View Full Version : Request For Critique Gone Bad.
Blackstar
06-02-2008, 23:44
My honest opinion is it isn't a good site, it looks badly done and unprofessional.
as above, and its hardly a photographic website. and £60 for an A3 print. Wow.
Messiah Khan
07-02-2008, 00:06
Im afraid i have to agree. The design is quite poor and unprofessional. The content and grammar etc is also poor. For example;
Scarlet enjoys working closely with her patrons, or alternatively, she is more than happy, to produce beautiful art, for you, from a simple idea, or request.
Does not read well at all. I would suggest keeping things simple, and if your not happy coding a basic html/css site by hand then have a look at companies that provide online portfolio websites for a small price.
Next to professional copywriting, some skilled graphic design/layout would help too.
I wouldn't worry too much guys. I have a feeling she won't be sticking around. Seems she's posting on a lot of forums and if I had to guess its to try and boost her page rank by having lots of sites link to hers.
http://dpnow.com/forum2/showthread.php?p=28420
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:6SiY9-U2oqQJ:www.thelittlephotoshop.co.uk/forum/index.php%3Fact%3DPrint%26client%3Dprinter%26f%3D1 4%26t%3D2383+www.redintherain.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us&client=firefox-a
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=6430261
http://forum.naature.com/index.php?showtopic=6671&pid=100908&st=0&#entry100908
http://www.tate.org.uk/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=19141
http://www.sculpture.net/community/showthread.php?t=6739
spammier than a can of spam, in a spam pie, cooked in an oven made of spam.
:D:lol::D
barsbyart
07-02-2008, 11:08
Sorry Scarlet, I have to agree about the site layout and grammar.
Re. the images - I think you've got some good ideas but the execution is poor.
Hmmm... Dal, Dal, Dal!!!!
as above, and its hardly a photographic website. and £60 for an A3 print. Wow.
Are you implying that £60 is too much for an A3 print? True I didn't look around to see if that's for a limited-edition print or an open-edition but for the right image in a l-e of (say) 25 and to archival standard I would say £60 not nearly enough!
Of that £60 HM C+E take £9 in VAT and HM Revenue take another £11 in tax so after paying for the ink/paper cost of website, petrol, etc. it doesn't leave much for feeding the kids!
Not everyone's cup of tea I suppose, but I find some of those images very creative. :shrug:
I agree the web site could be lots better.
certainly not backward at coming forward as we say. The whole feel is too OTT for my taste but as always its subjective
scarlet, I suggest looking at gallery 2 and / or coppermine, they're free image gallery systems, gallery 2 even has a fairly sound design (there are templates to choose from, too).
They're likely to simplify and speed up working with your site.
I think she has a love affair with the comma! :D
Well, I personally, and quite honestly, have no idea, what on earth, you, are talking, ab,ou,t,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (typo...)
I forgot, the reasons people seem to complain about the design include these imo:
- navigation: not quite clearly separated from the rest of the content
- colour scheme: the blue of the default links doesn't go well with the background
- layout: as said above, separation could be better. Dividing content into 'boxes' should help somewhat if you still want to do it yourself.
Also, have a look at this: http://www.designvitality.com/blog/2007/07/the-open-source-web-design-toolbox-100-tools-resources-and-template-sources/
You definitely need a proof reader. Personally I would have waited till your site was at least half presentable before spamming it on a whole host of other websites.
You're clearly commatoased.
fraggle101
07-02-2008, 20:50
Lol.. i like the pictures, well, most of em, but most of all i like your sence of humour... :thumbs:
You ARE a spamming Comma junkie.. :lol: Be proud!! Disluxixs fo teh wrold untie!!! :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
I love you Scarlet... :love:
PS, your right, i do appear to be a comma junkie and acting upon your advice, i have reduced my beloved squigly marks by 45% , with support from friends and family, who have convinced me to join, punctuation anonymous. I, am, not sure, i, am ready, for this, big step.
:lol: :clap:
Don't let us scare you off - we're mostly friendly.. ;)
Hi Scarlet
If you're making that many sales, why don't you pay someone to design you a better website?
You're clearly commatoased.
:bang:
donutagain
08-02-2008, 07:41
scarlet, has now left ,the building .thank you ,ladies and gentlemen.
foodpoison
08-02-2008, 07:51
The front page is so god damned pretentious I think I might shoot myself.
Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable with the welcome that Scarlet received on here? She described herself as a figurative surrealist (whatever that is :shrug:) and she is also a sculptress. My impression is that she doesn't classify herself as a photographer but as an artist, obviously the heavy use of Photoshop is not to everyones taste (including mine) and the website wasn't the best in the world. Just because her work is different to what we usually see on here shouldn't preclude us from extending some courtesy and constructive criticism.
