To FLASH or not to flash...

[Asylum Steve]

There was a time several years ago when I actually fancied myself somewhat of a web site designer. Yeah, I know, me and EVERYBODY ELSE...

Still, I had the latest version of Adobe GoLive, a good HTML manual, and a better than average knowledge and sense of creative page layout and design. It was fun...

Then, at some point, I'm not exactly sure when, site design evolved to become highly complex from both a visual as well as architectural point of view. Flash sites popped up that used audio, video, and animation in increasingly impressive ways. I stumbled on stuff that was far above and beyond anything I could come up with.

Anyway, the reality finally set in that it would be a struggle just to keep my own web site up and running (in plain and static HTML), let alone design, create, and update sites for other clients.

My dreams of being a rich and famous webmaster quietly subsided...

But, this was a good thing, because it reminded me that my true passion is still photography. I decided much better things would happen for me if I concentrated on the imaging aspect of my career.

So now I consider myself strictly an ARMCHAIR webmaster, constantly viewing and evaluating other photographer's web sites, noting what works and what doesn't work, sometimes being impressed with the latest bells and whistles, often times not...

Which brings me to my poll. A lot of shooters use FLASH for their web sites now, and some make much better use of the technology than others. Do you like the flash sites you've seen? Do you think it's neccessary to keep up with the latest trends? Do you simply think it's overkill?

I DON'T want to start another web site war (some of you may forget but we did have a few of those on the old site). The bottom line is different people have different needs and like different things in their web design.

BTW, you can vote for more than one thing. Oh, and feel free to leave comments with your vote...

[Sebastian]

IT HAS ITS PLACE

Like evertyhing else visual, if it adds to the overall product, then by all means. However, most of the time not only does flash not add a damn thing, it in fact takes away from the overall experience. It takes long to download, it is not friendly towards disabled users, and it distracts more often that adding any value.

Music artists and movie sites have used it to great effect, artists have used t as a medium, many great games have been made with it, but I have seen VERY few regular sites that used it to good effect.

My redesigned page actually had a flash title bar that did some fancy moves and dissolves with the images. It did NOTHING but annoy the hell out of me every time I loaded the page, so I got rid of it. Motion grabs attention, if it makes you look at something that has no value to you, you will get anoyed by it...at least that's the way I look at it.

[Peter_AUS]

I agree with both Steve and Seb on this, it does depend on what the site is being used for. Personally myself, I use a little revolving gif file on the index page of my computer site and always have, but it loads quickly and it does have a message with the effect it is.

I think people still have to remember who their audience is and what effect that will have on thier perspective clients when they load their pages up. If the audience is still on dial up connection then they have to design to that audience.

An effective way to do this is to design two corresponding sites, one flash and one straight HTML, but the resources needed to do this (time) becomes virtually two fold. Hence why a lot of sites designers don't bother, unless they are being paid big $$$'s for doing it, which most of us here aren't as Steve eluded to in his post.

Web design sounds like a really cool thing to do, but unless you have the time, resources and flair to design sites, with good presentation and content presented, it can become very frustrating.

Remember what may seem/look good to you, won't and never will appeal to everyone and that is where most concerns start with web design.

Basically if a person starts off with straight HTML design for their website and looks at the response/hits that thier website is receiving and by that I mean proper hits by real people, that will start to indicate how effective their website design has been to thier target audience.

The other unfortunate things is, their are a lot of other people out there who are trying to do the same thing as everyone else and finding that niche of interest can be hard.

This is a great subject to discuss and hopefully everyone will learn from those that have done it, are doing it and those that want to and might not fully know where to start.

[natatbeach]

Isn't geared to be very accomodating of fading objects...i prefer straight on websites that have no fluff and just get you to the point...seen some very creative sites utilizing flash elements but regardless of how creative I still get annoyed...just my two cents..

[Asylum Steve]

...with your comments about knowing your target audience and market. In this sense, web sites are no different than direct mailings or networking in person or by phone.

I've read quite a few books on web site design, some dealing purely with visuals, others covering the functionability and viewability (is that a word?), still others both.

One that particularly annoyed me was by a very experienced and respected PRINT design director. He took a very rigid approach to web site design, comparing it to a major newspaper or national mainsteam magazine. In his opinion, readability and complete ease of navigation were the most important design elements.

