layout questions

Howdy folks. Hopefully everyone's noticing that the site is churning along quite a bit faster than it was before. Speed should improve even more over the next few weeks as we start to push for more performance enhancements and code cleanup.

My questions are:

1) Would you prefer the ability to just make your own HTML and be able to paste a "place gallery stuff here" type tag down to allow for catalog-type site mechanics?

2) How tied are you to the 570px width? Under 600 isn't really necessary now that the vast majority of users out there are at 800x600 or greater. I'm look to push a new 770px gallery format. I know this chance would butcher my gallery, but this won't be implemented until there's a way to include multiple site layout templates.

Feedback is much appreciated.

jn

Um... I have my own website and all, but I still only know basic terms for stuff. O.o

I would like a little more explanation of this:

>>1) Would you prefer the ability to just make your own HTML and be able to paste a "place gallery stuff here" type tag down to allow for catalog-type site mechanics?<<

I'm not following. I think it would be fun to have more freedom with templates/looks/format. (though i've become pretty crafty with image slicing and whatnot.. hehe)

I think that if you do impliment this kind of freedom, that you keep it an option. I think allowing various levels of gallery modification would be a good idea. More HTML heavy for the advanced user, and the simple point and click for the novice.

And about the width of the layout/pics, I'd say that about half of the gallery owners follow this rule to a "t". I used to, but with my site and RS going, I got lazy and didn't want to make 2 "large images". So I put up my 500 pix width large scans up. Also, larger formats would be nice. I have always pushed the limits with this... (compensating an extra 20 pix width on one banner and the other...). But again, this would probably be part of the options.

I like where you are going with this. ^_^ And yes.. i've noticed the site loading much quicker than before. Also, you might want to beta test your site with some people. I have heard a few people tell me they can't even view RS on thier browser. :/ And I used to hear more complaints about the site loading slow, but that hasn't happened much recently.

I can't wait to see it when it's done :D
(and maybe i won't finish redoing my RS gallery until the new stuff is finished...)

The movtivation here is that the main template is too conservative. I think the main motivation was quite cynical, but quite reasonable:

1) Prevent bad things from happening: Don't let users put background images under text. Offer color schemes that aren't mindbendingly bad (even though they may only be mildly acceptable). Build a site map and obvious navigation for the user and then let him/her do as they please from there.

2) Allow those who are well aware of the bad things that can happen to do good things. This means... don't force margins on people. Allow as many graphic options as possible. Encourage image slicing, etc. Put in features one cannot get from static HTML (like database sorting).

That being said, I think (1) was achieved but (2) fell a bit short.

To address specific concerns: Yes, the easy form-based menus will continue to dominate RS for a long time. My goal is to somehow allow users to make regular HTML and then insert something like

----

Welcome to my gallery, hope you enjoy.

#DISPLAY GALLERY#

Contact me.

-----

... and poof, RS drops a gallery onto their web page.


As far as images go, image uploading is a horrible, horrible thing. Plans: the ability to upload one large image and RS does the work to make different versions of that image for you. A thumbnail, a zoom view, a normal view, a slideshow, etc. Autowatermarking with your gallery logo or simply your gallery name wouldn't be a bad idea. I can do that for any graphic format now. None of this JPG only junk. Just need to code it.

And finally, about people not being able to see the website, it's possible that they are using Macintosh something. I need to buy a used one someday just so I can test on it. The catch-all advice to anyone who can't use this website is to get the latest copy of Microsoft Internet Explorer.

http://www.microsoft.com/ie

K, I think that's it for now.

jn