Martin Stricker hat geschrieben: In fact I disagree. I don't think that's a good idea to crown PL as a new King. I think it's inadequate.
You're welcome to your opinion. At the concept stage, the overarching strategy is a valid point of discussion.
Martin Stricker hat geschrieben:The better way is to show the possibilitys of PL in a pleasant design.
Again, that's an option, but not one that I think is particularly interesting or effective -- the fact is that every single image editor on the planet has very pleasant images that were created with it. Nothing unique to PL about that, nor does simply showing pleasant images emphasize the important features of PL and give users a reason to try it. The same is true of simply creating a Web site design that merely copies the same features that are seen elsewhere.
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
Two initial things to consider are the target user group(s) of Photoline, and the competition. A competitive analysis can be eye-opening.
I always show my students the Photoline website, and ask for their opinion. One of the main challenges of the current home page, for example, is identity: none of the students, after examining the front page, understand what Photoline is, and what it can do. The information in the left sidebar is generally regarded as too technical in nature, and puts most off from even trying Photoline. Some students will not even take PL seriously because of the website, and the campy looking standard colourful icons GUI.
Another thing to note is that sliders are known to be rather useless - most visitors will read the first slide, perhaps the second one, and that is it. A slider only works when there is an effective reason to continue viewing the slides (such as a relevant sequentially ordered range of slides). This has been proven time and again in usability research. It is arguably a much better idea to perhaps have a rotating set of static headers. It also speeds up page loading.
In fact, information and content should not be hidden by visual eye candy.
Content is king. If a visitor cannot understand the message within a couple of seconds, you will lose the majority of potential customers.
Looking from a competitive point of view, Photoline is NOT a simple image editor that is aimed at users who merely require a simple editor to resize their images (for example). Photoline is a professional grade image editor and design tool, with a number of unique features that are simply not present in other competing applications - Photoshop included.
Yet certain features are NOT available in Photoline, or rather weak compared to the competition. For example, I would not do my initial RAW developing in Photoline - other specialized tools (Raw Therapee, DxO, etc.) are better suited for that. In short, to market Photoline, we have to realize both the advantages, and the caveats of Photoline.
In my opinion the CC model has opened a new market segment for Photoline to operate in. It is also one of the only editors that supports quite advanced features such as full 16/32bpc editing, a HSV workflow, and other goodies.
The first question we should ask ourselves is: who are the target audiences of Photoline? Why would they convert from other applications to Photoline? And, when they do, how can they be supported in their migration to Photoline? The last question is also quite essential to answer: currently the documentation is spartan, and there are almost no online tutorials. Gimp, for example, offers much more support to new users: a special Gimp book-azine is now available in most bookstores here in Vancouver and other English speaking countries. Thousands of tutorials are available. While Gimp is a much weaker image editor than Photoline, no-one will disagree here that without proper community support, other image editors will be more attractive propositions to migrate to, no matter the functionality. When the functionality is misunderstood, no-one will work with it.
All questions to be answered. I believe it would be a good idea to compare to products such as Paint Shop Pro, Affinity Photo (they do a splendid job marketing themselves), Corel PhotoPaint, and even partly Photoshop (sans 3d and video aspects). Identify the strengths of Photoline, and play with those while designing the content for the new website.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: I always show my students the Photoline website, and ask for their opinion. One of the main challenges of the current home page, for example, is identity: none of the students, after examining the front page, understand what Photoline is, and what it can do. The information in the left sidebar is generally regarded as too technical in nature, and puts most off from even trying Photoline. Some students will not even take PL seriously because of the website, and the campy looking standard colourful icons GUI.
Interesting, thanks for that.
But don't those responses say more about the mindlessness of the students than anything egregiously wrong with the Web site?
If someone is so trivially upset about the look of the Web site that they don't think about the product itself, can they ever be sold a copy of PL? Won't they be spending the rest of their lives slavishly chasing after the next "new thing"?
Like it or not, there are some concepts in image editing that can only be described by using technical terms. If some students are unable to understand even the simplest of technical terms, they will always be at a disadvantage, no matter what software they use.
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: In fact, information and content should not be hidden by visual eye candy.
