If you have a sec, check it out and tell me what you think of the new look.
www.derekpearson.com
thanks!
D
www.derekpearson.com
thanks!
D
New site look
- Thread starter derekpearson
- Start date
Real nice DP.........nice and clean, and simple.......just the way I like a website to look 
Looks good, very clean, professional
A little more MTB (not race, not urban) would make me happier. That with standing, it is top notch
A little more MTB (not race, not urban) would make me happier. That with standing, it is top notch
Looks good man. The site is pretty slow though.
On the home page, it would be cool if you could click on the photos to take you to the various sections - I immediately went to click on the photos vs. the text below.
I agree. Also, why do you have each subsection pop up a new window? The user clicks a topic and goes to that section, then if there's more a new window pops up. Why not just keep it in the same window? Doesn't make sense to me.MMcG said:
Looks good tho. I like the cleaness of it.
looks funky in mozilla (firefox 0.9.3) see attached screenshot. i agree with making the images links to each section.
and either your server is slow or your image sizes are huge, i thought some of the sections were blank when they were just loading up.
do you really want to represent each type of photography that you do with just one picture? i've seen a lot of your stuff and think you are an amazing photographer. you might be selling yourself short with just one photo/section. i've always been a fan of the 'click-thru' portfolio style like at http://www.melissalyttle.com/sports1.html.
that's my $1.25, hope it helps!
and either your server is slow or your image sizes are huge, i thought some of the sections were blank when they were just loading up.
do you really want to represent each type of photography that you do with just one picture? i've seen a lot of your stuff and think you are an amazing photographer. you might be selling yourself short with just one photo/section. i've always been a fan of the 'click-thru' portfolio style like at http://www.melissalyttle.com/sports1.html.
that's my $1.25, hope it helps!
Attachments
Looks good. Clean layout, not cluttered up. Very professional looking. I agree that you should be able to click on the images on the front page instead of just the text and that each page should open in the same window. I feel that you shouldn't make a link open in a new page unless you are navigating the user away from your site. And it looks good in the OPERA web browser.
I wish my senior pictures were as cool as the kid with the bike. Nice web site too.
Nice and black... real simple (this is a good thing IMHO)
A few things though (same thing I would tell a code hound that was working for my department)
1) Regarding design... on the opening page, remove the black border and let the photos rum flush against eachother (will look more classy and clean)
2) Some of the photos in the other sections of the site have a black border inside a white border that surrounds the photo. I think it would look better without them... especially since they are not even on some of the photos and are not present at all on others.
3) Regarding the code... if I reduce my window in width (in Safari) the right side of the page gets cut off... I assume you have your objects all aligned to right. Either way, its strange to have the right side clipped off.
4) Still dopnt like the fact that the strange font that you use to "sign" your photos has nothing to do with you site design. I think you should either use it in your advertising material or dont use it in you photos.
Dont take any of that stuff the wrong way now... part of what I do from day to day is critique designs and offer input, I'm just trying to help
A few things though (same thing I would tell a code hound that was working for my department)
1) Regarding design... on the opening page, remove the black border and let the photos rum flush against eachother (will look more classy and clean)
2) Some of the photos in the other sections of the site have a black border inside a white border that surrounds the photo. I think it would look better without them... especially since they are not even on some of the photos and are not present at all on others.
3) Regarding the code... if I reduce my window in width (in Safari) the right side of the page gets cut off... I assume you have your objects all aligned to right. Either way, its strange to have the right side clipped off.
4) Still dopnt like the fact that the strange font that you use to "sign" your photos has nothing to do with you site design. I think you should either use it in your advertising material or dont use it in you photos.
Dont take any of that stuff the wrong way now... part of what I do from day to day is critique designs and offer input, I'm just trying to help 
No doubt... nothing worse than a self important art director, right?golgiaparatus said:
Totally kidding, man...
golgiaparatus said:Nice and black... real simple (this is a good thing IMHO)
A few things though (same thing I would tell a code hound that was working for my department)
1) Regarding design... on the opening page, remove the black border and let the photos rum flush against eachother (will look more classy and clean)
2) Some of the photos in the other sections of the site have a black border inside a white border that surrounds the photo. I think it would look better without them... especially since they are not even on some of the photos and are not present at all on others.
3) Regarding the code... if I reduce my window in width (in Safari) the right side of the page gets cut off... I assume you have your objects all aligned to right. Either way, its strange to have the right side clipped off.
4) Still dopnt like the fact that the strange font that you use to "sign" your photos has nothing to do with you site design. I think you should either use it in your advertising material or dont use it in you photos.
Not taking anything the wrong way, thats why I asked.
Im gonna have to talk to my coding man, and I like that font! But Ill look into some other stuff.
And I agree with the sentiment about the picture linking from the front, thats what I originally planned but dont know how to set the table up. Im waiting for my web man on that.
Lets see what else.. pretty much good ideas everywhere, Ill keep it all in mind.
Oh and Cory. thanks for the compliments, but I do have galleries, they just arent that obvious, look for the more link in the gallery. I gotta figure how to make that more obvious as well.
D
J
JRB
Guest
Why are there no naked or bikini clad chicks in the gallery???
I am also having the problem shown in the attached image. I am browsing w/IE 6 and firefox 0.8. I also think the images should link out, and it should be more obvious how to open the "gallery". I barely saw the "More" link on top of the photo. otherwise I like the looks of it.
OH! Dont make me rip your pantone matched matched ass into a rusty 1970s kluge... I'll foil stamp my name into your forehead sucka!Full Trucker said:
I just took a look at your code, and I gotta say your code guy did some weird stuff.
