DSLRUsers.com

Who doesnt charge $3,000 for a simple flash based site (using XML)They do exist i know they do....Similar to this page http://www.bcsacs.com/

I am looking to build a site (flash Gallery) based.....any recommendations?



Cheers
Dan

Decent websites don't use Flash.

Ive seen alot of pro photog's in USA using the following sort of pre-made flash sites you can change and customise to a degree...

clickbooq - http://www.clickbooq.com
livebooks - http://www.livebooks.com
bludomain - http://www.bludomain.com
bigfolio - http://www.bigfolio.com

... but Id rather a static page - more google friendly.

Jonathan

PM sent..

Cre8tivepixels wrote:Who doesnt charge $3,000 for a simple flash based site (using XML)They do exist i know they do....Similar to this page http://www.bcsacs.com/

I am looking to build a site (flash Gallery) based.....any recommendations?



Cheers
Dan

Hi Dan,

I have just bought a site from http://www.creativemotiondesign.com/

They are template based but the company is very flexible and let you mix and match their designs. The back end UI is very easy to use and they serve my purpose.

I looked at the Bludomain ones for ages but do a google search and there are a LOT of unhappy customers out there due to their lack of support (I sent them two emails and got a reply 10 days later, not good enough).

Cheers.

ps: make sure you send them an email first and ask for a discount. I got $200 off the price just like that!!!

I agree with Gary.

As a very long time net-savvy internet user I have grown to hate Flash websites and pages and tend to close them very quickly as they require a user to sit and look at it, rather than getting on with it.

If a website takes more than five seconds to do something, like give me access or some kind of choice then my mouse pointer is heading straight to the close X

Fully Flash websites are more annoying than Harvey Norman adverts or Bunnings catalogues.

You can't beat HTML for speed and ease on the eyes for us people with short attention spans.

Flash should be used only for things like headers or little boxes tucked out of the way of the real information, which is what the Internet is all about. Completely Flash based website are unnecessary and waste bandwidth.

They might look nice but if I wanted bright colours and movement, I'll turn on the telly.

IMHO

Killakoala wrote:
I'll turn on the telly.

IMHO

But then you will see the Harvey Norman and Bunnings ads!!!

But Flashy is sooo purty

Man seriously YOU guys absolutely ROCK!!!!!!


Thanks so much to you all for the replies and the help

Killakoala wrote:As a very long time net-savvy internet user I have grown to hate Flash websites and pages and tend to close them very quickly as they require a user to sit and look at it, rather than getting on with it.

Exactly.

What is the purpose of the website, people? Do you want to attract business, or drive it away?

With simple, fast loading html or php, your risk of putting people off because of an unresponsive site is minimised. Use flash, and some people will say "wow". And a lot will go elsewhere, because it takes forever to load.

And a lot will go elsewhere regardless.

If a website takes more than five seconds to do something, like give me access or some kind of choice then my mouse pointer is heading straight to the close X

Exactly.

Flash should be used only for things like headers or little boxes tucked out of the way of the real information, which is what the Internet is all about. Completely Flash based website are unnecessary and waste bandwidth.

Exactly.

They might look nice but if I wanted bright colours and movement, I'll turn on the telly.

I have some coloured ribbons I can wave in the breeze, Steve.

W00DY wrote:But Flashy is sooo purty

But it's not much use if it's going to piss off some potential clients.

So the answer is to offer a choice in an opening page then. Sorted.

Dan, you could give it a go yourself, for what you need it's not too hard

I'd also recommend this dude: http://www.webnerd.com.au/

My view is that with the net getting faster and faster most sites will be flash or a variant someday soon......

I'm running about a 30 Mbit hole in the internet and flash still P!sses me off !

Mate, I'm actually a designer. It's my full time day job and I also do small, legitimate with an ABN, freelance jobs on the side (that don't go on forever like so many stories we've all heard before). I am currently working on a project that may have a lot of relevance to what you are looking for. I use a combination of Flash and HTML. Feel free to send me a PM to ask any questions you might have with no obligation whatsoever. Cheers.

3 Gb monthly traffic limit on my wireless account (which also gets used by my 15 yo daughter). No flash for me thanks.

Having been on both sides (development and as a client) of the coin, I can't stand full Flash websites.

Other things to consider include search engine rankings. How is the search engine going to rank you on your content when it can't read it because it's all embedded in Flash? Oh wait...it can't!

XHTML and CSS is the way to go for future proofing your site. Look at the trends...sorry but Flash doesn't really have much practical uses anymore.

I am also a designer by discipline, though I haven't touched flash since v5. I can say in Flash's defence that it is good solid technology, though people tend to use it to annoying ends.

I recently (over) quoted a big flash banner ad job, and I am partially glad. I personally do what I can to block them. As Gary said html or php is all you need.

Cre8tivepixels wrote:My view is that with the net getting faster and faster most sites will be flash or a variant someday soon......

Dan,

You are certainly entitled to your view on this.

Even if it's wrong.

gstark wrote:

Cre8tivepixels wrote:My view is that with the net getting faster and faster most sites will be flash or a variant someday soon......

Dan,

You are certainly entitled to your view on this.

Even if it's wrong.

Yeah well i dont really know i think i was getting the other versions mixed up...and plainly i am wrong.....lol

I do websites on the side for cheaper rates than most web designers. Standard rate is about $500 or so. I don't work from templates and generally can accomodate what you want into the site.

Some examples (some of these didn't cost $500, mind you):

http://www.jamesdwade.com/test/newcmbmx
http://www.loumarafioti.com/
http://www.henleydistrictslittleathletics.com/
http://www.thegator.com.au/
http://www.ugzine.com & http://blog.ugzine.com
http://www.dishonourclothing.com

Nothing wrong with Flash and its associated technologies (flex etc) but it really comes down to matching technology with requirement.

Get the requirements sorted first and ignore the technology.

Every technology option has its pros and cons. Consider that this site (dslrusers) uses fairly modest technology (php, mysql) and little graphical embellishment, but clearly fulfills the primary task.

The example you provided could have been achieved in any number of ways... think about whether you want a static or dynamic site and how often you might wish to make changes. You'll possibly not want to pay someone else every time you want to add or change content for example, so that will be a significant aspect in the design and technology selection.

Hope this helps rather than hinders....

Michael.