Website redesign - thoughts?

Thanks, yes, I've only usually done as much javascript as required, ie, some Jquery back in my PHP/Wordpress days.

I'm now using JAMstack with Gatsby and loving it™.

I don't like Bootstrap at all. It's bringing a sledgehammer to kill a mosquito lol.

This site scores all 100s on Google Lighthouse, it loads fast, with less than 1sec paints. I've never been able to get that kind of performance from anything using Bootstrap.

I have no worries about image theft. But, if I was, there is nothing that you can do to prevent image theft other than not putting the image online. No matter what other techniques you use, will not deter thieves. It will only hamper your audience by removing their normal capabilities, something I strongly feel against doing.

Thanks, yes.. that was my thoughts exactly. You only get a limited amount of time on a page with a visitor. I try to make it so the visitor can see as much as they like and view more by digging further. Its kind of the best of both worlds in my opinion.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18982908
And your commentary, John, doesn't come across as very fun or lighthearted
.

Todd, I very much like the "fun" approach. I am rather tired of reading so many "about" pages that are straightforward, serious, and professional. . It's just the same crap over and over and over again .... only the names are changed.

Your decision to mock traditional professionalism and present something unexpected and brash instead is a great decision and makes me think, "I like this guy!"

.

I think the problem is that the "main galleries" aren't named. . The viewer doesn't know what types of images will be in each one. . I don't want to explore a website - I want to go right to whatever it is I am looking for or researching. . I want to know specifically what subject matter I am going to be seeing before I click on a gallery.

I would make sure that all 300+ images are categorized into specific types, and that each image is placed into a gallery with a name that lets the viewer know what he/she will be seeing once he/she clicks on that gallery.

Perhaps one "miscellaneous" gallery is okay for those images that don't really fit into any specific category, but I would try to keep this to an absolute minimum. . Perhaps just don't even include any image that doesn't fit neatly into a given category.

.

Very valid points. I've re-conjiggered things a bit on the menu to try and make it more clear. If you refresh, hopefully you'll see the newer version with revised labels, swapped order of the menus, with the main 10 galleries on top.

I've also set the default gallery to the gallery 1 (which is actually the same as the popular/favorites gallery) and will change popular/favs to another subject matter altogether. I think that should help clear up some of the confusion. You'll now land in Gallery 1 when clicking Galleries menu item. You'll be viewing the pop/fav category (since I want everyone visiting the site for the first time to see my best stuff first).

I used to have all of this in a Wordpress DB.. so I was able to reduce any image to a series of galleries by tag, category, date, etc... which is nice, but so much overhead just for that capability.

This is a flat file system based by directory. So I just create a folder of images and voila, I have a new gallery. Very basic, but also very simple.

I have a blog setup for this site too, but haven't turned it live yet. The blog will be posts that will have tags, categories, dates, etc.. so eventually I'll have the abilities that you propose.

And by the way, I am working on(or have implemented) several of the changes suggested in this thread... I am creating test variations and will be sending split traffic to these variations and then I can see which one performs better.

I highly recommend anyone that doesn't use Googles split testing capabilities, to learn to do so. We all have ideas on what works and doesn't... but in the end, traffic patterns and analytics don't lie. They always tell the truth and that is how I design everything now.

Much of what I have designed is based on this principle. It really helps remove the "feelings" part of the equation.

Thanks again everyone.

I know you made changes, but it is still confusing.

I am still seeing galleries that are numbered, instead of only having galleries with names that tell me what the subject matter is.

Yeah I totally get what you’re saying. Just not sure what to do yet. As my blog posts get populated, I’ll have galleries specific to each subject matter by tag. For these are now just image dumps, essentially.

I can add maybe another 1 or 2 themed galleries, but after that I’d struggle to classify enough images to warrant their own galleries... and yet, I’d be leaving out a lot of work I’ve done. I’ve already culled and culled... and have about 350 images that I want public.

I plan to get all of my individual “image info” pages back eventually, which will have all of the info that anyone would desire, captions, gps, exit, etc...

I had this before with WP, but as I said I am retooling my skill set and want to do things without requiring WP going forward.

I've adjusted some of the animation timings and I've set the about page animations to only play once, and I've removed the scroll-exit animations.

That should smooth things out a good bit, I hope.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #18982934
Yeah I totally get what you’re saying. Just not sure what to do yet. As my blog posts get populated, I’ll have galleries specific to each subject matter by tag. For these are now just image dumps, essentially.

I can add maybe another 1 or 2 themed galleries, but after that I’d struggle to classify enough images to warrant their own galleries... and yet, I’d be leaving out a lot of work I’ve done. I’ve already culled and culled... and have about 350 images that I want public.

I plan to get all of my individual “image info” pages back eventually, which will have all of the info that anyone would desire, captions, gps, exit, etc...