Content is king. If a visitor cannot understand the message within a couple of seconds, you will lose the majority of potential customers.
I agree. If the Hubers decide to position PL as the Photoshop replacement, then my modest proposal a) leaves no doubt that you're working with an image editing application, and b) re-enforces the message that PL is the new replacement for PS.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: The first question we should ask ourselves is: who are the target audiences of Photoline? Why would they convert from other applications to Photoline
I think those are the second questions to ask. The first question is "What is PhotoLine and how will it be positioned in the market?"
Based on the answers to those two questions, the answers to your two questions could logically be obtained.
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: Identify the strengths of Photoline, and play with those while designing the content for the new website.
Yes. In other words, once you've identified the superior features of PL that you want to emphasize, you illustrate those features with specific examples.
Doing that is a far cry from merely showing pretty pictures because...well...that's all we've got and they sure look pretty.
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: In fact, information and content should not be hidden by visual eye candy.
Content is king. If a visitor cannot understand the message within a couple of seconds, you will lose the majority of potential customers.
I agree. If the Hubers decide to position PL as the Photoshop replacement, then my modest proposal a) leaves no doubt that you're working with an image editing application, and b) re-enforces the message that PL is the new replacement for PS.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: The first question we should ask ourselves is: who are the target audiences of Photoline? Why would they convert from other applications to Photoline
I think those are the second questions to ask. The first question is "What is PhotoLine and how will it be positioned in the market?"
Based on the answers to those two questions, the answers to your two questions could logically be obtained.
Yes, although in my opinion both questions are equally important. Without knowing your audience, you cannot market your product - without knowing your product and the market place (competition) you cannot market your product. I tend to focus more on users/customers, and others on the market - although in the end both go hand in hand, indeed.
As for the students, I think I should provide a bit more background information: all of them are either designers or developers learning all aspects of web development. Various ages, backgrounds, nationalities, and gender. Most are quite savvy in terms of technology. I think the current home page content does demonstrate a distinct lack in (audience targeted) content design, and it is quite telling that most of the students I asked could not explain to me what kind of product Photoline is after a quick look, no matter their technical expertise.
Compare this response to the one the students have in regards to the websites of Pixelmator and Affinity (which I also show them for comparison), and it is quite interesting to see that Photoline's website obfuscates, rather than confirms its identity.
Herbert123 hat geschrieben: most of the students I asked could not explain to me what kind of product Photoline is after a quick look, no matter their technical expertise.
I don't doubt what you're saying. Maybe it's just me, but I will never in a million years understand their inability to describe PL, since it's stated in large text at the upper right (complete with illustrations in the top area).
Maybe the PL description will always have to be more complicated than the simple apps you mentioned, because PL does image editing and vector graphics (and more)....
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
photoken hat geschrieben:If someone is so trivially upset about the look of the Web site that they don't think about the product itself, can they ever be sold a copy of PL? Won't they be spending the rest of their lives slavishly chasing after the next "new thing"?
Is this really important. When someone is (for example in a forum) asking for Software to edit photos, he will get much answers with many recommendations of programs. When this man opens the Websites of 5 programs he will do a quick selection. Unfortunately do people often make decisions really fast und don't spent much time in reading the features of the programs. I'm sure, that many potential customers choose other programs because of the first look of the Website.
Where is the problem to make a new Website. It's no job which takes so much time. What can Photoline/Computerinsel loose?
Andreas Huber hat geschrieben:Ono, your "Slider" doesn't optimize the pictures with a certain resolution. E.g. on my Nexus 4 the header image is full sized.
I've fixed it, but it does not have anything to do with CSS @keyframe based slideshow. It was more about setting good thresholds and matching image sizes, somehow I skipped one threshold around 400px width.
Andreas Huber hat geschrieben:To put it in a nutshell, here's my redesign (including the Support-Section)
I am sorry to be picky about details, but most of your icons are NOT pixel-aligned (blurry), also you miss Retina support. Also your "Features" section layout is IMHO really unreadable as everything is too much packed and has too many blank white areas. Please compare side by side: http://www.nanoant.com/photoline http://andreas.thetmc.net/photoline/
Please don't get offended, but using some high-flown sentences, like "editing photos was never been easier before" or explaining what's vector graphics sounds silly to me. It think we should just name most notable features and select best screenshots that represent them - letting the image be 1000 words. I think it is very important to keep only screenshots, so visitors are sure that the picture itself is getting edited in the PhotoLine, and there is no cheating.
