Fabke's NEW photosite

[Fabke]

After some months of searching for a new photogallery and a better one than FOTOPIC , I decided to make a complete new photogallery with Coppermine , the first photos are now online and can be found at airpage.free.fr/coppermine/index.php

Much more photos will be added and also the layout will still change , soon this gallery will replace my photogallery at the fotopic site.

Comments ar very welcome

[Chrisse]

Looks really nice, I must say and it's different enough from the Fotopic-lay out to make it draw attention

Oh, and since you asked for comments: When looking at the 'static' part of RIAT, I felt I had to remind you that static indicates the aircraft are standing still (Ahum: Hunter, B-52 ) Sorry, couldn't resist. I like the look though and am looking forward to more! Cheers, mate, I'll have one to celebrate.

[Fabke]

chrisse said:

Looks really nice, I must say and it's different enough from the Fotopic-lay out to make it draw attention

Oh, and since you asked for comments: When looking at the 'static' part of RIAT, I felt I had to remind you that static indicates the aircraft are standing still (Ahum: Hunter, B-52 ) Sorry, couldn't resist. I like the look though and am looking forward to more! Cheers, mate, I'll have one to celebrate.

Thanks for the comments , I hope that everybody will find this much better than the fotopic site.

Thanks also for the remark about the static part of the RIAT report , I still have to learn with this program and that's why those flying planes were placed in the static part , it's fixed now

Feel free to give comments , even negative comments are welcome , only this way I will learn and see what you like

[Jumbo]

Hey Fab,

Am I right to say that you want to leave Fotopic mostly because of the adds that appeared some time ago ?
Or is there another reason ?

I personally think Fotopic is OK, but I am only showing a limited number of collections

With Coppermine, do you need to upload your pics to a specific website, or are they all on your own website ? The latter implicates that one should have a personal website up and running, isn't it ?

The looks of your new site are different from what we were used to, but it feel OK.

Greetz,

Jumbo

[Fabke]

maverick said:

Hey Fab,

Am I right to say that you want to leave Fotopic mostly because of the adds that appeared some time ago ?
Or is there another reason ?

With Coppermine, do you need to upload your pics to a specific website, or are they all on your own website ? The latter implicates that one should have a personal website up and running, isn't it ?

The looks of your new site are different from what we were used to, but it feel OK.

Greetz,

Jumbo

To answer your first question , yes and no...the adds aren't the biggest problem but what I don't like with fotopic is that they compress your uploaded photos what results is very poor quality photos , this can't be disabled if you have a free account

Coppermine is a PHP based website that you have to upload to your own server , in my case to the FREE.FR server , webspace is no problem as I have 1GB for my photo storage ;D ;D ;D

The look of this new site will still change , it's all in a test fase right now

Still one question , is the quality of the photos better than on fotopic or don't you really see the difference and is the size ok or should be be 1000 pixels wide instead of 1200 pixels?

Thanks for your feedback

[Flyboytjen]

Well Fab, I'll think that the pics are OK at the size U upload them now.
Of course it will make a difference by people to people, if they are using 15"/17" or a 19" screen.

For me it's OK but if it is really better then fotopic...? maybe you must do a try out with 2 exactly the same pics

But...I will also take a look to change, because I like your lay-out!


C U and I which you lots of success with this new photo site!

FB

[Chrisse]

After the first test at home yesterday, I tried it from work today. It seems that I need to scroll sideways a little with the big pictures. I didn't notice it yesterday at home but did today It's a pity as the design is really nice, but the size of pictures is a little too big. Is the idea that people can download the pics in a size suitable for most desktops?

[Fabke]

chrisse said:

After the first test at home yesterday, I tried it from work today. It seems that I need to scroll sideways a little with the big pictures. I didn't notice it yesterday at home but did today It's a pity as the design is really nice, but the size of pictures is a little too big. Is the idea that people can download the pics in a size suitable for most desktops?

Thanks again for your comments.

Some other visitors have sent me an email that the photos are too large for their screen , they were 1200pixels large.

I can make it so that you can see them on a small resolution , about 500-600 pixels large and once you click on it , you can get the full size BUT I don't like it that way , it's not easy for the visitor when he has to click on every thumbnail and then again on the picture itself , so I decided to show them on 1000 pixels , that should be ok for everybody , I don't think that there are still many people who work with a screen which is setup to 800 pixels or am I wrong?

Anyway , I still have to rearrange the photos , but those from the TDPU's spottersday at Florennes are now in the new 1000 pixels format , let me know if this is better

[Chrisse]

Fabke, I agree that the intermediate 500-600 solution would indeed not be a good solution, if only for bandwidth and practical clicking reasons

The TDPU pictures at res 1000 display perfectly well here at my work computer, 1280*1200. I'll check it out with a 1024 setup at home later on too Thanks for keeping the comments in mind, you're a star.

[Chrisse]

Ok, with 1024, you get a sideways scroll bar for about 20% of your screen at the bottom. Up to you if you want to keep it that way. I know that at my site about 60% of visitors use 1024x768 resolution. I don't mind the side-ways scrolling for a nice picture so it's really your choice

[Fabke]

chrisse said:

Ok, with 1024, you get a sideways scroll bar for about 20% of your screen at the bottom. Up to you if you want to keep it that way. I know that at my site about 60% of visitors use 1024x768 resolution. I don't mind the side-ways scrolling for a nice picture so it's really your choice

Thanks again for your reply , I really appreciate it , maybe I should make the photos 950 pixels wide to fix in a 1024 screen resolution , I'll see.

Once I know what to do with this photo site I'll make a complete new website to replace Fabke's AIRSHOW page , but , this will happen next year I'm affraid

[Vonsmalhausen]

not bad at all
it's just that i hate scrolling a pic i know.....i'm lazy ;D
that's why i stick with Fotopic : one click on a thumbnail, and you get a full-screen pic.... no scrolling to see it ( at least, not in my case )
but overall i have to say that the quality of the pics are excellent

[Fabke]

I'm back again , what do you think now , photos can be seen in a smaller resolution which fix perfect on a 1024 and 1200 pixels screen and when clicking on it you can get the full size

Does this looks better or not?

[Chrisse]

Honestly, this looks wonderful. No scrolling anymore, nice design too, not to mention the quality of the pictures Can't wait to see it all like that, but I know these things take time. We never have as much of that as we'd like, right?

[Fabke]

chrisse said:

Honestly, this looks wonderful. No scrolling anymore, nice design too, not to mention the quality of the pictures Can't wait to see it all like that, but I know these things take time. We never have as much of that as we'd like, right?

Thanks , much appreciated the work you did by testing my new site , I'll start uploading more and more photos