No blown highlights on my calibrated monitors, either. I agree with the ideas posted by others:
- The photo and bio, what you do, generally belong on another page where the frontispiece should grab someone's attention and draw them to look at more on your 'site. - Having a search box with text input on the front page seems distinctly out of place ... what would I be searching for? When I put something in there and did a search, it brought me to a page with an utterly different design and aesthetic. - A list of clickable links, not "click here" links, that stays in place would work better. But a good first effort, surely better than the first effort I created about 12 years ago! ;-) Godfrey www.gdgphoto.com On Mar 25, 2007, at 5:17 PM, Nick Wright wrote: > I'm curious how many other folks see that image as having blown > highlights. I'm relatively new to calibrated monitors etc, but I use > the Spyder2Suite. And on my screen, the highlights are not blown. > > On 3/25/07, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Nick >> I can really recommend the "wedding & social" forum on http:// >> www.photo.net >> for you to present your website and ask for opinions. Really >> helpful people >> there and lots of sites from odder wedding photographers to compare. >> >> Regarding your photo I think that the softness and the small DOF >> on one eye >> simply does not work here. There is a blown out highlight on the >> shirt and >> the overall color looks partly off for me too. Maybe I would like it >> better in b/w..... >> >> I really think you should present yourself on a sub page "about >> me" and >> reserve the main entry page for a presentation of your services only. >> Otherwise I agree with the other recommendations you got so far >> here, show >> nice hyperlinked sample photographs instead of "click me's" and >> show the >> absolutely best stock samples on a sub page instead of making >> people search >> for them. >> >> I'm glad that you could stand my harsh comments btw :-) >> Greetings >> Markus >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Nick >> Wright >> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 6:33 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: Web site review >> >> Wow, there's a fellow who's not afraid to speak his mind! ;;D >> >> I appreciate your taking the time to reply, and there's no need to >> apologize for anything (opinions don't hurt my feelings). I do, >> however, have a couple remarks/questions ... >> >> First, I'd really like to know what is "technically weak" about my >> photo. A comment such as that deserves a little further explanation I >> think. Unpleasing doesn't bother me. If you don't like the way it >> looks then you won't hire me. I surely don't want folks who don't >> like >> the way I make photos hiring me. But "technically weak" ... I'm very >> curious as to what you mean. >> >> If you are referring to a perceived lack of sharpness, that's a >> little >> thing called depth of field. And I paid a lot of money to have lenses >> to produce it that way. There's a very specific reason that I shot >> that photo in that manner using such narrow depth of field. And it >> has >> a little to do with the next paragraph. >> >> Lastly, the site is "about me" because -- ultimately -- that is what >> I'm selling, me. Anyone can go anywhere they choose to have their >> photographs made. I want them to choose "me" to make them. >> >> Again, thanks for the reply. Look forward to hearing back from >> you. Be well. >> >> PS- Oh and by the way, in that photo, I ~am~ smiling! :D >> >> On 3/25/07, Markus Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Hi Nick >>> I find your photo unpleasing and technically weak as well, What >>> about a >>> really sharp one with a smile? >>> Your entry site is a lot more "about you" than about the services >>> you have >>> to offer, I would rethink it. >>> Sorry and greetings >>> Markus >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>> Behalf Of >> Nick >>> Wright >>> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 4:43 AM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: OT: Web site review >>> >>> I threw up a simple Web site, and I was wondering if you all would >>> tell me what you thought of it. Professionally-speaking. >>> >>> I hate fancy flashy sites. So mine probably appears a bit >>> spartan. But >>> I would like to know what you all think. Thanks a lot. >>> >>> The addy is: >>> http://www.phojonick.com/ >>> >>> -- >>> ~Nick Wright >>> http://blog.phojonick.com/ >>> http://www.phojonick.com/ >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >> >> >> -- >> ~Nick Wright >> http://blog.phojonick.com/ >> http://www.phojonick.com/ >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > -- > ~Nick Wright > http://blog.phojonick.com/ > http://www.phojonick.com/ > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
