Since starting blogging on TTP, I've had to look at a lot of photographers’ web sites, and found that there were some that are excellent, some are good, and others that are just hideous.
The main objective of a website for most photographers is to promote their work, as well as to expand the reach of their photography to new clients, and certainly to internationalize their work. When I initially started my own websites, I never imagined that I'd get visits from China, or Belarus...and that's a good thing for all of us. However, photographers need to remember that simplicity is always best in creating websites. Whether photo editors or just casual viewers, simple websites with killer images are always best.
Many photographers' websites have flash galleries, which can be visual treats. However, when these cross into the realm of the fantastical design and navigational labyrinths that remind me of the cult game 'Myst', it becomes ridiculous. It is one thing to have an effective and beautiful website...and quite another to have a 'state-of-the-art' website that is too complicated to be effective as a marketing tool. Don’t waste people’s (especially buyers/editors) time with fancy technology and/or weird navigation, and keep it simple and efficient.
Photographers are encouraged to accept fancy websites by their web designers, who have massive egos as well, and want to showcase their technical prowess. But, the websites belong to the photographers, and must be created around the photographers' work, not vice versa. People will remember powerful images...not flashy websites. Another thing about flashy websites...they get stale quickly.
Having said that, I've seen photographers' websites that seem to have been built in the early nineties...low resolution images, clunky and ugly buttons, thumbnails that don't work, etc. So updating websites is a must. And since I'm on this subject; photographers need to update their copyright statements every year. Another thing: photographers are well advised to avoid free website hosting since these come with adverts, which clutter the web pages and do not exhibit a professional image...and finally, photographers ought to get their personal domain name.
Color is critical for photography websites. My recommendation is to keep it simple...not necessarily monochromatic, but one basic color for the background which serves as complementary backdrop to the images. I personally think that white, grey or anthracite, black are the best colors for backgrounds. Let's remember that it's not about colorful backgrounds but about photographs. Incidentally, I wish I knew how to code my web pages in a way that viewers could choose between 2-3 basic colors. I've seen blogs with this option available, and I'd like to use it for my web site.
The size of the photographs on the web site is also critical. I recently started to use 9x6 inches at the (unprintable) resolution of 72 dpi for my photographs. This size allows the viewers to look at the photographs without straining their eyes, and I think allows them to better appreciate the photographs. Some of my own galleries need updating to that size.
Depending on the subject matter, I occasionally add sound to my photo essays. The sound adds aural texture to the photographs, and is often of recordings made at the same time as the photographs. However, I fully agree with those who advocate that sound (or music) should start at the discretion of the viewers, and not automatically...although I think slideshows are expected to have some sort of soundtrack.
_KIJU%20copy.jpg)
