# new photo site



## sdfink04 (Mar 21, 2012)

I encourage everyone to check out a site I helped develop, _mod edit - link removed_. It allows anyone to upload photos with a chance to sell them. Most sites limit who can upload photos and make you apply, but we think even amateur or non-photography types can take worthy pictures from time to time. There is also an amazing social networking side to the site. You can favorite photos and follow other photographers to build your own personalized photostream. It's like Tumblr, but instead you get to dictate what the content is instead of others dictating it. If you are a part of a photography business, people who notice that they live near you can contact you to work with them. Take a look at


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 21, 2012)

You should hire a professional designer to design the site/logo/branding. The aesthetics of the site were the first thing to turn me off. I would venture to guess that others would feel the same way. Frankly, I am surprised people use photobucket to host images. While photobucket has been redesigned, it's still not great. 

I can't do poorly designed sites... Good luck though.


----------



## Joey_Ricard (Mar 21, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> You should hire a professional designer to design the site/logo/branding. The aesthetics of the site were the first thing to turn me off. I would venture to guess that others would feel the same way. Frankly, I am surprised people use photobucket to host images. While photobucket has been redesigned, it's still not great.
> 
> I can't do poorly designed sites... Good luck though.




Tyler, had you not clicked on it, I would not have either.

Now that I have, I can say like I have before at such stuff people come up with like this = Oh look, another internet popularity contest!

Great fun for kiddies


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 21, 2012)

I look at the site and say to myself, "What the he11 is it?"

Is it a PhotoBucket wanna-be?

Can I sell my photos from here?

Is it like FaceBook?

Maybe it's just a "Post your pettiest pictures here for everyone else to ooh and aah over" joint.


----------



## sdfink04 (Mar 21, 2012)

Ok, so as I (tried) to explain in my post, it's a site meant for serious photographers, such as the people who use this forum. It is for selling photos first and foremost, but it has social networking functionality that makes it so people who maybe aren't interested in photography can still enjoy photography and share in that world. No site allows average people who happen to take nice photos to put photos up and make money; no site has social networking abilities that would appeal to serious photographers (facebook just doesn't cut it). I understand your criticisms, but how about a few suggestions. Did any of you leave the front page or check out some of this functionality? What would you put on the front page so that we could truly convey what this site is for? It isn't meant to be "a popularity contest" or anything immature. Do you think we should change the color scheme and go to more "mature" graphics? What type of "feel" would real photographers like yourselves like (i.e. new-age, apple app store-ish, plain, gamey, etc.)?


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 21, 2012)

sdfink04 said:


> Ok, so as I (tried) to explain in my post, it's a site meant for serious photographers, such as the people who use this forum.



Then it needs to _scream_ that on the home page.  Fact is, it's doesn't.  To me, it doesn't 'say' much of anything.



sdfink04 said:


> It is for selling photos first and foremost, but it has social networking functionality that makes it so people who maybe aren't interested in photography can still enjoy photography and share in that world. No site allows average people who happen to take nice photos to put photos up and make money; no site has social networking abilities that would appeal to serious photographers (facebook just doesn't cut it).



But none of that is evident for a new-comer.  If you need to preface the intent of your site in this manner just to get _us_ to understand, what chance do you have to grab the attention of someone who finds you from a Google search?



sdfink04 said:


> I understand your criticisms, but how about a few suggestions.



Hire a professional web site designer.



sdfink04 said:


> Did any of you leave the front page or check out some of this functionality?



Yes, and it still didn't make sense to me what you're doing.



sdfink04 said:


> What would you put on the front page so that we could truly convey what this site is for? It isn't meant to be "a popularity contest" or anything immature. Do you think we should change the color scheme and go to more "mature" graphics? What type of "feel" would real photographers like yourselves like (i.e. new-age, apple app store-ish, plain, gamey, etc.)?



That's what a pro designer will be able to do for you.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 21, 2012)

For one, you're using the font "Hobo" which is pretty atrocious IMHO. It has to be one of the worst fonts ever.  The color scheme, or lack thereof is not appealing and is quite dull. The overall design and interface could be greatly improved. Perhaps through the implementation of Discover your community - DISQUS for a comment feature. 

You could also benefit from using a few different fonts that are less generic and "free" looking. If you are familiar with @fontface that's a plus, but it's not too difficult to learn how to implement. Font Squirrel is a great source for commercially usable fonts. I'd suggest a Slab Serif font, as I feel like it would fit your site name well, and design around that. Here's an example of a slab serif: Font Squirrel | Free Font Alfa Slab by JM Solé

You can "test drive" fonts before downloading them to see what looks good and what doesn't. 

As far as color is concerned kuler is a good place to start. Lots of good ideas for color schemes that you could try out. Just remember less is often more.

Also, Awwwards is one of the coolest sites ever. I suggest you go there and get inspired. They actually posted a blog post containing 30 free (beautifully designed) UI kits that you should check out: http://www.awwwards.com/30-free-ui-kits.html

www.awwwards.com


----------



## HughGuessWho (Mar 21, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> For one, you're using the font "Hobo" which is pretty atrocious IMHO. It has to be one of the worst fonts ever. The color scheme, or lack thereof is not appealing and is quite dull. The overall design and interface could be greatly improved. Perhaps through the implementation of Discover your community - DISQUS for a comment feature.
> 
> You could also benefit from using a few different fonts that are less generic and "free" looking. If you are familiar with @fontface that's a plus, but it's not too difficult to learn how to implement. Font Squirrel is a great source for commercially usable fonts. I'd suggest a Slab Serif font, as I feel like it would fit your site name well, and design around that. Here's an example of a slab serif: Font Squirrel | Free Font Alfa Slab by JM Solé
> 
> ...



