Check my Photography Site!

[gragland]

I made this simple flash photography site for someone. Check it out and let me know if you find any mistakes. I think load times are pretty good for whats on it, what do you think? Im interested in if it looks okay at different resolutions on differnet kinds of computers and if there are any glaring mistakes.

One problem i know of is that all the pages can scroll down even if theres nothing to scroll down to. This is becuase all the sections (portrait, wedding, etc...) have to fit on the site. Is there any way around this? I think you will understand when you take a look.

www.sonyaannejosephphotography.com


thanks!

[nuansa]

I waited to load 785kb on a 56k modem. Needless to say, it took forever to d/l your site. Then when i finally got through, I only saw a beige page with site title and nothing else. It seems that you might have a problem

[barry769]

The site loaded fine for me and looks alright. I don't see the point of having a second scrollbar on the budgeting page. Other than that it could use a little more visually, but overall it is a good start.

[JRBT]

Why did you use Flash for this site? It functions like an HTML page, and the 700 some download only take a few seconds for me, but for the average North Western hick - they are probably using dial-up.

[gragland]

nuansa, i dont know why it didnt work for you, ill try to find out.

barry769, the reason i have a second scroll bar on the budgeting section is because i would have to make the height of the movie much higher to fit all the text. Then the other sections would have a lot of empty space at the bottom. How could i get around this?? Maybe i should just make everything html except the photo galleries.

The reason i used flash is becuase i dont know html, and my stepmom wanted a website that worked, and nothing fancy. Maybe i should just make everything html except the photo galleries. I think i know enough html to do that.

But for now i would rather leave it as is. Making html won't cut down much on the size will it??

[barry769]

I think that would be your best bet. It would load a lot easier too

[gragland]

im just gonna leave it as is for now. the load times wouldnt be much faster with html becuase most of the size is due to the pictures (am i right?). is there any way to get around my problem of having empty space at the bottom of each page becuase the movie has to be big enough to fit the content of each section. Some section are not as big so there is an empty space at the bottom that the viewer can sroll down through.

If i could solve this problem then i would not have to put the text in the budgeting section in its own srollbar. Please help??

[nuansa]

Now that my computer is back in business, I had to check your photo site again. Alas, it came out!!! I have no idea why it wasn't working in another computer earlier... the flash player updated and everything seemed fine until the real page loads up.

Anyhow...

The nice photographs will surely sell themselves and your simple layout brings out the beauty in each photograph. However, you should reconsider how the site is put together.

If you decide to stick with flash, you need to break the swf file apart. I get the sense you're new at this, so get a really good book on flash and actionscripting and beef up your knowledge. Loading each section as separate swf files into a main swf file is one option. There are other ways of doing this... consult a book.

If you decide that html may be an easier way to go than learning actionscript in a jiffy... again, get a book on html. It is an extremely easy language to learn! Better yet, spend some $$ on Dreamweaver and let the program do everything for you (well, almost). Then, find javascript for slideshow on the internet to navigate through images.

The above methods would not shrink your site, rather they will split your site to be downloaded by your viewer in increments AS REQUESTED. I assume the site caters to regular folks with dial-up connections, so waiting for a 785kb site will tire them out and eventually drive them away.

A little comment on the writing: you should stick to either first person or third person throughout the site. In "about me" section you wrote in third person. Either change it to "about the artist" (or "photographer" or "profile" or "bio" ...) and change all other writings to third person OR ... well you know what.

Have fun!

[gragland]

thanks for the suggestions!

[ikandi-mac]

this has got to be the most pointless waste of flash time i have ever seen... by all meand learn some html / php it will be alot quciker for you and us

[Grubbel]

Nice images.

But I agree, this is best done in HTML. If you still want to use Flash, break it apart in serveral swf's or load the images in a dynamic way.

[daveglanz]

I agree that the site might be better in HTML/PHP the way it is now, but .... just because your client wants it "simple" doesn't mean it can't be done with Flash.

Look at FK's site of the day:
http://www.davidzaitz.com/
Good example of how Flash can enhance a photo site.

[val2000bg]

Even though I'm with a dial-up connection the site loaded pretty fast.It took about 5-7 minutes.The size is maybe not that big but everyone who visit the site will expect something really cool with a lot of effects.I agree with the others that you should try use HTML and before that you should read some books so you could do your work professional.I wish you a good luck with your futur web sites.

[dyldebus]

haha... yeah go ahead and learn php and redo the site

not very constructive criticism ikandi-mac. Though I agree this should definitely be done in html (no the load times won't decrease, but it will be distributed between each image) I don't think it's necessary to try and learn php if you don't even know html. It will be a dollar sign nightmare.

Just get a hold of dreamweaver and your set... there is a handful of other free software that will do a similar job, but if you're html deficient it's the easiest way to go.

[kelly2shirts]

if you don't want to redo the site, try changing the compression settings for your photos. under the library window go to the jpeg (jpeg right?) and hold down control (i'm on mac) and click on the jpeg. this will pop up a window. scroll to properties and open. in this window you can mess with the compression settings and test them out. don't get to crazy with compression since you do want your photo's to retain good detail. this should help download time a bunch though. check this site below for inspiration. i really like it's simplicity. the work shines.

http://www.erikalarsenphoto.com/

good luck!