Hey all, I've just launched the new layout for my website and wondered what you think about it and if you see any errors of some sorts. It's a completely new look and I've changed the navigation of the photogallery so it has categories. If you feel there's something missing, please say so.

Just one thing missing, the link! :)

Yeah... I'd like to see your website... :)

I do like the layout.Your banner is cool too.Like the mousever links. The javascript for thumb popups is kind of slow. Seeing "Image loading" in a small window then opening a larger one may turn some away. I've used that before.No more. Now get some more bike images up.Love em.

Nice work agree with DB about the banner, but the uniform green background makes it look at first glance kinda like the bog-standard homepages you set up with the program on the website for your free webspace from your host... Nice and quick & easy to flip around (but I'm on broadband so that doesn't count). The non-arty pictures (eg. the pic of your camera) could maybe do with just some minor postwork to stop them all looking so... erm... uniform and boring? Even just adding some shadows or something to a couple, so they don't look all the same? Just my opinion tho. Overall? I like it - seen a lot worse! (",) p.s. guys, to get his link : click on his name, go to his gallery and click on the link under any of the pictures. Or cut and paste this : http://picard.sytes.net/

Attached Link: http://picard.sytes.net

Whoops!.. I really must have been ready for bed last night since I forgot the link! Thanks to those that took the effort to go look for it :) dB: What do you mean by that the script is kinda slow? They only thing that can be slow is the downloading of the actual photo I think :) I am thinking about replacing the image loading picture with an animating picture so it doesn's look as static and the user thinks there's actually something happening. Jordy: I like uniform backgrounds. Having stuff in the background too often makes it too busy for the eyes. I used to have a dark blue background and wanted another color. Nothing standard about this page, all coded by hand :P I'll look into the "product photo's". Thanks for the comments...

Looks good and I like the uniform background, and agree that having stuff in them can be too distracting. I have only few of comments and it is just my personal opinion (pet peve) call it what you will. 1. I dont like frames and they can cause issues with older browsers and some search engines cant read them properly. 2. Some pages have a DTD's and some not, this may cause different browsers to interpret the code differently, put simply a DTD tells the browser how the code is written, so the browser uses that information to display the page how you intend it to be seen. 3. The thumb images dont have an alt tag, this helps browsers cache the images and also helps search engines with page rankings. Also a browser without java support (and believe it or not there quite a few)would not be able to load the images, you could add a noscript tag that would inform the user that they need to install a java plug-in. Having said all that it does look consistent in the latest versions of IE, Netscape, Mozilla and Opera, and the overall feel of the site is very user friendly and pleasing to the eye.

That's some usefull comments there LP.

1. Way back (around 8 years ago) I would have agreed with you and I didn't have any frames in my site then (even sported a "this is a no frames website" logo :) But these day which browser doesn't support frames? Even the somewhat outdated ones have support for that. To people using browsers that don't do frames I say, get with it and upgrade to a decent browser, I don't ask the latest technology around. Maybe lynx doesn't work properly, but this is a photography website not meant for text browsers. Trick with searchengines is to layout your index file properly :) and use a robots.txt. Still have to finetune those last 2 (for the SE).

2. Point taken. I'll put DTD's in all files. This was simply an oversight :)

3. Alt names. Usefull for hovering and I'll probably add them now. So many different search engines and so many different ways of indexing your site. Used to be META tags.. now they ignore them. I use javascript, not java (yes, they're 2 different things). But your note about informing them they need javascript is valid. added to the todo list. Just to be a pain I checked your site. It doesn't state you need javascript enabled when I turn javascript off. your noscript tags are empty ;) Well maybe not to be a pain, but interested in how you had implemented it.

Thanks for taking the time to look this deeply into it.

