Re: Web Site Take Two
G'day again Shaun Actually what I was getting at was not moving the external links to a separate page but including a window target in the HTML code so that the external link opens in a new, separate window rather than replacing your page. Most HTML editors should be able to do this but, in any case, you can edit the code manually. For example, in the paragraph under Wittenoom Gorge on your home page there is a link to Mesothelioma Web. The code for the link is: a href=http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/mesothelioma.htm;strongmesothelioma. /strong/a When someone clicks on this link the Mesothelioma Web site replaces your page and the visitor might not return. However, the following code would open Mesothelioma Web in a new window and leave your page active. a href=http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/mesothelioma.htm; target=window1strongmesothelioma. /strong/a Sorry if I'm telling you something you already know. + Brian Walters Australian Plants Societies http://farrer.csu.edu.au/ASGAP/ On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 15:12 , 'Dr. Shaun Canning' [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Thanks for the positive comments Brian. Much appreciated. I will indeed move the links to a separate page. In fact, I might get rid of that stuff altogether. Undecided as yet. Thanks again... Cheers Shaun Brian Walters said: Shaun Really impressive site - I looked mainly at the flower shots as that's my interest. I liked the clarity in the thumnbnails and the sharpness of the scans generally. Were all of these taken with the *istD or have some of them been scanned from slides and then worked over in software? I've got quite a lot of wildflower shots on slides but I've found it difficult to get decent scans. My transparency adaptor attached to the Epson 1650 Photo scanner gives results which are acceptable for the web but not much else and I've found the quality of Kodak Photo CD scans ranges from excellent to abysmal with most being just OK. Back to your website - I agree with earlier comments about the size of the images and I still think they are a bit large. Is there a reason why they need to be that large? As a viewer of the site, I would prefer if they could fit on the screen without scrolling. The only other thing I can think of is the way you reference your external links. At present, anyone who clicks on the mesothelioma link, for example, gets taken away from your site and may not return. It might be worth targeting the external links to a separate window so that your site stays active. Cheers Brian Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
Re: Web Site Take Two
Thanks Brian, that's what I'll do! P.S. I see you work for CSU? That's my old stomping ground (Albury) Cheers Shaun Brian Walters said: G'day again Shaun Actually what I was getting at was not moving the external links to a separate page but including a window target in the HTML code so that the external link opens in a new, separate window rather than replacing your page. Most HTML editors should be able to do this but, in any case, you can edit the code manually. For example, in the paragraph under Wittenoom Gorge on your home page there is a link to Mesothelioma Web. The code for the link is: a href=http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/mesothelioma.htm;strongmesothelioma. /strong/a When someone clicks on this link the Mesothelioma Web site replaces your page and the visitor might not return. However, the following code would open Mesothelioma Web in a new window and leave your page active. a href=http://www.mesotheliomaweb.org/mesothelioma.htm; target=window1strongmesothelioma. /strong/a Sorry if I'm telling you something you already know. + Brian Walters Australian Plants Societies http://farrer.csu.edu.au/ASGAP/ On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 15:12 , 'Dr. Shaun Canning' [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Thanks for the positive comments Brian. Much appreciated. I will indeed move the links to a separate page. In fact, I might get rid of that stuff altogether. Undecided as yet. Thanks again... Cheers Shaun Brian Walters said: Shaun Really impressive site - I looked mainly at the flower shots as that's my interest. I liked the clarity in the thumnbnails and the sharpness of the scans generally. Were all of these taken with the *istD or have some of them been scanned from slides and then worked over in software? I've got quite a lot of wildflower shots on slides but I've found it difficult to get decent scans. My transparency adaptor attached to the Epson 1650 Photo scanner gives results which are acceptable for the web but not much else and I've found the quality of Kodak Photo CD scans ranges from excellent to abysmal with most being just OK. Back to your website - I agree with earlier comments about the size of the images and I still think they are a bit large. Is there a reason why they need to be that large? As a viewer of the site, I would prefer if they could fit on the screen without scrolling. The only other thing I can think of is the way you reference your external links. At present, anyone who clicks on the mesothelioma link, for example, gets taken away from your site and may not return. It might be worth targeting the external links to a separate window so that your site stays active. Cheers Brian Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
Re: Web Site Take Two
Shaun Appearances can be deceptive. CSU (Wagga campus) kindly agreed to host the ASGAP website but I don't work there. They've given use access to their server which is really great and has allowed up to create a much larger web site than would have been possible otherwise. Cheers Brian + Brian Walters Australian Plants Societies http://farrer.csu.edu.au/ASGAP/ On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 16:12 , 'Dr. Shaun Canning' [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Thanks Brian, that's what I'll do! P.S. I see you work for CSU? That's my old stomping ground (Albury) Cheers Shaun Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
Re: Web Site Take Two
Nice stie, great stuff! Norm Shaun Canning wrote: www.heritageservices.com.au
RE: Web Site Take Two
Thanks Norm! Dr. Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services 11 Lawrence Way Karratha, Western Australia, 6714 0414-967644 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Norm Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 12:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Web Site Take Two Nice stie, great stuff! Norm Shaun Canning wrote: www.heritageservices.com.au
Re: Web Site Take Two
Shaun, can you post the site address again? Norm Shaun Canning wrote: Hi Gang, Kevin rightly mentioned that the images on my revamped website were too large, which indeed they were. So, I have revamped the site for the second time to reduce the size (and download time) of the images. None are now larger than about 250k. Please have a look and send some feedback. There was very little last time, and I'm hoping it was because the images were too big, not because they are crap!
