On 2/22/07, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When I go through an album, I tend to move back and forth through the
> images. One will make me think about another, and I'll go back and
> forth. Your web design, with that separate window that shows whatever
> has most recently been clicked on on the main page doesn't even allow
> flipping between two browser instances.
>
> And I can't just click on a new thumbnail without first closing the
> image window, or the image window is then hidden behind the thumbnail
> window. I know you roll your own code, although I don't know why.
Because I don't want to start from scratch. I also enjoy it a little
bit when I'm rolling some code. It also forces me to think about the
images I put out there since it's not as easy as just uploading a
bunch of images to create a web page. It requires a little bit of
effort and forethought. Just because it is easy to create a gallery
of 100 images doesn't mean one should do it.
> What I do know is that. at least for me, you web design detracts from
> rather than adding to, your images. YMMV
Then don't waste your time with my distracting web site. I doesn't
matter enough to me to modernize it. I don't care so much for most
the current examples of photo web sites and I don't have the incentive
to try to make mine different from what it is. There is no compelling
reason from my point of view that a person should spend a moment
longer at my web site than they can stand.
> Wow, I sound like you look in AG's ferry photo. Oh well, I figure those
> who don't ask get what they ask for.
Your criticism is very fair from your point of view. I just don't
care one way or the other. If I were trying to sell my photos on the
web, that might be quite a different story.
> So now I've wandered through some images - have a new gripe. In Firefox,
> horizontal images come up reduced to fit the size of the viewing window,
> and pretty darn small. Click on them and they enlarge to their native
> size - but the window doesn't get bigger and there is no scroll bar, so
> only part of the image is visible. Yeah, does the same thing in IE.
>
> Moose
Basically, the javascript simply opens the image in a new window. The
new window is sized to the image. It's hard-coded. Either I get that
right or I don't. If you try to open multiple images, it gets messed
up and sends the browser window to the background. This is just
normal browser behavior. It's meant to work one way. Click the
thumbnail. It opens in a specifically sized window. View the image
in that window and close it. Pick another image and do the same
thing. That's how it works for me and that's how it is meant to work.
I can't duplicate the behavior you are getting, though I don't doubt
that you are getting the behavior you describe. I just can't evaluate
how to fix it or whether it is fixable unless I can duplicate it.
It's quite possible that since browsers are so much different from
what they were when I came up with this design that there are
preference settings that can ball up the works.
I do appreciate your looking. Please don't take it personally that I
have no particular interest in your feelings about the web design. I
didn't put the images out there as a way of soliciting feedback about
the web design. I realize that people do like to solicit that sort of
feedback, so much so that it has become normal for viewers to give the
feedback unsolicited -- so no harm, no foul.
Joel W.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|