Message edited on: 10/10/2004 16:47

Your point about my own noscript tags is valid, in truth I turned them off as I was having issues with the validation of html 4.01, and I was going to look into it, however I am at present rebuilding my site using xml, so I have decided to leave it alone, there will be bigger issues for me using java with xml so I will probably concentrate on that. As my site has got rather large it has been necessary to re-design it to make it more manageable, so I have gone back to a table layout using a dynamic web template (very user friendly) and makes it more consistent across various screen sizes. I mean no offence about frames, it is more or less a pet peeve of mine, I just dont like them, I do agree with you that it is much less of an issue these days, like you say these things are all relative, and the meta is a thing of the past, and as far as I am aware only one engine uses them now (AltaVista I think) The alt tag is a controversial point, weather you use them or not is entirely up to the individual, but if you wish to validate your html you must have them. The only downside it that it is very time consuming. I have been told that it helps with search engine ranking, but I dont know if that is 100% true. Each search service works differently so it is impossible to say what is the best way of doing things, your site seems to work well in all the browsers, so the hard work is done. The no script line has to be like this, I have added spaces in the start, end tags and to the noscript so it doesnt mess up the forum (hopefully) < no script > < p >Edit this line to suit your needs</ p > </ no script > LP

Attached Link: http://www.yourhtmlsource.com/javascript/basicjavascript.html

Look at the bottom of this page for the noscript html For some reason the forum wont let me post it properly!

Thanks :) I'm no stranger to HTML and javascript/java (my graduate project was in java). I just was curious as to what you'd write on the screen, not how it was implemented. So I've adjusted the welcome screen now. Added the noscript tag and DTD there. I'll adjust the rest tomorrow. The problem with HTML is that it's not strict enough IMHO, but that may be because I'm a software engineer and am used to work with strict syntax. HTML lets you get too sloppy too easily (kinda like VB, but worse) :D No frames and template pages work with ASP or PHP generated stuff, but with static pages it's just too much work of you want to change one thing and have to edit 1000 files just to add a menu item for instance. Anyhow. I aim to be as browser independant as possible. So far, judging from your comments I've succeeded in that at least :) Sites demanding I use IE and IE only lose me as a visitor unless I really really need to be there. I'm a mozilla user myself. /me makes a mental note to explore your site though.. for the photographs. I'm planning a trip in my bike to Schotland next year so that'll wet my appetite so to speak :)

I seem to remember that you were a software engineer as I think that I wrote some stuff the last time you posted but couldnt remember if it was your site or not. I put the java stuff just incase you didnt know, probably most if not all of what you know is way beyond my knowledge (ouch it hurt saying that LOL) I know all about having to update 1000s of files to add a menu item and that is why I have turned to templates. I will work for me. I think any good web designer must aim at as many browsers as possible. No one in their right mind would have a shop and say you can only come in if you have a blue shirt on, which is basically what you do if you only allow one browser, sadly that is why I have to have all the browsers installed. I hope you enjoy your virtual tour of Scotland on my site, if you want any info on places that I have visited feel free to drop me a mail either from my site of send me an IM. There are a few good sites for info: http://www.rampantscotland.com http://www.scotland-info.co.uk and http://www.henniker.org.uk is worth a look he is a local photographer Plus of course good old Google LP

That's what I meant to say.The image loads really slow.Personally I like images to pop up intsantly from a thumbnail.So far the one I found to be fastest is on a page I made for a tribute to some of the photographers here at http://www.dbgrafix.com/photography/artists.html

The only way to make it instant is to load all images when the page opens. My animals page has currently 18 photo's at an average of 100kb each full size. That would mean loading 1.8megs in the background. I'm not going to do that. I've looked at the site you gave, but the pictures load just as fast as mine there's nothing instant about those either. Only difference is, you show the loading of the picture and I load it in the background. The speed is the same. Maybe if feels longer because you're looking at a static loading image. That's why I'm going to replace it with an animation. There's always room for improvements, but you can't make everyone happy :P

Well you are right there. I have tried many times to please even dial up users,but then I think what for. If it is an art site with a reason for viewing images I'd like to make them look as good as I can. Plus I like playing with html and trying new things.I also checked the speed loading yours against mine and they are the same.Just seemed slow because I could real the words Image loading. About your background.I like it because it reminds me of British Racing Green and it accents your banner well.

Actually, the background color is the color the owl in the banner was set against (some foliage). This also made it easy to blend the own against it :)

I LOVE the hippo! Just tooo much fun!