RE: Web Site Take Two
www.heritageservices.com.au Dr. Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services 11 Lawrence Way Karratha, Western Australia, 6714 0414-967644 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Norm Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 10:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Web Site Take Two Shaun, can you post the site address again? Norm Shaun Canning wrote: Hi Gang, Kevin rightly mentioned that the images on my revamped website were too large, which indeed they were. So, I have revamped the site for the second time to reduce the size (and download time) of the images. None are now larger than about 250k. Please have a look and send some feedback. There was very little last time, and I'm hoping it was because the images were too big, not because they are crap!
Re: Web Site Take Two
Shaun Really impressive site - I looked mainly at the flower shots as that's my interest. I liked the clarity in the thumnbnails and the sharpness of the scans generally. Were all of these taken with the *istD or have some of them been scanned from slides and then worked over in software? I've got quite a lot of wildflower shots on slides but I've found it difficult to get decent scans. My transparency adaptor attached to the Epson 1650 Photo scanner gives results which are acceptable for the web but not much else and I've found the quality of Kodak Photo CD scans ranges from excellent to abysmal with most being just OK. Back to your website - I agree with earlier comments about the size of the images and I still think they are a bit large. Is there a reason why they need to be that large? As a viewer of the site, I would prefer if they could fit on the screen without scrolling. The only other thing I can think of is the way you reference your external links. At present, anyone who clicks on the mesothelioma link, for example, gets taken away from your site and may not return. It might be worth targeting the external links to a separate window so that your site stays active. Cheers Brian + Brian Walters Association of Societies for Growing Australian Plants http://farrer.csu.edu.au/ASGAP Shaun Canning wrote: Hi Gang, Kevin rightly mentioned that the images on my revamped website were too large, which indeed they were. So, I have revamped the site for the second time to reduce the size (and download time) of the images. None are now larger than about 250k. Please have a look and send some feedback. There was very little last time, and I'm hoping it was because the images were too big, not because they are crap! Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
Re: Web Site Take Two
Thanks for the positive comments Brian. Much appreciated. I will indeed move the links to a separate page. In fact, I might get rid of that stuff altogether. Undecided as yet. Thanks again... Cheers Shaun Brian Walters said: Shaun Really impressive site - I looked mainly at the flower shots as that's my interest. I liked the clarity in the thumnbnails and the sharpness of the scans generally. Were all of these taken with the *istD or have some of them been scanned from slides and then worked over in software? I've got quite a lot of wildflower shots on slides but I've found it difficult to get decent scans. My transparency adaptor attached to the Epson 1650 Photo scanner gives results which are acceptable for the web but not much else and I've found the quality of Kodak Photo CD scans ranges from excellent to abysmal with most being just OK. Back to your website - I agree with earlier comments about the size of the images and I still think they are a bit large. Is there a reason why they need to be that large? As a viewer of the site, I would prefer if they could fit on the screen without scrolling. The only other thing I can think of is the way you reference your external links. At present, anyone who clicks on the mesothelioma link, for example, gets taken away from your site and may not return. It might be worth targeting the external links to a separate window so that your site stays active. Cheers Brian + Brian Walters Association of Societies for Growing Australian Plants http://farrer.csu.edu.au/ASGAP Shaun Canning wrote: Hi Gang, Kevin rightly mentioned that the images on my revamped website were too large, which indeed they were. So, I have revamped the site for the second time to reduce the size (and download time) of the images. None are now larger than about 250k. Please have a look and send some feedback. There was very little last time, and I'm hoping it was because the images were too big, not because they are crap! Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
