Portfolio website changed

Messiah Khan

Messiah Khan

Santa is your dad
Messages
2,666
Name
Alasdair Fowler
Edit My Images
Yes
I know I have posted it before, but I have fiddled and changed my portfolio website quite considerably over the last few months. I have replaced monoslideshow with pixelpost, which has allowed me to greatly customize the entire structure of the gallery. I have also integrated a paypal purchasing system, as well as using cutenews for a blog on the first page. Ive done quite a lot of testing and tweaking, but if you come across any bugs, or areas that you feel should be changed then please say so. Anyway, what do you think?

http://www.afowler.co.uk/

Ps. It now includes all my 'portfolio' shots, right back to when I started photography. Im working on a system to disable shots from the gallery, but still have them archived on the system. I also have quite a few recent shots to process and upload, but they will come as time goes on.

:)
 
Hi MK

nice looking site. cant really find a fault!

out of interest the background in your banner- is it a plugin or something like that!?
 
Beauty of a website MK...really like how the background compliments the rest :) The gallery works really well too....so much so I'm having a nosey at it now hehe..the header is really good too!
 
The site works really well - fast and easy to use. A refreshing change from some of the clunky stuff I have seen of late.
 
Pixelpost is neat. Haven't played with it for a while but when I eventually get my act together I'll be using it too. Hadn't seen the plugin that draws the histogram before - that's kinda cool!

The site itself looks great and responds as fast as a fast thing. Very nice.
 
Cheers guys. Still needs tweaking a bit, and I have some ideas I want to implement, but overall im pleased with the result.

33L said:
Hi MK

nice looking site. cant really find a fault!

out of interest the background in your banner- is it a plugin or something like that!?
Click to expand...

Yeah, its using monoslideshow with all the controls disabled. It's the same system thst my entire gallery used before moving to pixelpost.

bod said:
Pixelpost is neat. Haven't played with it for a while but when I eventually get my act together I'll be using it too. Hadn't seen the plugin that draws the histogram before - that's kinda cool!

The site itself looks great and responds as fast as a fast thing. Very nice.
Click to expand...

Glad its nice and fast as it's very easy to keep adding things and end up with a big bloated site.
 
thanks MK
 
Slapo said:
yes, they look a bit too jaggy and are too tall (I think it would look a lot better if the sides were even). Also, they're a little too close to the edge, so if it's possible, moving them 10-20px inside would be more appealing (to me :p).
Click to expand...

Don't think I can do much about the jaggedness, but i'll have a look at making them shorter and moving them off the edge. :thumbs:
 
Took me ages to find this thread. Didn't realise we now had a section for websites and that it had been moved.

Slapo said:
Looks better with them further off the edge now :)
Click to expand...

Cheers. I tried making them shorter, but its very hard to change them without them going even more jagged edged (They need to be gifs with transparancy). Im also trying to figure out how to have the opacity change when you hover over them, but due to the way it's all set up im having issues with it. Got it workiing on the info/comments/sales buttons though.
 
Nice site Alasdair and I can't see anything wrong with it at all. How did you get on with the RPS L diploma by the way?
 
Slapo said:
Thinking about it, maybe it could actually be removed with a bit of a trick - if they looked a bit like the Lytebox prev/next links. See here (Grouped Images):
http://dolem.com/lytebox/index.htm
Click to expand...

Id rather have them off when not hovering on the image. Semi transparent when hovering over the image and fully opaque when hovering over the buttons themselves. There will be a way of doing it, even if it invloves a bit of Javascript.

Ajophotog said:
Nice site Alasdair and I can't see anything wrong with it at all. How did you get on with the RPS L diploma by the way?
Click to expand...

Cheers. I failed the LRPS assesment. Still annoyed by that tbh.
 
Sorry to hear that Mate. It a funny old set-up isn't it, I do think sometimes looking at some of the images that pass and fail if your images are better than the judges you don't stand an earthly chance. I reckon if you hadn't of submitted sure stunning work you might have stood a better chance. Just my observations of what I've come to see.
 
Slapo said:
Thinking about it, maybe it could actually be removed with a bit of a trick - if they looked a bit like the Lytebox prev/next links. See here (Grouped Images):
http://dolem.com/lytebox/index.htm
Click to expand...

Sorted it now. :D

Ajophotog said:
Sorry to hear that Mate. It a funny old set-up isn't it, I do think sometimes looking at some of the images that pass and fail if your images are better than the judges you don't stand an earthly chance. I reckon if you hadn't of submitted sure stunning work you might have stood a better chance. Just my observations of what I've come to see.
Click to expand...

Aye. When I went for it, one of the main reasons was to strengthen my CV on the creative side of things. But now I don't need it as I got the Digital Arts and Media technician job at Northumbria uni. Also £90 a year for 4 letters after my name is a bit expensive.
 
bod said:
The jaggies on the arrows are because they're not anti-aliased.
Click to expand...

Even if they were in the original image, gif doesn't support full alpha channel properties, just binary transparency (i. e. transparent or not). Maybe if MK used pngs for that, it could work... then again, IE6 users would see it with a grey background (burn IE6-, burrrrn!).
Which is why I thought setting a background Lytebox (or Lightbox) style just for the arrow/navigation text could work well.
 
Slapo said:
Even if they were in the original image, gif doesn't support full alpha channel properties, just binary transparency (i. e. transparent or not). Maybe if MK used pngs for that, it could work... then again, IE6 users would see it with a grey background (burn IE6-, burrrrn!).
Which is why I thought setting a background Lytebox (or Lightbox) style just for the arrow/navigation text could work well.
Click to expand...

Yeah png would work better (burn Microsoft burn :D), but some anti-aliasing is better than none, and it's the jaggies on the inside of the line that are most noticeable. They don't need transparency.
 
Id prefer to avoid using pngs. I'll try and smoothen the inside a bit, and might redesign the button. Will give the lightbox thing a look as well. :)
 
Your website has been bookmarked by me as an example of "excellent photographer sites."

Really impressed and a style of site I aspire to :thumbs:
 
ekimeno said:
Your website has been bookmarked by me as an example of "excellent photographer sites."

Really impressed and a style of site I aspire to :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Cheers. :)

Slapo said:
Just to make sure we understood each other well, I meant the design of the prev/next buttons that could be used, nothing else :)
Click to expand...

Ah right, im with you. I've changed the buttons to pngs to experiement, but I don't have IE5 or other old browser here at work to test it on. One thing I noticed is that IE7 doesn't support opacity in the CSS. My CSS is CSS3 valid, but it seems IE7 isn't. Will have to work out a solution for that.
 
It looks good now, I'd just remove the fade in/fade out, it's a bit slow, especially in IE8 (which is, believe it or not, faster than IE7).

CSS3 is still a working draft, I think. Some parts of it are close to becoming a recommendation, but it'll still take some time for them to get there.
Internet Explorer has been pretty much the worst of the bunch with their CSS support for the last 7 years or so. I don't think that even IE7 covers all the basic stuff (mostly selectors). Gecko and Opera's engine are very comfy to design for, much more so that for IE if you want to be standards compliant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top