Please rate my Wedding website.

Photolistic

I have been slowly building this site for the past 2 years and its come a long way.

Thinking as a client what would you say about my website?

Any wedding or portrait photos that should not be there because they are not up to the standards of my talent? (not that I have much)

Also if there is anything that is not consistent or that I should add on my site as far as basic stuff goes, please let me know.

Thanks. I am always trying to make it better.

eyeguy

I think you did a great job and the photographs are all great and interesting and show potential customers what you can do. If I can nit pick one thing it would be to background color of white, perhaps using black or gray would make it easer on the eyes and make the photos pop. I hope this helps P.S have a look at this one I found as a link from a Smug shooter http://www.daveswartzphotography.com

All the best

Photolistic wrote:

I have been slowly building this site for the past 2 years and its come a long way.

Thinking as a client what would you say about my website?

Any wedding or portrait photos that should not be there because they are not up to the standards of my talent? (not that I have much)

Also if there is anything that is not consistent or that I should add on my site as far as basic stuff goes, please let me know.

Thanks. I am always trying to make it better.

urbanaries

Photolistic wrote:

I have been slowly building this site for the past 2 years and its come a long way.

Thinking as a client what would you say about my website?

Any wedding or portrait photos that should not be there because they are not up to the standards of my talent? (not that I have much)

Also if there is anything that is not consistent or that I should add on my site as far as basic stuff goes, please let me know.

Thanks. I am always trying to make it better.

23 and 24 in the weddings gallery look pixellated and not up to the quality of the rest. I think using square thumbs would help the gallery look cleaner. Some scans of the shots the photo booth produces (or shots of people using it?) might be a great addition to the promo page rather than just the product shots (look like they're out of a catalog and a little hard to figure out what I'm looking at exactly. The verbiage in the gallery description of the weddings gallery should be cut down or rewritten. It doesn't set the right stage for your photos, IMO. Let the (very lovely!) images speak, and if they want to contact you they can in the other link.

Just my random ramblings, as Scott says, opinions are like bellybuttons...everyone has one but they're not worth much...or something.

ETA: just visited your blog and the photos are stellar there!!! The branding is so different, and the wedding images are not ones I saw in the other site. Right now your blog is geared more toward wedding clients being impressed than your website, but these days many people are using blogs as their primary site, so I think it works! Gorgeous photos!

I keep having more thoughts...calling your images "pictures" doesn't lend a very professional feel. Photographs or images has a better cache. I'm still looking at your blog and the shots are really wonderful!!!

Photolistic

Thanks, I will take that all into consideration. I need to update my pictures on my site. I have about 600 pictures waiting to be edited to be put on. Im just lagging.

urbanaries wrote:

23 and 24 in the weddings gallery look pixellated and not up to the quality of the rest. I think using square thumbs would help the gallery look cleaner. Some scans of the shots the photo booth produces (or shots of people using it?) might be a great addition to the promo page rather than just the product shots (look like they're out of a catalog and a little hard to figure out what I'm looking at exactly. The verbiage in the gallery description of the weddings gallery should be cut down or rewritten. It doesn't set the right stage for your photos, IMO. Let the (very lovely!) images speak, and if they want to contact you they can in the other link.

Just my random ramblings, as Scott says, opinions are like bellybuttons...everyone has one but they're not worth much...or something.

ETA: just visited your blog and the photos are stellar there!!! The branding is so different, and the wedding images are not ones I saw in the other site. Right now your blog is geared more toward wedding clients being impressed than your website, but these days many people are using blogs as their primary site, so I think it works! Gorgeous photos!

I keep having more thoughts...calling your images "pictures" doesn't lend a very professional feel. Photographs or images has a better cache. I'm still looking at your blog and the shots are really wonderful!!!

zoomer

I am certainly no expert on sites but it looked ok to me.
I hate sites with very few photo examples...yours had plenty and looked like good work.

Sam

The one item that jumped out for me was your statement, "All of the pictures I take are edited and given to you on a DVD. "

Once you say this you are committed to providing ALL, as in every out out of focus, bad blurry shot you take. Do you really want to pp every bad shot and give them to the client? Also what is your definition of edited? You may want to clarify this. If my (the client's) understanding is that this means complete detail processing to include color balance, levels, crop, sharpening, blemish removal, skin smoothing, teeth whiting, weight reducing, B&W, special effects, etc, you will be opening your self to a no win situation.

Sam

Scotty_R

Jim, it seems to me that your style is largely photo journalism when it comes to weddings. I couldn't look at any of protected galleries, but what strikes me most as missing is any traditional bridal portraits. If I was a bride, or more importantly the brides mother, I'd want to see some examples of half and full bridal portraits in a variety of settings. Just a thought.

Photolistic

Thanks, and I agree.

Wachel

Your site looks nice. I do agree with maybe a darker background but I don't think the white bad either.

Don't ask how I found this but on the page with the photo booth. You put pint and I am sure you meant print. "Studio cutey is a talking photo booth that pints out classic..."

Photolistic

Wachel wrote:

Your site looks nice. I do agree with maybe a darker background but I don't think the white bad either.

Don't ask how I found this but on the page with the photo booth. You put pint and I am sure you meant print. "Studio cutey is a talking photo booth that pints out classic..."

No... it pints out strips. JK thanks.

NateWagner

well, first of all, I also noticed the pints, instead of prints on the cutey thing.

The other thought, is that your photo for weddings looks really soft and blurry. I might look for a different shot for that (hope you don't mind my saying so )

Photolistic

NateWagner wrote:

well, first of all, I also noticed the pints, instead of prints on the cutey thing.

What do you mean?