Re: Web site/New images

["Keith Zimmerman" <zz_ir@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Clive's statement that we should spend more time giving
feedback.  But I think the main point of the feedback should be the images
rather than the site.  That is the purpose of this list.  The site is just
the means of sharing those images, for there is nothing to look at without
the images.

Keith Zimmerman
zz_ir@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://homepage.davesworld.net/~vkzimm/infrared.html


----- Original Message -----
From: "Clive Warren" <Clive.Warren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <infrared@xxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 4:17 AM
Subject: RE: Web site/New images


> At 8:15 am +0000 5/3/01, kevan.brewer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >At least Symon got some comments. I got ONE short comment off-list
> >(thanks Jaap). Maybe I should have used PDF...
> >
> >Kevan
> >
> >>  -----Original Message-----
> >>  From: Brewer, Kevan [mailto:kevan.brewer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>  Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 8:32 AM
> >>  To: 'infrared@xxxxx'
> >>  Subject: Web site
> >>
> >>  I have updated my web site (see below) with some of my first
> >>  infrared pictures.
> >>   There's a few SFX and some HIE photos. I have also included
> >>  an 'About
> >>  Infrared' section to give the interested reader a brief intro
> >>  to infrared (it
> >>  links to the FAQ for further reading).
> >>
> >>  Any comments, suggestions or criticisms on any of the
> >>  pictures or the site
> >>  would be welcome.
> >>
> >>  Kevan Brewer
> >>  --
> >  > http://www.like7.com/
>
>
> Kevan,
>
> Probably a simple matter of time - one site took up a lot of time and
> frustrated a few people, yours was easy to navigate and took less
> time.
>
> When visiting your site I thought your SFX photos were good and
> demonstrated that the film is a capable infrared performer. Until
> seeing your shots I had written SFX off as an infrared film of choice.
>
> The best way to tell if people like your work is to check on the
> visitor statistics of your web site.
>
> One of my sites has had only two pieces of feedback - both negative
> regarding a statement about lens coverage which is in fact correct!
> However, looking at the visitor statistics the site is very popular
> with a lot of repeat visitors.
>
> We should probably take a little more time for giving feedback to
> people who have put the effort into placing their images on a web
> site, particularly if they are infrared images and the the people are
> members of this list!
> --
> All the best,
>
>               Clive   http://www.cocam.co.uk
>                       Photographic Services, Filters and Equipment,
Infrared FAQ
> http://www.f32.net
> Large Format Travel and Stock Photography
> *
> ****
> *******
> ******************************************************
> *  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
> *         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
> *       to                                           *
> *         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
> *----------------------------------------------------*
> *   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
> *  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
> ******************************************************
>

*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************