As to the links to other forums some of them date back to December so hardly spamming. You've also got to admire her canny marketing - if she is trying to improve her page rank what better way than to put "contains nudity" in the forum subject title as it will almost guarantee a high number of hits. :D
now that scarlet has nuked the thread it might as well be closed
as it makes no sense any more?!?
I think many people who posted in this thread did so because one person spoke up and said the web site was 'tacky' so to speak - the flood gates opened and other people decided to agree for agreements sake.
I think Hacker is right in what he says a few posts ago.
As to the links to other forums some of them date back to December so hardly spamming. You've also got to admire her canny marketing - if she is trying to improve her page rank what better way than to put "contains nudity" in the forum subject title as it will almost guarantee a high number of hits. :D
No, I really don't. In the past 2 years I've had over 23,000 comments spammed onto my website. I hate it that sort of thing.
I agree with Hacker entirely. Scarlet took some stick in this thread but countered with very good humour. Still the negative jibes continued and she obviously finally decided she's had enough, deleting her link and her posts. I can't say I blame her.
Are we really happy with the way her post was received here? :shrug:
sorry but I'm not reproaching myself for my comment, it wasn't rude or mickey taking just honest and I thought thats what the poster asked for.:nono:
It is unfortunate that she took it personally, but I was building better websites 10 years ago. Theres a lot of things on her site that I haven't seen in years, its like it dropped out of 1998. She really does need a new website.
Jonnyreb
08-02-2008, 11:07
I agree with Hacker entirely. Scarlet took some stick in this thread but countered with very good humour. Still the negative jibes continued and she obviously finally decided she's had enough, deleting her link and her posts. I can't say I blame her.
Are we really happy with the way her post was received here? :shrug:
No. I've just read this so a little behind the times. There are many members that should be ashamed of themselves. Congrats guys; you've demonstrated the polar-opposite behaviour this forum has prided itself on. :clap:
Absolutely disgraceful
Matt Charlton
08-02-2008, 11:12
I'm with Hacker, CT and Jon.
Bit of a shock to see this kind of posting on here to be honest :(
Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable with the welcome that Scarlet received on here? She described herself as a figurative surrealist (whatever that is :shrug:) and she is also a sculptress. My impression is that she doesn't classify herself as a photographer but as an artist, obviously the heavy use of Photoshop is not to everyones taste (including mine) and the website wasn't the best in the world. Just because her work is different to what we usually see on here shouldn't preclude us from extending some courtesy and constructive criticism.
As to the links to other forums some of them date back to December so hardly spamming. You've also got to admire her canny marketing - if she is trying to improve her page rank what better way than to put "contains nudity" in the forum subject title as it will almost guarantee a high number of hits. :D
I agree with Hacker.
barsbyart
08-02-2008, 11:13
Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable with the welcome that Scarlet received on here?
No, Hacker, you are not the only one.
However, she asked for c+C and her site was rather poor. She did get some constructive advice but perhaps the comments regarding her grammar got a bit out of hand.
If she takes note of the essence and ignores the way in which some comments were made she can improve her site.
If she is genuine hopefully she will revisit.
If she has been upset... well, I'm sure that wasn't really anyone's intention and these things [I]do[I] happen. To succeed as an artist she will have to learn to take adverse comment and either learn from it or shrug it off.
I hope she is genuine and does return because it might be nice to see work from an artist who is not primarily a tog and there is MUCH she could learn photographically.
richmond
08-02-2008, 11:24
There were 21 posts before anyone said anything remotely kind to her. I didn't get the chance to visit and see the web site for myself, but I'm sure a bit of construtive advise and not all the (nasty) negative criticism would have been more helpful.
Well said Barsbyart. Some of the comments here are out of order & I find myself agreeing with Hacker, Jonny, etc.
New people to Talk Photography are here because they have seen something in the members collective input that they have joined to be a part of - to benefit from the massive amount of experience, skill & the sense of community found here. This thread has in turns both stamped all over that ideal but at the same time reaffirmed it.
As photographers we build up thick skins to deal with C&C - some of which is often brutally honest - we were not instantly this way, we learned from our peers & people that encouraged us & pointed us in the right direction when we went wrong.
It is sad to think that a new person to the site has been ridiculed - should you have nothing constructive to say then keep your comments to yourself.
Jonnyreb
08-02-2008, 11:31
I'm sure a bit of construtive advise and not all the (nasty) negative criticism would have been more helpful.
Spot on, but that would have been much more difficult to do and would have required some thought.
It was that (probably ex-) members first post having been a member since December......... would you want to give us a second chance after that??
:(
barsbyart
08-02-2008, 11:32
Thanks moomike.
I have PM'd her suggesting that she revisit this thread to see the comments that are now appearing.
I am sure that if she does revisit she will receive the help that she needs/wants.
