Website

[Bill Pierce]

Apologies for being absent for a week. I'm on the road and, between jet lag and busywork, my free time disappeared. A website I was working on before I left home finally got up and running. When I have time to get back to it, there will be a lot of changes. But, at least, you can log on to it. There are some "professional" pictures. But many of the images are "between assignments" or "amateur" or whatever you want to call them. I would appreciate any comments and, hopefully, constructive criticism. The site is http://www.billpiercepictures.com.

Bill

[Solinar]

I liked the presentation of your work and it loaded pretty much instantly on to my PC - which is more than several years old.

[back alley]

i like it, the style and muted grays, but the change over from photo to photo seemed slow.

[tmfabian]

Originally Posted by photomoof

Just for the record, I am totally against non-semantic web sites, unless you totally want to avoid being found by search engines except by your name, or meta tag.

It works for some kinds of clients, but still, all flash is problematic, I use it only for films, not stills.

Otherwise call me...

Actually google and adobe have worked this out, flash websites and content are now searchable.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/...awl-flash.html

I like the site, simple and easy to figure out. which is refreshing these days, some sites have so many options and buttons i just quit and go somewhere else.

[Bill Pierce]

Originally Posted by photomoof

Just for the record, I am totally against non-semantic web sites, unless you totally want to avoid being found by search engines except by your name, or meta tag.

Fred -

Supposedly this site has a block of "hidden" text visible to the search engines. When I finally get back home and manage to install some tracking features, I'll let you know if it's working.

Bill

[f/stopblues]

Bill, I really enjoyed looking at your work on the site! A surprising number of people's candid photos (in the so-called RF style) don't pass my initial sniff test.. "why did the photog show me this photo?" Yours are full of life!

The actual interface of the site was quick to figure out. I'm no expert, but it kept me browsing for quite a while.

[rolly]

I like your site. I knew your name but not your work; having looked at the site I felt it was unpretentious and now I could say I have a sense of what your "voice" is. Loved the 2D section; didn't like the portraits section, thought those could be in other sections, but you probably want to display portraits. What are your favorite photos?-- is there some way to set up a renewable or changing exhibit? I'm a writer with a love of photography, and I appreciated few words. Tell the story with the pictures, no cheating (unless there is a good story that makes this rule worth breaking-- or something historic that is not widely known...or, in the case of Nixon, has been forgotten...)-- I'd visit again or often if there were changing galleries. But I really liked it!

[Bill Pierce]

Originally Posted by rolly

I'd visit again or often if there were changing galleries. But I really liked it!

I'm on the road right now, but I have set up the site so I can change and add pictures easily. There's no doubt I'll be doing that when I get home. And the input from the forum is going to be a help.

[Bill Pierce]

Originally Posted by f/stopblues

Bill, I really enjoyed looking at your work on the site! A surprising number of people's candid photos (in the so-called RF style) don't pass my initial sniff test.. "why did the photog show me this photo?" Yours are full of life!

The actual interface of the site was quick to figure out. I'm no expert, but it kept me browsing for quite a while.

Chris -

Needless to say, thanks.

Bill

[Bill Pierce]

Originally Posted by photomoof

Bill there are two Metatags on your site for Google, so it should appear in the search engines.

Fred -

Thanks.

Bill

[swoop]

That is a fantastic website and incredible body of work.