IOW, ALL sites should be like Yahoo, with close to instantly loading pages with little or no large graphics, all text laid out in neat little tables. Basically something that would appeal to the lowest common denominator. This in turn would get you mass viewership and the most hits possible, like that was all that mattered...

BTW, this is also the philosophy of all the "Mystery Meat" nonesense, MM being the site dedicated to making ALL of the WWW devoid of any thinking, creativity, abstractness, or ambiguity. IOW, cookie cutter...

Now, anyone that knows me or has been to my web site knows that these ideas run COMPLETELY opposite to what I believe. Sure, I don't want to annoy or frustrate my target viewers, but making them THINK or EXPLORE my site in a fun way is definitely one of my goals. And that may mean actually CONFUSING them for a moment until they figure out how to get somewhere or how a page functions. Sure, it's a risk, but the positive responses from intellegent viewers are worth it...

For the most part, my target market has high end machines with broadband internet connections. They not only want to see good examples of my work, but will probably have a more favorable perception of me if my images are presented in a visually distinct or even provocative way.

Sometimes it's the things that baffle the average viewer that the person higher up remembers and likes.

Again, you have to know your target audience...

I agree with both Steve and Seb on this, it does depend on what the site is being used for. Personally myself, I use a little revolving gif file on the index page of my computer site and always have, but it loads quickly and it does have a message with the effect it is.

I think people still have to remember who their audience is and what effect that will have on thier perspective clients when they load their pages up. If the audience is still on dial up connection then they have to design to that audience.

An effective way to do this is to design two corresponding sites, one flash and one straight HTML, but the resources needed to do this (time) becomes virtually two fold. Hence why a lot of sites designers don't bother, unless they are being paid big $$$'s for doing it, which most of us here aren't as Steve eluded to in his post.

Web design sounds like a really cool thing to do, but unless you have the time, resources and flair to design sites, with good presentation and content presented, it can become very frustrating.

Remember what may seem/look good to you, won't and never will appeal to everyone and that is where most concerns start with web design.

Basically if a person starts off with straight HTML design for their website and looks at the response/hits that thier website is receiving and by that I mean proper hits by real people, that will start to indicate how effective their website design has been to thier target audience.

The other unfortunate things is, their are a lot of other people out there who are trying to do the same thing as everyone else and finding that niche of interest can be hard.

This is a great subject to discuss and hopefully everyone will learn from those that have done it, are doing it and those that want to and might not fully know where to start.

[Peter_AUS]

and the poll will be interesting to watch as well. This morning when you first posted this topic, the poll was running with the "Depends on the website and the Photographer" second last choice, now it is running with the second choice, swung completely around. So the ongoing results will be good. I only hope that people vote before viewing the responses to this thread first, and remain first impulse replies, which are usually the more honest votes.

Yes it is interesting reading the views of writers about what is a good way to design a site and what elements should be used and not used. Viewability (yes that is a word), is I think the most important thing about a website design. Why, because that is what will keep your audience.

How many times have people gone to a site, seen the first page, (which can be named either homepage.html, default.html, index.html, or leave the "l" of and make htm), and not gone further into the site to investigate what the site might be able to present to them. Reading hit stats on websites that are hosted by hosting companies that supply this feature is interesting. See how many are real people and how many are robots searching and reading the webs, often will elude to the real effectiveness of a website.

One interesting site I was pointed to a while ago, was http://www.websitesthatsuck.com started in 1996 which has some really great information on website design, elements and even shows as the name suggests websites that suck really well.

PJ has asked me to moderate this forum, and hopefully I can bring to this whole website some views, ideas and experiences that I have had and point people in directions for help, assistance and advice.

I don't profess to be the "Bees Knees" for website design, but I do have an interest in web design and also helping others, as some of you already know. If I can do that great and I am sure and glad to have others here that have within them the knowledge, artistic flair and willingness to support a site, that remains free and I hope stays that way. That is what is so great about photographyreview.com and its members, that willingness of many to help others with thier experience and guidence, once shown them when they were starting out.

[Asylum Steve]

I've had discussions with PJ about you being a moderator, so I knew you were the front runner for this forum. I'm really glad to see it's worked out. I think you're a good fit for these discussions...

Yes, I agree, the poll should be interesting, however unscientific it is...

BTW, as a moderator, you should have soon, if not already, the INCREDIBLE power to "stick" a thread at the top of the page. Seb and I were both wondering if you could stick our respective threads (my poll and his FAQ).

