Complete Website Overhaul!

I didn't even think about keeping my old site\template online to show a comparison of before and after, so I will just show the "new".

I redid everything. Completely new colors, new font, new style, new branding, EVERYTHING.

I know flash is generally frowned upon here, but I hope you can look passed that and look at the actual content of the site and critique me on that

http://www.photosbybra​dley.com/

I am still working on my blog - trying to get it to match my website.

Let me know what you think!

I've seen the setup or program used to make your website before and don't have a favorable view of its result.

Your "information" pages have such a small area of text that it forces users to do a bunch of scrolling. Having the reader scroll a page is seen as a negative as far as web page design goes because it makes the reader have to do something just to see everything on that page.

First, Flash is not "bad" it's just been used poorly.
But most photographers don't need flash unless they have a specific need for certain effects.

About your site, the font choice and background colors could be bit more "wow"
It feels very generic and it doesn't match your nice photos. Sorry if I'm being too honest.

I'm thinking about writing a post about successful websites (I need a revamp of my old site as well), I think many photographers could need some guidance and/or tips.

Too 'flash'y. Menu elements zooming around, a big wait when you open the page... the site function is supposed to seamlessly showcase the content, not distract from it.

Well, I like it. It is a bit "flashy", but I think it does what it needs to, and definitely looks like you put some time and effort into it, and have talent. Don't take the suggestions and comments here the wrong way, you're asking fellow photographers and as you know, it's in our nature to spot problems first, and then appreciate the work second.

The one thing I would suggest is to drop the "17/18 year old photographer" thing. Firstly, anyone spending a good amount on photography is going to question putting that investment in a teenagers' hands. People normally advertise their years of experience, not their lack of experience. It borders on unprofessional, and makes people take you less seriously. I know it's something you're proud of (and I think you should be!) but saying "I'm only 18 and look what I can do" is going to instantly turn people off.

BrandonSi wrote in post #11307122
The one thing I would suggest is to drop the "17/18 year old photographer" thing. Firstly, anyone spending a good amount on photography is going to question putting that investment in a teenagers' hands. People normally advertise their years of experience, not their lack of experience. It borders on unprofessional, and makes people take you less seriously. I know it's something you're proud of (and I think you should be!) but saying "I'm only 18 and look what I can do" is going to instantly turn people off.

Very good point. As I was writing that, I thought just as you are thinking - but I was told that I was just "overthinking" it. But I'm glad someone agrees with my original thought on that whole thing.

May I ask what you guys mean by "too flashy"? Maybe I can try to fix that, if I can define what you guys mean by that;p

Thanks for all of the input, though!

Well, what I meant by too "flashy" was two fold.. A general over-use of Flash as technology can create a cumbersome end-user experience.. Load times, flash version compatibility (I doubt the site works on an iPad/iPhone, etc..).. Secondly (and just my opinion) there should be a balance between presentation and content. Your site (again, IMHO) comes across as being focused on how your images are being presented, rather than letting the images stand for themselves. You don't want too much web site "bling" detracting from the images.

I will admit my design aesthetic tends toward minimalist, so definitely get some other input and don't take my opinion as the final word on anything. We all see and interpret differently, the goal is to strike that delicate balance were most people are presented with an enjoyable viewing experience. Keep in mind the technical level here can be somewhat high, especially in this sub-forum. Run the site by some less computer/photography/d​esign-savvy people and get their input.

BrandonSi wrote in post #11307554
Well, what I meant by too "flashy" was two fold.. A general over-use of Flash as technology can create a cumbersome end-user experience.. Load times, flash version compatibility (I doubt the site works on an iPad/iPhone, etc..).. Secondly (and just my opinion) there should be a balance between presentation and content. Your site (again, IMHO) comes across as being focused on how your images are being presented, rather than letting the images stand for themselves. You don't want too much web site "bling" detracting from the images.

I will admit my design aesthetic tends toward minimalist, so definitely get some other input and don't take my opinion as the final word on anything. We all see and interpret differently, the goal is to strike that delicate balance were most people are presented with an enjoyable viewing experience. Keep in mind the technical level here can be somewhat high, especially in this sub-forum. Run the site by some less computer/photography/d​esign-savvy people and get their input.

Thanks for taking the time to express your opinion\suggestion!
As for the iPhone\iPad compatibility, I do have a mobile version specifically designed for the iPhone and iPad [when one of those devices navigate to my site, it goes to the mobile version of the site].
And now that Android devices support flash, my site is compatible on nearly every mobile device [on my Droid X, the site works surprisingly well for it being complete flash].

I also agree with having the photos stand for themselves - I will try to work some more on "fixing" that, or making it a little more basic [I guess would be the word].

Thanks again for your comment\suggestion!

No problem! Glad you had the mobile angle covered.. Go Android!!

By flash-y I meant too much obvious use of Flash and similar technology. If you read through the related thread (might be in photography chat) about Steve Jobs saying why Apple doesn't support flash, you'll see that one of the reasons is that mobile devices don't have the concept of mouseover. So, relying on that for navigation of your site might be limiting. At the very least, make sure that mouseovers are also clickable.

But mostly your menu animation was just too gimmicky. When I tried to find the content, I was thinking, "Whoa! What's going on with this menu?!?!" That's the first impression.

EDIT: I see you have the mobile thing covered. Missed that reply.

AntonLargiader wrote in post #11307691
By flash-y I meant too much obvious use of Flash and similar technology. If you read through the related thread (might be in photography chat) about Steve Jobs saying why Apple doesn't support flash, you'll see that one of the reasons is that mobile devices don't have the concept of mouseover. So, relying on that for navigation of your site might be limiting. At the very least, make sure that mouseovers are also clickable.

But mostly your menu animation was just too gimmicky. When I tried to find the content, I was thinking, "Whoa! What's going on with this menu?!?!" That's the first impression.

EDIT: I see you have the mobile thing covered. Missed that reply.

Thanks for the clarification -
By "menu animation" do you mean the way that some of them slide up? How they are highlighted? The colors\shades when clicked/highlighted?

Sorry for the questions, I just would like to understand everyone's suggestion\comment :s

Tumeg wrote in post #11313757
...
By "menu animation" do you mean the way that some of them slide up? How they are highlighted? The colors\shades when clicked/highlighted?

Yes. All of that.

The reason for having the banding full-width for the submenus isn't obvious. Having some items be submenus and some not is a bit mysterious (normally there are cues like arrows to indicate that). And just too much animation overall.