Also I don't think using JavaScript is necessary, modern browsers support CSS @keyframe http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css3_pr ... frames.asp, for older browsers we just fall back to single image. This way we make the whole site load faster and has less dependencies.
Falaffel hat geschrieben:Is this really important. When someone is (for example in a forum) asking for Software to edit photos, he will get much answers with many recommendations of programs. When this man opens the Websites of 5 programs he will do a quick selection. Unfortunately do people often make decisions really fast und don't spent much time in reading the features of the programs. I'm sure, that many potential customers choose other programs because of the first look of the Website. (...)
This is exactly why I created this (yet another) thread. How you can convince someone that program is great if its website looks bad. This could work for some programming language, text editor, or a hacking/debugger tool, but for a design/computer graphics tool - the website has to keep the standards.
Another false impression you get looking at website is that the program itself is old or abandonware, unless you move your eyes onto data of latest release.
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
One more thing. The Screenshots in your new designs should be made with the dark UI. Most programs today have a dark UI in standard and unfortuately many people will think, the program is not up-to-date when they see the grey UI.
I don't like these facts too, but unfortunately this is the reality today.
Falaffel hat geschrieben:One more thing. The Screenshots in your new designs should be made with the dark UI. Most programs today have a dark UI in standard and unfortuately many people will think, the program is not up-to-date when they see the grey UI.
I don't like these facts too, but unfortunately this is the reality today.
In fact they are, not very dark but my darkness setting is 192, I can make it lower though.
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
Falaffel hat geschrieben: Unfortunately do people often make decisions really fast und don't spent much time in reading the features of the programs.
Like I said, there's really no accounting for the foolishness of some people. If they want to throw away their money without making an informed decision about their purchase, they've got a real problem and there's no point in chasing after such empty-headed people.
Falaffel hat geschrieben: Where is the problem to make a new Website. It's no job which takes so much time.
That's where you're wrong -- it takes a lot of time, effort, and thought to create an effective Web site because that site must be a part of a general marketing strategy.
I have not been arguing against a re-design, but I have been arguing against those who just think of a Web site as an isolated thing, and who want to simply get their jollies by playing at "Web Designer" by creating amateurish pages that merely look pretty, or trendy, or mimic what those amateurs saw somewhere else.
Ken Yes, I think it can be eeeeeasily done....
Just take everything out on Highway 61.
Torsten hat geschrieben:I have some thoughts made me in my spare time, a redesign of PhotoLine site would look like. Here is come the following out: http://pl32.webagentur-scholz.de/5Lorg45Xf/
Not bad at all. I like the layout. But the icon.... it is the old dull one, please use the recent one Also way too many stock pictures having absolutely nothing to do with PhotoLine, what's the point of putting just plain photos? What the main top plain photo has to do with PhotoLine, even if it was corrected in PhotoLine there are many other programs (including free ones) that can do the same. It is nice lizard photo, but nothing else.
The pictures has to show something specific about PhotoLine, and something that was done exclusively in PhotoLine that was some real effort. It may sound immodest of mine, but we need to show more things like Lens Silver/White.pld from Samples. Mine were done is some specific vector+effects technique. But you can do many more things in PhotoLine, like brush painting, some 3D extrusion. Such things should lang on main site. Maybe you guys did some nice designs, logos or (PDF) layouts in PhotoLine, such things would be great.
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
Thank you Ono. I wanted to make the layout quickly finished. To show it, I was helping me the stock photography.
Only the image of the lizard is a photo of me.
I agree with you completely, we must integrate the new logo and show what is possible with PhotoLine.
The images can be exchanged quickly.
Also way too many stock pictures having absolutely nothing to do with PhotoLine, what's the point of putting just plain photos? What the main top plain photo has to do with PhotoLine, even if it was corrected in PhotoLine there are many other programs (including free ones) that can do the same. It is nice lizard photo, but nothing else.