Now that was a nice and helpful response. I am impressed.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 21, 2012)

HughGuessWho said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > For one, you're using the font "Hobo" which is pretty atrocious IMHO. It has to be one of the worst fonts ever. The color scheme, or lack thereof is not appealing and is quite dull. The overall design and interface could be greatly improved. Perhaps through the implementation of Discover your community - DISQUS for a comment feature.
> ...



Sometimes I surprise myself.


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 21, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Sometimes I surprise myself.



Take two memory cards out of petty cash..... you earned it!


----------



## Joey_Ricard (Mar 21, 2012)

Everyone lets pat ourselves on the back!

Good thing he didn't ask for C&C on his website


----------



## Forkie (Mar 21, 2012)

What is it with photography websites spelling things without the 'E'?


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 21, 2012)

Forkie said:


> What is it with photography websites spelling things without the 'E'?



There's only so many E's on the innernets, you know.

We gotta save 'em for things like e-mail, e-commerce, e-banking etc.


----------



## KmH (Mar 21, 2012)

I think it's really cool the way a lot of the photos get distorted so they fit in the square thumbnail boxes. :er:


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 21, 2012)

KmH said:


> I think it's really cool the way a lot of the photos get distorted so they fit in the square thumbnail boxes. :er:



And slobbered with the site's watermark.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 25, 2012)

nochbag said:


> this site is great! i love the simplification. finally, a site that doesn't steal your photos like Facebook, is terrible to navigate like flickr, and is TROLL FREE! how about that trolls!



This must be your first time on the internet. The site "steals" your photos by putting their own watermark on your photos, did you notice? Does facebook do that? Nope. BTW, you said "Finally,..., a site as terrible to navigate as flickr." Were you trying to praise the non-existent design?


----------



## tirediron (Mar 25, 2012)

Oh brother...


----------



## 480sparky (Mar 25, 2012)

Strange.... it says he has 4 posts, but only one of 'em shows up.  :er:


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 25, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Strange.... it says he has 4 posts, but only one of 'em shows up.  :er:



According to my view, it says he has 2 posts. Haha.


----------



## Overread (Mar 26, 2012)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...aphy-websites/32982-attention-read-first.html

sdfink04 please read the linked thread and then contact the sites administration team as referenced with regard to advertising your site on the forums. For now I've removed the original references to your company from the opening post.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 26, 2012)

nochbag said:


> You are all stupid trolls so i'll explain it to you since you obviously cannot use any logical thinking at all. The site watermarks the photos, so that others do not STEAL them. If you posted photos for sale on a site, would you want people to be able to right click and save the photos? i guess so, if you were a troll. ANd btw, do you both spend your lives on this site being trolls? 5000 posts a piece? really? get a life.



Hi Nochbag, are you sure your name isn't douchebag? 

Did you not see post #7 in which I rendered a lot of valuable information? Check it out: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...bsites/277631-new-photo-site.html#post2540629

If I'm hosting an image on a website, and they're watermarking it with their logo w/o a prompt or checkbox that says during upload "Would you like the PhotoRankr watermark applied to your image?" then it is essentially image theft on their part. At least in my opinion, they are modifying your work without consent and more than likely harming the image by putting a big huge watermark in the corner of the image with no degree of transparency. 

Having right click disabled is enough for most people to be deterred from downloading an image, however it doesn't necessarily protect your images if you encounter someone with a resource viewer. It's just as easy to snag the highest resolution files with a little digging. 

If you want to protect your digital images online, you're going to need a lot more than a simple watermark anyway. But, you probably don't even realize that. Ever heard of the clone brush (or content aware fill) tools in CS5? Lots of image pirates have.


----------



## MTVision (Mar 26, 2012)

nochbag said:
			
		

> NO **** black guy with a wig hahaha. pirates can get anything, that's why they're called pirates. as for you, maybe u should find a 'better designed' forum that doesn't look like **** to troll on



Wow! 
How old are you? 15....
Maybe you should get back to school and learn something useful


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Mar 26, 2012)

480sparky said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > I think it's really cool the way a lot of the photos get distorted so they fit in the square thumbnail boxes. :er:
> ...



Professionalism!  They try to convince us that at the school house too.


----------



## o hey tyler (Mar 26, 2012)

Maybe you should stay in highschool and stop acting like you are knowledgeable about how the internet and photography displayed on the web works. Judging by the great offense that you took about the design of PhotoRankr, I can only assume based on your level of typing skill, and your distinct lack thought processes that you are indeed one of the people working on the site. Perhaps even the "designer" of the site (if you want to call it designed, but that's giving the site far too much credit) 

Truthfully, I've seen wireframe mockups of websites that have more of an aesthetically pleasing design than this complete and functioning website (PhotoRankr). 

You appear to be the one who's trolling, as I actually offered the OP useful advice to consider when developing a website. 

FYI, VBulletin is pretty standard as far as forums go. Other forums on the same platform are going to look, and behave similarly. Of course, you don't realize that because you're a highschool kid taking the class "Intro to the Internet 101."

Lastly, my Avatar is a mashup between 50 Cent and Justin Bieber. This further goes to show how thick headed, and immature you are. GLWL.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Mar 26, 2012)

Do go on!


----------



## cgipson1 (Mar 26, 2012)

nochbag;2545297}
And i got half the this website crying over my comments! I'm only 15! You probably are an admin at this site said:
			
		

> Such language ... naughty naughty!!


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Mar 26, 2012)

This is the best thread all day!  "LOL" doesn't do it justice  

I'm certain you do know more about this kind of thing than any of us.  I mean, hell, when I was 15 I knew it ALL!  I am now but a poor shadow of my formerly omniscient self.  Such a sick sense of humor, The Divine.


----------

