From: Dave Rose (cactuscowboy@bresnan.net)
Date: 10/20/03-11:22:19 PM Z
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Nelson" <emanmb@yahoo.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: Galina's website
> Hmmm, I thought it was exquisitely done, the dots make
> me wonder "what happens when I click here?" some of
> the music sooked but u can't please everyone...
> Hey, here's a button that says "sound off/on". but I
> reloaded the site and the music (to me)
> changed/improved as well as quotes at the bottom.
>
> there's a lot of depth to that site w/multitudes of
> layers that, like the details in a photograph, beg to
> be explored and I just scratched the surface. I
> appreciate the unusual interface but best to view
> after clearing the cache etc. and prevent lockups. u
> can't browse all day and then just wander in there and
> hope your browser can handle it...you have to be
> "prepared"
"clearing the cache"?! What utter nonsense are you talking about? I can
browse 500 websites with no problems whatsoever, then open Galina's website
and my computer locks up tight. That's a real problem. It's admirable that
you've arrived at a solution to this problem and are "prepared". The
suggestion that I need to 'tune up' my computer just to view a poorly
designed website is absurd. If a website cannot be viewed on IE, then
something is seriously wrong with that site.
Before my computer locked up, I clicked on a spinning dot and waited over
three minutes for a half dozen thumbnail sized photos to download. I'm on a
fast cable connection. On the typical dial up connection that would likely
be a thirty minute download. Maybe you've got all the time and patience in
the world to stare at a computer screen and wait. I don't.
> sure, some folks prefer simple web site design and
> their work mirrors the need for simple presentation.
> this work, fits into this presentation, tableau,
> _______ (insert whatever artyfarty buzzword u wanna
> use.)
Please spare us the condescending attitude. I'll make the argument that
excellent photography does not need clever gimmicks, music, and tricky
website design to hold the viewer's attention.
> sites like this make me envious of those who know how
> to work w/flash. they invoke a sense of mystery that
> there may be something interesting/weird/cool/gross or
> whatever behind the next button.
If the imagery itself cannot adequately convey that sense of mystery, is
flash being used as a crutch?
I'm glad that you got something positive out of this website. When my
computer crashes, as it did accessing this site, my reaction is immediate
and very negative. When I visit a photographer's website, I want to see
photographs. I don't want to be assaulted with lame-a$$ music when I've
already got music playing on my stereo. I don't want to suffer through
lengthy, interminable downloads. I don't want to be insulted by a confusing
array of spinning buttons. The extraneous BS on Galina's website does
nothing but turn me off. Just show me the photos without the annoying
distractions!
> there's nothing bad or rude about this site at all.
> w/high bandwidth connections becoming so commonplace
> it's the future of web sites in general to put in as
> much content as possible out there and use that to
> help create some kind of feeling that
> accompanies/compliments the work instead of the
> utilitarian variety of plop, plop, here it is.
> eric
> http://www.eman-photo.com/
It's totally rude and bad to design a site that cannot possibly be viewed
with a dial up connection. Even with a fast cable connection this website
is hostile and difficult to view. You may think that the future of web
sites is "as much content as possible". I disagree. There's a lot to be
said for simplicity. KISS!
Best regards,
Dave in Wyoming
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 11/05/03-09:22:18 AM Z CST