1. Why is the main image/images in a iframe? Why have 2 pages of code, when this page is so simple? Only 1 html document is needed for this page.
2. Why did he use non-breaking spaces to seperate your section links, instead of using a table? This is a really poor way of trying to format elements on a page.
3. When I resize my browser, it cuts off the left side of your page. I'm not sure why its doing this, but I think the iframe has something to do with it. Attached is a screenshot of what I'm talking about.
Also, I noticed that the image of the guy with the "SBC" shirt has the label "Seniors" above him. Is this "seniors" as in seniors in highschool or seniors as in senior citizens? I at first assumed senior citizens, but I guess I'm wrong...
1. Why is the main image/images in a iframe? Why have 2 pages of code, when this page is so simple? Only 1 html document is needed for this page.
2. Why did he use non-breaking spaces to seperate your section links, instead of using a table? This is a really poor way of trying to format elements on a page.
3. When I resize my browser, it cuts off the left side of your page. I'm not sure why its doing this, but I think the iframe has something to do with it. Attached is a screenshot of what I'm talking about.
Also, I noticed that the image of the guy with the "SBC" shirt has the label "Seniors" above him. Is this "seniors" as in seniors in highschool or seniors as in senior citizens? I at first assumed senior citizens, but I guess I'm wrong...
pixelninja said:
haha, thats what you get when I take some of his code and try to make a whole site of it. I got impatient and figured, hey how hard can it be
: He took a look at it this afternoon and said what the #@()*@#$ did you do?? Good point on the senior bit...
thanks for taking the time to show me how really incompetent I am
I like it
J
JRB
Guest
It does look good, but about the chicks???
I do like:
-The clean, simple layout
-The great photography
-I actually like the new browser windows, I'm one of these weird people that hates using the "back" button, so I open things in new windows all the time (or, tabs, as in the case of Mozilla)
I don't like:
-The fact that you have to click on the little pieces of text to move around - both on the main page, and to get to subsequent galleries
-The lack of skimpily clothed girls
-The clean, simple layout
-The great photography
-I actually like the new browser windows, I'm one of these weird people that hates using the "back" button, so I open things in new windows all the time (or, tabs, as in the case of Mozilla)
I don't like:
-The fact that you have to click on the little pieces of text to move around - both on the main page, and to get to subsequent galleries
-The lack of skimpily clothed girls
derekpearson said:
if it was my site:
make the home page images clickable
I'd get rid of the pop up window when you hit "more"
I'd put more outside of the window / keep in the same spot for all catagories
and is it sized for 800 x 600 ? if so screw them make it for 1027 x 768
Sorry, didn't realize this was your html work. I tried to be nice! Really, I did!derekpearson said:haha, thats what you get when I take some of his code and try to make a whole site of it. I got impatient and figured, hey how hard can it be
He took a look at it this afternoon and said what the #@()*@#$ did you do?? Good point on the senior bit...
thanks for taking the time to show me how really incompetent I am
hahapixelninja said:Sorry, didn't realize this was your html work. I tried to be nice! Really, I did!
Ok, I took most of the suggestions to heart, take a look now. Its still in progress but its changed now.
www.derekpearson.com
D
Derek, I hate to say it, but I think I've found a serious navigation flaw in your site. In a nutshell, you've disabled your back button 
Try this and you'll see what I mean:
Select a section. Click through a few images. Now, click the Back button. Does it take you back to the last image you looked at? NO! It takes you back to the last html/php page you were on! This, coupled with the fact that there are no thumbnails, makes it incredibly hard to go through your images. Let's say you like the 4th sports image, but you just clicked on it and went to the 5th. You should be able to click the back button to get back to the 4th, but you can't. You go back to the previous .php page, then you have to re-scroll through your images again to find the one you like.
I love the image of the rider steaming on the side of the trail. Its awesome. BUT, once I clicked it and moved on, it took me 37 mouse clicks to get back to it!
I'd talk to your code guy about this if I were you. This isn't good.
I'm using IE 6 on Windows2000.
Try this and you'll see what I mean:
Select a section. Click through a few images. Now, click the Back button. Does it take you back to the last image you looked at? NO! It takes you back to the last html/php page you were on! This, coupled with the fact that there are no thumbnails, makes it incredibly hard to go through your images. Let's say you like the 4th sports image, but you just clicked on it and went to the 5th. You should be able to click the back button to get back to the 4th, but you can't. You go back to the previous .php page, then you have to re-scroll through your images again to find the one you like.
I love the image of the rider steaming on the side of the trail. Its awesome. BUT, once I clicked it and moved on, it took me 37 mouse clicks to get back to it!
I'd talk to your code guy about this if I were you. This isn't good.
I'm using IE 6 on Windows2000.
Yeah, in viewing the source it uses a java image scrolling deal, where clicking the image doesn't actually bring up a new page, it just changes the image displayed on the current page. So in clicking "back" on your browser, it has no page to go back to except the main site page.
If there were forward and backward buttons, it would fix this, instead of only being able to go forward..
If there were forward and backward buttons, it would fix this, instead of only being able to go forward..
I'd call this more of a band-aid than a true fix. Yes, nav buttons would help, but if someone hits the browser Back button, the problem will still be there. A combination of back/forward buttons plus thumbnails would be a better band-aid, but I still think that a different solution than the javascript is necessary.binary visions said:
J
JRB
Guest
I still didn't see any chicks in bikinis. 
loco-gringo said:I still didn't see any chicks in bikinis.