I'm really not kidding when I say the site does look like it fell from 1998. I've been building websites since 95 and I'm really very surprised to see a site like this. I would have thought that people would be able to see current trends in design, even if they're not designers. This site is quite an old style, which is why its surprising. You just don't see things like this these days.
Default blue underlined hyperlinks. They just don't look nice on a black background. Its quite harsh to look at. Then you have the same default blue on yellow, which again just doesn't work. Its not easy on the eyes. You're using tables. Tables for design isn't good. Its not what they were intended for. You should be using XHTML + CSS. XHTML to structure the content and CSS to design the page. Tables, with borders, were considered bad design about 6-8 years ago. Your links page is a hideous mess. Its all over the place. Do you really need all those links? On the contact page the links at the bottom are oddly bigger than some others. You're using popups for the images, which again were considered bad many years ago. I haven't seen the term 'webring' in a very long time. I didn't know anyone still used them. You've also embedded wmv files, which isn't very accessible. You should use a Flash slideshow.
The code is just horrible. I'm sorry, but it just is.
<p align="center"><span class="style55"><u><br>Exhibitions</u></span></p>
<div align="center" class="style2"></div>
<div align="center" class="style2">
<p class="style42"><span class="style50"><u>Autumn/winter 2008 tour dates to be announced. </u></span></p>
<p class="style33 style50 style51"><u>Autumn / winter 2007</u></p>
<p class="style33"><span class="style50">THANKYOU!</span></p>
<p class="style34"><span class="style18">I would like to express my deepest gratitude, to all my friends and colleagues, who helped make my UK touring exhibition, such a massive success. I am looking forward to the 2008/9 touring exhibition and to working with you all again. </span></p>
<p class="style33 style43"><span class="style53"><u>Books</u></span></p>
<p class="style34"><span class="style18"> Several of my most recent black and white images, will be published in a number of books in early 2008 and my own book of posters and prints later in the year.</span></p>
<p class="style34"><span class="style18">Book titles and isbn to follow. </span></p>
<p class="style3">
The align attribute isn't a good thing to use, and I think its even been deprecated now.
Take a look through these for some ideas.
http://www.donaldweber.com/2007/
http://richardkern.com/
http://www.eoloperfido.com/portfolio.htm
http://jameswojcik.com/
http://www.artcoup.com/movie.html
http://www.verahartmann.com/launch.html
http://mondino-update.net/index.php?page=1
http://www.yangtan.com/v01/flash.html
http://www.candacemeyer.com/
http://www.galerierodolphejanssen.com/artists_works.php?iso=luchford_glen
http://www.eugeniorecuenco.com/index2.htm
http://www.mariotestino.com/main.htm
http://www.carldekeyzer.com/
http://joesnyc.streetnine.com/
http://www.ericogden.com/
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
http://www.mrtoledano.com/index.html
http://www.wddg.com/jms/
I refrained from commenting earlier because I didn't want to add to the pummeling, but in defence of the pummelers she did set herself up for it. Scarlet asked for critique of the site and her work. The site is very poorly constructed to say the least and there's no excuse for awful spelling and grammar with the amount of help that's available in just about every program these days. The photography is so-so, only the sculpture shows any real effort and while it's not my cup of tea I can see where some might like it.
When you put something up for public scrutiny it's important that you make the effort to make it look the best, if you don't then you invite negative comments like those we saw earlier.
barsbyart
08-02-2008, 12:40
Hi petemc!
I am not a site designer - I am a photographer/artist. I agree with much of what you say (I didn't like the look or navigation of her site - particularly the popups) and I'm sure that your comments are constructive but I think that you are missing some important points:
1 Not all sites produced before today are bad just because they're old/old-fashioned.
2 Scarlet (anyone) is entitled to have their site look how they want.
3 Her site exists but is not well received so what can she do about it now? Can she re-work what she's got or would she really be better starting again from scratch?
My opinion is she should start again having first done some more research - but that's ONLY my opinion.
I can't remember if she built the site herself, had it built or used a template but assuming that she wants a quick fix re-start where should she start looking? So can you or ANYONE recommend a good cheap or free place to start?
(This assumes that she will bother to come back)
Iain MacIntosh
08-02-2008, 12:47
Think some folk saw an easy target here with sarky comments but some folk should look to their own sites before judging others.
Iain
Jonnyreb
08-02-2008, 12:49
I refrained from commenting earlier because I didn't want to add to the pummeling, but in defence of the pummelers she did set herself up for it. Scarlet asked for critique of the site and her work. The site is very poorly constructed to say the least and there's no excuse for awful spelling and grammar with the amount of help that's available in just about every program these days. The photography is so-so, only the sculpture shows any real effort and while it's not my cup of tea I can see where some might like it.
When you put something up for public scrutiny it's important that you make the effort to make it look the best, if you don't then you invite negative comments like those we saw earlier.
