Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2
    Member #
    15958

    Current Rating

    Visual Appeal:
    0.0 out of 5

    Accessibility:
    0.0 out of 5

    Website Speed:
    0.0 out of 5

    Compatibility:
    0.0 out of 5

    Overall Rating:
    0.0 out of 5

    Rate This Site


    Advertisement (login to hide this!)


    You must be logged in to view this site

    all opinions are welcome. i was hoping i could get some feedback on my site or some improvements that i need to make. also if anyone knows knows flash, on my flash page i wanted to add normal text to make it more google friendly. now the site is purly flash but is thier anyway i can add it on the bottom. this is my flash link http://www.iccreativity.ca/flash/index.html.

  2.  

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    488
    Member #
    11940
    None of the elements seems well integrated ...Flash with html, or blog with the rest of the site. I would suggest you study other photography sites.

    For example, 29 out of 30 photographer sites sites go for black backgrounds. Great if you want to fade into the background noise of competition, not if you do a simple simulation of a user shopping for photographers and seeking one that stands out.

    The Athony Phillips Site. A well designed photography site with categories and big pictures. In contrast your site has very, very small thumbnails which are barely usable.

    Glance is another site where photography, not Flash, is the objective.

    Joseph Cartright actually integrates photography into the layout. Check out the blog.

    The site is a mishmash and not a well designed layout. Even on the blog, one post is in itty-bitty micro type that's barely readable, the other isn't. Users attribute attention to detail on the site to the job the photographer will do on their job. This site is sending a mixed message.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Steax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Bandung, Indonesia
    Posts
    1,207
    Member #
    14572
    I suggest you not to use Flash at all for this purpose, because you don't really have "flash-only" functionality. Using HTML and some JS for the effects you have, you can achieve much more, including the search-engine support you want. May I ask why you're using flash there?
    Note on code: If I give code, please note that it is simply sample code to demonstrate an effect. It is not meant to be used as-is; that is the programmer's job. I am not responsible to give you support or be held liable for anything that happens when using my code.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Ferro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    386
    Member #
    14204
    Liked
    5 times
    Personally I prefer flash for the image fading routines, as it's stand alone, so when the images are fading in and out you don't get that awful stutteriness of the cursor if you move it around during the fading process due to the javascript executing it's setInterval fade routine. That's really starting to majorly bug me now with these javascript image fading routines , and makes them look a bit unprofessional, in my opinion. That's just an opinion though , after mucking around with them myself a little bit, I think they look pretty bad in comparison to the flash ones. However they are much more SE friendly as Steax says .
    Is it more common for someoene to have JS turned off, or is it more common for someone not to have flash player installed? Perhaps nowadays it's neck and neck.....
    I think flash player is a lot more of a viable thing to do nowadays than it was.
    You could have a look at "swfobject" and see whether you can utilise that at all as an overlay for some html code.
    Also - the automatic music is very annoying.
    Apart from that - I thin the border around the thumbnails is too thick, and there is pixeleation going on in the header. I really like the way the big pictures come in when you hit a thumbnail though.

  6. #5
    Senior Member Ferro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    386
    Member #
    14204
    Liked
    5 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Steax
    Using HTML and some JS for the effects you have, you can achieve much more
    Are you saying that you can acheive better aesthetic effects with html and js, or do you mean "acheive" as in SEO , etc.?

  7. #6
    Senior Member Steax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Bandung, Indonesia
    Posts
    1,207
    Member #
    14572
    Most aesthetic effects in Flash can be replicated with HTML, CSS and JS. I meant achieve as in SEO and the rest... I'm just saying that most of what Flash is used for is made in it just because "they can" (which happens to be very bad attitude for the web). Why use flash if HTML will do?

    Is it more common for someoene to have JS turned off, or is it more common for someone not to have flash player installed? Perhaps nowadays it's neck and neck.....
    Perhaps. But remember - if flash is disabled, then it won't appear at all (and probably your entire site, since the rest of the UI triggers animation). If JS is disabled, then the images just don't rotate.

    For me the search engine support that HTML brings is worth all the problems with JS. Its simply no good to have a cool Flash site if nobody finds it.
    Note on code: If I give code, please note that it is simply sample code to demonstrate an effect. It is not meant to be used as-is; that is the programmer's job. I am not responsible to give you support or be held liable for anything that happens when using my code.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Ferro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    386
    Member #
    14204
    Liked
    5 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Steax
    Why use flash if HTML will do?
    I think personally flash is a lot smoother aesthetically (what I said about the mouse pointer stuttering with the js fade effect). Just a personaly opinion though. Talking specifically about these image fading effects (I've been mucking around with these a fair bit recently). But I would agree there are a lot of effects in flash, especially flash driven menus that seem unnecessary, for sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steax
    Perhaps. But remember - if flash is disabled, then it won't appear at all (and probably your entire site, since the rest of the UI triggers animation). If JS is disabled, then the images just don't rotate.

    For me the search engine support that HTML brings is worth all the problems with JS. Its simply no good to have a cool Flash site if nobody finds it.
    Do you think that clever use of swf object would cover this? Or how about swf object overlaying a JS fading routine? Then the flash degrades to the js fade which is pretty good IMHO. Then you have a situation where if the user has flash and js, they get the flash, if they have just js, they get js fade, and if they have no js, they just get a static image?
    Or perhaps that's a bit long winded for most people's tastes - I did a site like this recently though, and it seems a good (if long winded) solution as far as I can tell.
    My site was more an exercise than anything else though, like I say many people might find this a bit long winded. Thoguh to me it may be important with an aesthetically orientated site like a photography site......
    Edit - the method I'm talking about would not be suitable for a flash DRIVEN site, but might be good for just the image fade overlay on an otherwise well programmed html site.

  9. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2
    Member #
    15958
    thank for your advise i guess i still have alot of work to do.

  10. #9
    Senior Member raspberryh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Erie, PA
    Posts
    882
    Member #
    7208
    Liked
    1 times
    I think that if you really like flash for the fading, then do the photo gallery itself in flash, embed it in the page, and then have everything else in HTML.
    choosy developers choose gif!
    website | paintings | blog

  11. #10
    Senior Member Steax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Bandung, Indonesia
    Posts
    1,207
    Member #
    14572
    Ferro - the long-winded method would be the best method, but I'd cry at the amount of testing and debugging required. But thats just me.
    Note on code: If I give code, please note that it is simply sample code to demonstrate an effect. It is not meant to be used as-is; that is the programmer's job. I am not responsible to give you support or be held liable for anything that happens when using my code.


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Remove Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com