RE: website finally up

Kate,
I think the splash page is a generational thingy. I know a younger
generation expects web pages to do something, so they always click on
an image. Older, more "orderly" minds seek a more direct and sensible
(?) navagation. I remember back a few years when all the rage were
"games" like Riven and Myst (and an earlier proto-game, Freak Show)
had absolutely no navagation hints at all... you simply clicked
throughout the scene until something happened, which set up a set of
functional expectations for later navagation. I thought it was really
wacky at the time, but my (much) younger friends thought it sublime.

Also another self-styled guru David Spiegel thought intro or 'splash'
pages were esential to introduce a well designed web presence.
(warning, this is from memory) examples from his old, now inactive
website are at
http://www.killersites.com/killerSites/2-sites/index.html

Darryl Baird

-----Original Message-----
From: Kate M [mailto:kateb@paradise.net.nz]
Sent: Tue 9/6/2005 6:05 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: RE: website finally up
 
I realize that I have offended by having a "splash page" - but is it
really all that bad????
www.katemahoneyphoto.co.nz

Comments???
Kate

-----Original Message-----
From: George L Smyth [mailto:glsmyth@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 September 2005 1:20 a.m.
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: website finally up

I would also recommend not having a splash page. When I went to the
site I saw the splash page and then left. When I came back to these
messages I saw that someone had seen images, so I went back and
realized that I had to click again to go to the actual site. I would
recommend just sending people to the content, or at least tell them
that they need to click once again (note the third comment on the page
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530_comments.html - Jakob Nielsen is
the expert on website usability).

Cheers -

george

--- Clay <wcharmon@wt.net> wrote:

> Loris,
>
> Thanks for that piece of information. I have a big monitor, so my
> screen real estate is generous, and that did not even occur to me. I

> will see what I can do to fix it.
>
> Clay
> On Sep 6, 2005, at 3:15 AM, Loris Medici wrote:
>
> > Site and Photos are beatiful except: I have a screen resolution of

> > 1024x768 and your site doesn't fit on my monitor even when
explorer
> > window is "zoomed" (with F11). It's not neat to force guests to
> > scroll left/right to let them see the menu or other thumbnails.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Loris.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Clay [mailto:wcharmon@wt.net]
> > Sent: 06 EylYl 2005 Salõ 01:51
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> > Subject: website finally up
> >
> >
> > Dear list people,
> >
> > My recent show opening has forced me out of my state of electronic

> > torpor, and I finally have the beginnings of a web site. I would
> > appreciate any feedback as to look and feel issues, load times and

> > general aesthetics. I have two of my easiest-to-capture groupings
of
> > photos up already, and I will be adding more later
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Clay
> >
> > www.clayharmon.net
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Handmade Photographic Images - http://www.GLSmyth.com
DRiP Investing - http://DRiPInvesting.org

        
                
______________________________________________________
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date:
2/09/2005
 
-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/91 - Release Date:
6/09/2005