I had this before with WP, but as I said I am retooling my skill set and want to do things without requiring WP going forward.

Part of this I still think needs to be fixed by changing your presentation even if in some ways the approach is the same. Davesrose gave a suggestion which basically built on my own.

If you have tagging for each image asset in your "library" (instead of 10 main galleries) then you can give the user the ability to easily select what aspects they want to include in a custom filter.

I meant that your animations make your site seem sluggish. You mention adjusting animations now. When I try to view the site now, the page animations seem even slower when first loading. They're faster when they get saved in cache....but IMO they're not necessary. A visitor already should know where they are going by the navigation.

My background is art, and have gotten more into coding. Working with any team project, you quickly have to learn Bootstrap! It can be a pain to have so many containers of classes, but Bootstrap does have better core design features as well as cross browser normalization.

Not sure I understand. I have yet to see any slow animations on any device other than one that is very old or has malware running on it. The animations are completely rendered in CSS and thus have nothing to do with cache. So I am not sure. Which animations are you referring to? I assume the intro black fade, with the page title? I do have those set a bit longer, as they have several purposes... they are for dramatic effect, they help to discern which page you’re on, and they help to disguise the loading process by hiding the page assembly. They are set for 1 sec. and even then, they are animating opacity, so they start to reveal in less time. They are also not set to block the page, so you can scroll through them if your in a hurry.

Ah bootstrap...I know all about Bootstrap, believe me. I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole, honestly. It’s just the direction that the web is moving. It’s still used in large team projects but it’s considered mostly legacy now. Bootstrap is usually for designers who don’t know css very well, or for teams that are trying to crank out volume.

I’ve worked in the industry since 99, with large Fortune 500 sites, small Indy firms, freelance, you name it. I’ve seen tech come and go. Used most every framework, css, and platform that’s been around at this point.

PHP based sites with large frameworks like bootstrap are dying and in my opinion, will not be relevant in less than 5 years. Probably mush faster than that. I believe JAMstack will slowly be taking over. That’s the direction I’m working towards.

Not trying to sound stand off-fish... sorry...

I’m just mean that my goal and objectives might be different than some others here. My take on the animations is this... this is not a site like POTN or any site that you’d visit more than once. It is a portfolio type site and meant to have impact more than reusability. I fully expect most visitors to never return, or at most, very infrequently. I just want to make an impact and a memorable experience. I don’t won’t bookmarks and star/favoriting features, etc.. just want slick brochureware type thing, if that makes sense?

This is a different take on sites that I normally work with professionally, so I am intending to have fun with it and be creative. I do intend to lose the transitions and what not on pages like the blog where it would slow things down and be pointless.

Oh, and I am running an AB test on transitions vs no transitions. The data isn’t conclusive(haven’t got a large enough pool yet), so I can’t prove either conclusion yet, but that’s why split testing things like this is so important. A place I worked at a couple of years ago, required every change we made, be split tested and whichever method performed better, won.

I love working this way... prove it or lose it. Helps take feelings out of the equation.

.
Thanks for explaining what your goals and objectives are. . That's helpful. . It's hard to give critique when we don't know exactly what it is you are attempting to create.
.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #18983340
It is a portfolio type site and meant to have impact more than reusability. I just want to make an impact and a memorable experience. I don’t won’t bookmarks and star/favoriting features, etc.. just want slick brochureware type thing, if that makes sense?

.
I can understand why you would want to create that type of site, and provide that type of experience for your site's visitors. . It makes sense, especially because it will be refreshingly different than the photo-viewing sites that most of us are accustomed to.

As I have explained before, my primary suggestion is to ensure that visitors can go quickly to the image(s) they are looking for, without having to look through other images en route to their target subject matter. . If I were specifically searching the web for images of rusty old cars, I would not be willing to look through images of night skies and landscapes and sailboats and tractors. . I would want to get directly to the old car images without having to look at anything else along the way.

The "All Cars" gallery on your site does a great job of this! . That is exactly the kind of thing people need in order for their time on a website to be worthwhile.

.

Colorblinded wrote in post #18983053
Part of this I still think needs to be fixed by changing your presentation even if in some ways the approach is the same. Davesrose gave a suggestion which basically built on my own.

If you have tagging for each image asset in your "library" (instead of 10 main galleries) then you can give the user the ability to easily select what aspects they want to include in a custom filter.

Yes, I totally understand... and I’ll be working back towards that. I had this functionality in my last version https://web.archive.or​g …s.com/tag/light​-painting/
But I don’t have all of that built out yet with my new cms. So, the galleries now, are just big image dumps basically.

But totally agree... and eventually I’ll have it set back up that way. I just ditched the blog for now as I transition to this new platform.