I just did a major re-vamp of the images and the organization of my personal online static gallery (the blog got a new look/feel back in December). I'd appreciate feedback from folks, particularly on the Portraiture category and the Human Figure category - do they hang together well? Do I have too many in any one grouping? Would it be better to separate the color and black-and-white portraits onto separate groupings or do they flow well mixed?
The static gallery is located at: www.theflyingcamera.com
The image sequences are excellent, it's something that not enough people give importance to.
I'm not sure about how well the way the bottom row of thumbnails works, at first I found it disconcerting, unexpected, I think it's the way the main image resizes.
Interesting website Scott, great images.
The Portrait category looks thin compared to the others, that is, for Travel and Human Figure you have sub-categories, but not for the Portraits. After looking at the others I kind of expect more choices in Portraits. That said, I'm not sure it makes sense to "invent" a sub-category to make it consistent, so I am conflicted.
Compared to the others, there are a lot of pieces in the Portrait section. What if you removed "Charles, Column Capitol" and "Charles, in Henry's Garden"? At least on my monitor, the color on Column Capital is a little off, and Henry's Garden is a little weak compared to the others (IMHO).
That would bring the number of images there a little closer to the other sections.
As for mixing the color and B&W, I'm fine with that, and I think the transition into the color works well with "Dorothy Kloss". The transition back out is a little jarring to my eyes, but I think it's handled well because of the dynamics of the sitters' facing each other and the setting change.
I like the work.
Last edited by bdial; 01-12-2014 at 08:16 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Ian- that's just the way the website works. I'm using the Visualserver template - I don't remember if there is another option for the navigation. I can play around with the settings and see if there is a way to dock the scroll at the bottom to keep it always visible.
Barry - I'm certainly open to editing the images and their sequence. I know what you mean about the menu headings - to have no subcategories seems a little off compared to the others, but I don't know that "portraits" really needs a subdivision. I could in theory do a "color" and "black-and-white" subcategory, or a "studio" and "environmental", but then the categories wouldn't balance well in terms of numbers of each.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Nice images and site. Regarding the portraiture dilemma you could create a sub-category Studio-Portraits like you did with your figure work and a sub category environmental portrait or some such. But I personaly don't think that it's that important to have an equal amount of sub categories for each genre.
But I'm not a fan of the 18% grey background. To me, the background is the same as a mat over a printed photograph. Would you use that grey as a mat color? If so, I'll just shut up.
If you click on the top level "Portraiture", you see one image. It may not be obvious to all who visit the site that it's a link. That, of course, will be moot when you have a 2nd subcategory.
In "About", I think you need to separate the paragraphs with increased line spacing for easier reading.
As to mixing color and b/w photos, I find it a bit visually jarring (which may be my limitation). BUT - I think the choice of b/w vs. color in an image is an artistic decision and I don't feel it's my place to interfere. (But you did ask so I answered.)
I use a small laptop (13.3" screen). The layout works well on my screen - not all do. It did not work quite as well on my 7" tablet. The spot to "drag up" to navigate to other photos was too small. Of course this could just be my browser.
"Far more critical than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know." - Eric Hoffer