I have no problem with my poll dropping back into the pack after a while, but I think Seb's FAQ would be a good thing to always have at the top of the forum. Just a suggestion...

and the poll will be interesting to watch as well. This morning when you first posted this topic, the poll was running with the "Depends on the website and the Photographer" second last choice, now it is running with the second choice, swung completely around. So the ongoing results will be good. I only hope that people vote before viewing the responses to this thread first, and remain first impulse replies, which are usually the more honest votes.

Yes it is interesting reading the views of writers about what is a good way to design a site and what elements should be used and not used. Viewability (yes that is a word), is I think the most important thing about a website design. Why, because that is what will keep your audience.

How many times have people gone to a site, seen the first page, (which can be named either homepage.html, default.html, index.html, or leave the "l" of and make htm), and not gone further into the site to investigate what the site might be able to present to them. Reading hit stats on websites that are hosted by hosting companies that supply this feature is interesting. See how many are real people and how many are robots searching and reading the webs, often will elude to the real effectiveness of a website.

One interesting site I was pointed to a while ago, was http://www.websitesthatsuck.com started in 1996 which has some really great information on website design, elements and even shows as the name suggests websites that suck really well.

PJ has asked me to moderate this forum, and hopefully I can bring to this whole website some views, ideas and experiences that I have had and point people in directions for help, assistance and advice.

I don't profess to be the "Bees Knees" for website design, but I do have an interest in web design and also helping others, as some of you already know. If I can do that great and I am sure and glad to have others here that have within them the knowledge, artistic flair and willingness to support a site, that remains free and I hope stays that way. That is what is so great about photographyreview.com and its members, that willingness of many to help others with thier experience and guidence, once shown them when they were starting out.

[Peter_AUS]

I was going to get that done anyway Steve, no matter what happened and also hope you and Seb remain as active as it has started out to be. As this has only just happened in the past 60 mins, I am looking at those options at present.

I also like the fact that PJ has put up this forum as well in this environment as I think they go hand in hand with each other. As long as it stays the way it is, I will be happy, information dissemination is the key to forums and the high horses that I have seen on other websites that people get up to (not these forums) is most frustrating and I think turns people away from sites.

It is great to see this finally happening too and it is great that one post has pushed this forward to fruition. I hope I am seen as helpfull, leading and some humour evolves as well in this forum, as it can be a frustration to some when things do move the way the plan. We have all been there I am sure and will hit that wall again and again. I will post some info in the FAQ's soon and am on the look out for websites as guides to others for design and thoughts/ideas for others to grow and learn from. A bit like what happens in the photo forums with images being featured there for a week or so, let me know your thoughts if you could and Seb too if he reads this as I am sure he will.

[Sebastian]

I was going to get that done anyway Steve, no matter what happened and also hope you and Seb remain as active as it has started out to be. As this has only just happened in the past 60 mins, I am looking at those options at present.

I also like the fact that PJ has put up this forum as well in this environment as I think they go hand in hand with each other. As long as it stays the way it is, I will be happy, information dissemination is the key to forums and the high horses that I have seen on other websites that people get up to (not these forums) is most frustrating and I think turns people away from sites.

It is great to see this finally happening too and it is great that one post has pushed this forward to fruition. I hope I am seen as helpfull, leading and some humour evolves as well in this forum, as it can be a frustration to some when things do move the way the plan. We have all been there I am sure and will hit that wall again and again. I will post some info in the FAQ's soon and am on the look out for websites as guides to others for design and thoughts/ideas for others to grow and learn from. A bit like what happens in the photo forums with images being featured there for a week or so, let me know your thoughts if you could and Seb too if he reads this as I am sure he will.

Peter,

Thanks for making the FAQ a sticky. I will keep working on it to add and revise info whenever I can. ANd don't worry, I'll share any thoughts I have regarding the forum, I have never been one to hold back an opinion...

[Michael Fanelli]

I use the Opera browser which gives me quick control over plug-ins: Flash is turned off. I have yet to see a flash site that added anything of value and many that are just anger-inducing. This even ignores the heavy use of Flash for advertising.

All the gimmicks in the world can't cover up a lack of good content!

[adina]

Actually, I prefer the simple clean websites. We are very much minimalists here. Too much flashing/fading/blinking whatever doesn't appeal to me.

adina