How is my website?!?!

[aaronseminoff]

Please tell me what You think about my photography website! www.aaronseminoff.com

[tommykjensen]

2 things.

One if You want to use a dropdown menu then at least make it so You don't have to click on go after selecting the section, thats simply one click too many.

Clicking on a thumbnail opens a new window but the photo is not centered. And clicking on the photo inside the new window opens the photo in the original window.

[cmM]

simple website, I like it, easy to navigate.

I agree about the dropdown menu however.

Oh, and since most your stuff if B&W, I'd use a more colorful background to contrast that.

[meow]

Actually, it's considered bad practice not to have a Go button. Such a form doesn't work with keyboard for instance.

To get around the problems JavaScript causes you could document.write() the whole select thing and provide normal links within noscript tags for ppl w/o JS and search engines. Other than that, the site is fine. :)

[NJDrew]

The site looks good. I also noticed you are using quite a bit of javascript. Some things to keep in mind:

1st) your main page uses js to create a rollover effect for your images. This function causes the browser to refresh/reload every couple of seconds. This could be a problem for dial-up users who have slow connections to your site.

2nd) The popup large view of the thumbs might be blocked by popup blockers.

3rd) SideKicks dont support javascript, so those people may not be able to view your page.

Other than the tech stuff, I like how simple it is layed out and the easy of use. Nice page all around.

[mdude85]

I wouldn't worry about JS issues too much... current estimates are that about 1-3% of internet users regularly have Javascript turned off...if you feel that the amount of work you put into your site to fix Javascript issues are actually worth including the 1-3% of users who turn off JS, then consider doing some revising. This is equivalent to some people having the desire to create a Macromedia Flash-site and a non-Flash site for other users: truth is 98% of internet users have flash installed on their browsers. Or those who provide text links in addition to graphical links. The number of people with graphics turned off on their browsers is very very small. It is up to you to decide whether or not you want to spend time optimizing your site for incredible minorities.




Now the issues with people on dialup might be another consideration -- only about half of American internet users have broadband or some other fast internet connection, and the other half use dialup or another slow connection. Since your images are very small to begin with, I wouldn't worry about the cycling of images too much...but it might be interesting to see what would happen if there was no image cycling.

I tihnk your images are a little small, actually, and the compression on them is pretty bad. I would consider going back to your original pictures, resizing them to something standard (for instance on my website, I resize all my pictures for 640 px on the longest side), and I save at about 70% quality in Photoshop ... it creates images around 70k, which I don't think is too bad for 56k users (10 seconds max).

http://mdude.homeip.net

[mdude85]

Actually, it's considered bad practice not to have a Go button. Such a form doesn't work with keyboard for instance.

To get around the problems JavaScript causes you could document.write() the whole select thing and provide normal links within noscript tags for ppl w/o JS and search engines. Other than that, the site is fine. :)

meow, how many people do you know that don't use mouses on their computers?