I will put images on these bare spots or change the bar to make it more alluring. I'm not sure until the client makes up his mind about displaying his photography.

I will probably change the nav bar text as you mentioned. Good idea about the blue but I don't know how well it will go over.

Anyways thanks for the feedback.

On the front page, the issue for me was contrast. Using my notebook, the light blue text ("an owner operated.....") was really tough to read against the white background. On the desktop it was better but I imagine other TFT slaves saw the same as I did.

Andrew

How about (if you have the time), make a version of the site the way they want it, then make another version of things you know and that we have suggested to use and put them both to them, let them decided?
Could give you brownie points for being creative and could open their eyes at your talents

If all else fails, just give them a really big bill hehe j/k

The big bill would be a good idea but my father, the client, probably would disown me.

I enjoyed the clean simplicity of your site.
Nothing jumping and nothing to get in the way of the photographs... After all that's what the site is about.

My main beef is in the lack of pictures in the portfolio.

If I'm going to a site about photography, I have an expectation of seeing photographs.
The ones there are wonderful! I just wish there were more on the site.

I have been working with artist for a couple years and have found that the best copy protection to posting artwork on the internet is to make sure the artist name is on the picture somehow. (Sometimes you can do this with a watermark) and to only post the picture at 72 dpi. That way it would never look good printed out any larger than the print size you post it at.

btw: Right click protection doesn't work if the person who wants to copy the picture is using a Mac computer (like I do)

I hope you can talk your father into putting his photograph in his website portfolio.
I can forgive a lot of web-author mistakes if the site has substance, but a portfolio without pictures is really kind of.... well, you get the idea.

All that aside, I do like what you're doing with the site.
I'll be interested to see how the final version comes out.

Karen