Previous: true pluralism found in texas; discovery of jackalope expected soon (11)
shaking the uglies
Post #606 • August 19, 2005, 8:51 AM • 14 Comments
I wouldn't call it perfect, but I wouldn't call it purple, either. This will do for now.
August 19, 2005, 10:08 AM
George, thanks for the feedback. From your comments I take it that nothing is barfing nor is causing anyone to barf. I will consider your eminently sensible suggestions when I rebuild the navigation; in the meantime, I just wanted to get something up there that resembled design.
August 19, 2005, 10:13 AM
Franklin, I didn't run into any glitches.
It's elegant looking and my remarks are my own pet peeves sharpened by lot's of surfing. p
August 19, 2005, 10:47 AM
I totally dig it. I crank my monitor resolution so i don't have the scroll problem, although I do notice a suspicious amount of blank space between the picture and the footer; wouldn't that be a simple thing to fix?
My suggestion, when you do get around to redoing the navigation, is to use the flickr model of previous/next buttons to the right of the image, with little thumbnails of each; I think that as flickr comes to dominate image-viewing (i'm not sure what the fuss is about myself, but there it is), that will become the standard.
August 19, 2005, 1:31 PM
That's a lot better, Franklin. It seesm that you could get a lot more thumbnails up if there was not so much info at the thumbnail level.
Geirge, when you talk about computer design you make all kinds of good sense.
August 20, 2005, 6:08 AM
The two entries above from "Paul" are straight ads, nothing to do with art.
August 20, 2005, 9:16 AM
franklin, i especially like nude 4. in fact i almost love nude 4. in fact, i think i need to go back and stare at that one for a while. lovely. this piece has more light and depth, and energy, as the others are more surface (i get lost in all the surface tension). your pieces are soothing and tense at the same time. (to me anyway but what do i know?). i agree with george to make you site as easily navigatable as possible. right now there is too much goingback and forth and some may lose interest...
August 20, 2005, 9:30 AM
Ads are gone.
Mek, thank you.
August 20, 2005, 11:59 AM
August 22, 2005, 12:48 AM
I have an idea for a future topic, Franklin. The other evening I saw the documentary DVD "In the Realms of the Unreal" about closet artist Henry Darger (1894-1973). The film was really quite good, Darger's art (and story) endearing.
But all the press I could dig up around the guy has since been spun to paint him as a sort of poster-uberchild for "outsider art". Google-searches on his name and the name of the film primarily turned up the Undeniably Good Cause of the naive, the mentally insane, and crafters everywhere and in every form.
Have you touched on that ridiculous category - outsider art - here yet?
August 22, 2005, 1:06 AM
Or how about this news article description of a sculptor's sculpture included in a new Indianapolis sculpture park called Artspark:
"Sadashi Inuzuka: "Circle." A visually impaired sculptor who is an assistant professor of art at the University of Michigan, Inuzuka worked with students from the Indiana School for the Blind to create this piece, which consists of a ring filled with sand that visitors "rake" with a rotating tool. When the rotation stops, it triggers recordings of the wind, rain, etc."
Sorry, I don't know how to make our lives easier with a hyperlink.
August 22, 2005, 1:42 PM
Ahab et al, I'm wondering if you're familiar with Inuzuka's previous work or not... he's been connected to the art scene in Alberta in past years... The pub on the Banff Centre campus is decorated with some of his ceramics from a past residency, and here's a URL to a small image of work from the Works Festival in Edmonton in 2000:
Seems he's got a thing for circles.
August 26, 2005, 5:55 PM
Salut Franklin !
J'aime ton boulot même si nous ne travaillons pas de la même manière.
Ici, en France, c'est pas facile tous les jours pour les artistes.
ça doit être pareil chez-vous, non ?
I like your paintings, even if we don't work on the same way.
( this is the best I can do in English )
August 26, 2005, 11:22 PM
August 19, 2005, 9:54 AM
The overall layout is nice but I'll quibble anyway now that the purple is gone.
I have my monitor set at 1024x768 resolution.
If I click a thumbnail, the image opens, but because of the graphics and info above it, I have to scroll it into full view. Worse, on my mac, I cant do it with a click because then the top is cropped (i.e. scrolled all the way down, can't rely on thisaction because of how browsers behave) so I have to drag the slider to get it into view (scroll wheel on winboxes) Whatever, I think this is a no-no unless you are offering up a really big reproduction. All that clicking and button pushing, my hands are sore at the end of the day and I'm not a Vito.
Suggestion: Looks like the images are scaled to around 425 high or to the width, that's a good size. Rearrange the layout so the image opens up fully visible.
The whold idea is to have people see the images. For this to be effective, everything should happen with as little thought by the visitor as possible. If the visitor discovers they have to click three times to get from A to B, they will never go to C.
For example, the (2005, Main) links at the top are confusing. OK I just looked at this painting and I want to see another, how do I get there from here? (Skipping the previous-next Php issues) I guess I have to click on one of those two at the top, I've got a 50-50 chance of getting back where I really want to be. If I'm having a bad day in the casino, thats a few more clicks down the path of towards RSI.
You know what these labels mean, the visitor does not, not the first time, people are click happy, the'll click on anything and get lost. I worked with technical people for a number of years and learned to never assume they understood the jargon. The same with art lovers, don't assume they understand how their computer works or what your labels mean, make it hard for them to be wrong.
Finally, the awstats, show the sad fact is that people don't spend much time on a site. It's always best to make it as easy as possible to see stuff. Unless I think am really interested after seeing one or two images, my tolerance level for clicking goes way down and I leave.