I agree with all you've said there, Steep, except that there has been very little critique, lots of criticism and a fair amount of school-yard bullying.
If there had been a mature attempt to constructively criticise from those that should know better, then Scarlet may have benefited from the collective knowledge and experience. Sadly, this site has let itself down badly in that respect.
Hi petemc!
1 Not all sites produced before today are bad just because they're old/old-fashioned.
Thats not what I meant. The design is outdated and has been considered bad design but web designers around the world for many years. We've learnt from our mistakes and grown from that. Google's design is brilliant and hasn't changed since day 1, but still works perfectly. Scarletts design didn't work back then, and works even less 8 years on because of the progress made. Its from a time when there were no web designers, just the developers who had built the web. That was my point.
2 Scarlet (anyone) is entitled to have their site look how they want.
But if its costing you sales, clients and visitors then whats the point? She did also ask for critique so that point goes out the window.
3 Her site exists but is not well received so what can she do about it now? Can she re-work what she's got or would she really be better starting again from scratch?
My opinion is she should start again having first done some more research - but that's ONLY my opinion.
I can't remember if she built the site herself, had it built or used a template but assuming that she wants a quick fix re-start where should she start looking? So can you or ANYONE recommend a good cheap or free place to start?
(This assumes that she will bother to come back)
She should totally start over. Look at the examples I gave or hire someone who knows what they're doing. www.w3cschools.com has some good advice on coding.
Since I posted the above comments I've done a bit of searching and examining. I am convinced this thread was not started by someone looking for genuine critisism but as part of a 'mass' attempt to get her site up the rankings, petemc posted some links to forum threads earlier and there are many more almost identical ones (google for redintheraind and scarlet to see for yourself) along with entries in just about every art related site on the net. While 'we' may not have done ourselves proud I don't really think it will have slowed the Scarlet advertising train any.
I completely agree Steep. I deal with spam on an hourly basis and have been for years. This stood out for me as spam. If she sticks around and becomes a part of this community then I'll happily apologise. However looking at the copy / paste forum spamming she's done I don't feel that will be the case. They all read exactly the same and it doesn't show willingness to become part of our community. So yes some of us may have acted badly, but then on the flip side if she has just come here to spam her site and get some hits she's only trying to use us all. It doesn't quite show her in the best light. Step back a minute and look at it that way before throwing your handbags about and popping off your monocles at this thread. What what.
Jonnyreb
08-02-2008, 13:27
Steep, I now completely disagree with you as your suggestion is that the ends justify the means.
I'm not interested in this:google for redintheraind and scarlet to see for yourself.
Whereas I am concerned by this:
'we may not have done ourselves proud
Irrespective of the "what / if / why "of Scarlet's motivation, her treatment on this forum was reprehensible and there is no excuse for it.
OK, I've said my piece on this subject. History teaches there is no justification for the obscene
There is if she was just trying to use us all by spamming links to her site with no desire to become part of our community. Just like every other spammer whose posts are deleted and accounts banned, or should we be nice to them too?
There is if she was just trying to use us all by spamming links to her site with no desire to become part of our community. Just like every other spammer whose posts are deleted and accounts banned, or should we be nice to them too?
We have moderators and site admin to deal with those problems, bring it to their attention and let them deal with it.
We have moderators and site admin to deal with those problems, bring it to their attention and let them deal with it.
Who have posted here after I pointed it out. I'm sure they are aware of it.
barsbyart
08-02-2008, 13:44
petemc - I'm not disputing any of your points; I'm just saying that if anyone wants c+c so they can do better let's not only say what's wrong but also try to show a way forrward.
Re. the site costing her sales - well artists can be tempremental and if they choose to starve ...
She asked for c+c and you gave it - fair enough!
I don't understand all the code stuff 'cos I'm not a site designer. Also, not all of us can afford to employ a designer (at this moment) so perhaps we have to suggest multiple/alternative ways forward.
Jonnyreb - Totally agree with you. Whatever S's motivation and whether she joins this community or not this thread will remain as a 'black mark' for a while and may put off others who would otherwise have joined and benefitted.
But what's done is done and it might be time to draw a line... (and a lesson for ourselves) and move on.
barsbyart, check the other thread about web design. I've helped there perfectly well. I know what to do :p But as I said, should we treat all spammers with open arms just so we can be fluffy wuvy duvy to each other? As for the black mark this thread can be deleted instantly.
Okay, there's no point in further recriminations.
I'm not going to delete, at the moment, but I am closing. There are plenty of other threads where people have posted their websites never to return. If it's photographic we tend to leave it, this is after all a photographic forum, anything else gets stamped on.
If someone thinks a post is spam, HIT THE REPORT BUTTON, don't treat it as an opportunity to have a go.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.