Website Design: Flash, HTML or other

I have already went through 2 versions of my web site, which I designed and coded myself (in html, CSS and javascript, big wup!)

I know that Flash allows you to have nice animations and prevents people from right clicking and saving the images on the site (but people can still make a Print Screen if they really want a copy an image from a Flash-based web site) but it takes a long time to load, which is something important for me.

I am wondering whether I should add a flash version of my site to make it look more shiny (Oh! It's animated, wow!) and "professional" or if part of my site should have Flash animations or galleries.

So I'd like to have your input and see what you think and what you did for your web site.

Thanks!

I think either way works. Mine is all HTML with flash galleries. I like HTML because people are used to the way HTML works. (i.e. you can use the Back and Forward buttons on your browser) It's also faster to load. But I've also seen some beautiful and well done flash sites too. I think you can win with any of the above choices.

Whether you go with Flash or HTML, it should always be clean, simple, easy to navigate, and pretty. Slow animated crap while browsing drives people mad... especially me. I can't stand looking at a photo gallery where they put some kind of neat 2 second long transition between each image. Just because you CAN, doesn't mean you should. I'm sure some people love slow animations and transitions... but I'm guessing if a bride has been through 15 photographer web sites, she doesn't want to sit around and watch a 2 second page flip transition for 50 pictures.

I am a fan of CSS and JS. They're actually very powerful tools and should not be underestimated. Anyway, it is faster to load and saves on your bandwidth. ;D

picturecrazy wrote in post #2597755
Whether you go with Flash or HTML, it should always be clean, simple, easy to navigate, and pretty. Slow animated crap while browsing drives people mad... especially me. I can't stand looking at a photo gallery where they put some kind of neat 2 second long transition between each image. Just because you CAN, doesn't mean you should. I'm sure some people love slow animations and transitions... but I'm guessing if a bride has been through 15 photographer web sites, she doesn't want to sit around and watch a 2 second page flip transition for 50 pictures.

Thanks for your comments. I feel the same here. If you have a look at my site, it is simple, elegant (I think ) and functional. If I choose to go with a Flash web site, it will still have these attributes!

dlphotography wrote in post #2597793
I am a fan of CSS and JS. They're actually very powerful tools and should not be underestimated. Anyway, it is faster to load and saves on your bandwidth. ;D

Agreed! That's why I currently use them! Thanks for your input

I'd like a dual website Ideally, a openign splash page to choose between flash and html. flash wowes customers if their computer will show it.

Right now as is its html with flash galleries, but thats all I know, and have learned that since when I started working on it in april.

Mine is Html with CCS and JS.

I haven't had a complaint yet.
http://i2istudios.com/

another hit against flash is that search engines can't really index flash content.

picturecrazy wrote in post #2598621
another hit against flash is that search engines can't really index flash content.

metadata keywords are your friend. You can also place some text in a splash page up front.

picturecrazy wrote in post #2598621
another hit against flash is that search engines can't really index flash content.

True!

coreypolis wrote in post #2598649
metadata keywords are your friend. You can also place some text in a splash page up front.

It helps, but at the same time, using Flash reduces the number of links you have to your home page from other sections and that is also very important in SEO.

sblais wrote in post #2598673
It helps, but at the same time, using Flash reduces the number of links you have to your home page from other sections and that is also very important in SEO.

I'm not sure I understand this point.

Can you explain what you mean?

People at work sometimes can't see flashed, so I moved back to a totally html based site after a few customers couldn't see the flash galleries.

tim wrote in post #2600263
People at work sometimes can't see flashed, so I moved back to a totally html based site after a few customers couldn't see the flash galleries.

I had similar feedback, but I'm planning on migrating to a flash based site in the future. I figure that if someone wants to view my work enough they will find a suitable place to do so. The pros/cons stack up fairly evenly, but for pure aesthetics, I'm going with flash.

mizuno wrote in post #2599598
I'm not sure I understand this point.

Can you explain what you mean?

SEO (Search Engine Optimization) is very complex and no one knows what algorithm Google et al. use to rank it search results. But, many have spent significant effort to see the effects of certain variables.

When people are searching for a wedding photographer in your area with the keywords you are targetting, you would like them to find your home page (since it should be the entry point to your site). It is still good if they can find any page on your site, but if they could find your home page, it would be a plus, right?

Now people have found that one way Google et al. work is that the number of other web pages linking to your home page helps greatly in increasing your home page's ranking. So if you have 20 pages with a hyperlink directed to your home page, you will be ranked lower than someone who has 1000 pages linking to his page.

The negative thing with Flash is that search engines don't analyse the flash movie content. They skip it entirely. So if your Flash movie contains links in between "flash pages", these links are not considered by search engines. Only links between HTML pages. So using Flash may certainly reduce your ranking with search engines.

Clear as mud?

I'm relatively new at this business, but here's what I have found. I ask each potential client that has called me how they found me. Usually, they do a google or something, but eventually they end up at my web-site. I've had a couple word-of-mouth (would love more of those!). In every case, they have explored my site. And the number one reason they have called - because my personality has shown through in the content.

We all know that being a wedding photographer is all about establishing and building a relationship with the bride and groom. That's usually easier if they first have some idea of who you are. So, regardless of the tools you use, let your personality show through.

One bride mentioned that I had some humor in my site, especially in my short bio. She went on to comment that all the other sites she visited, and didn't contact, were all so dry and busines like. Will that work for every client? Probably not. But then again, I'm not interested in every client. I want to shoot fun couples, those that smile naturally and with little provocation. Are they the easy ones? Sure, but they are also the fun ones.

Did I ramble on a bit. Yeah - oh well.