| These links to photography sites here are links
to sites that predominately feature high quality landscape or nature
images. I specifically do not want the list to grow to be some all-inclusive
list of every photo site in the world. Not only are there already many
such lists, but the links are often broken as they are too difficult
to maintain. This is simply a list of the best sites I have encountered.
Inclusion in this list is pretty
much by invitation only, but if you think your site satisfies
the selection guidelines (below) drop me a line. In short,
a site must show a high degree of excellence, in the photography
and/or site design, preferably both.
The links are organised in alphabetical order, by business name or
photographer's surname.
Linking to this site
If you are linking to this site from a page that allows the use
of banners please use this
banner. With or without a banner please link to the site's root
level, ie. http://www.robgray.com with a link text
of "Nature Photography by Rob Gray". Here's
the code to make life easier.
Short
version
<a href="http://www.robgray.com"
target="_blank">Nature Photography by Rob Gray</a>
Longer version
<a href="http://www.robgray.com"
target="_blank">Nature Photography by Rob Gray</a>Australian
nature photography and living on the road in Australia's weirdest
off-road motorhome.
Guidlines for inclusion
| Absolute
must-haves. |
B&W
landscape photographs or nature photographs
depending on the list. This should go without
saying I suppose, but you never know. Sites with
ONLY B&W landscape or nature images are more
favoured as that's where my interest lies. A wedding
site with a few antelope photos will not be included. |
| Turn-ons |
Simple
design. Not
too many frames.
Consistent design.
The same or similar treatment of type, headings, logos
etc. on all pages.
Writing.
If you've got something to say about photography or
can give something back to the net with tutorial articles
then so much the better. |
| Turn-offs |
Spinning
things. The odd flashing "NEW" gif is
OK but keep animated things to a minimum.
Enforced long loads. Don't force the viewer to
download 100k of menu image before they can even select
a button.
Large images. Yes I know we want to show our pics
to their best advantage but try to keep images sizes
to less than 100k for initial galley pics. A good
compression package will do this easily. If you want
to show larger pics indicate the size on the thumbnail
or link so the viewer can decide if it's worth the
wait.
Large thumbnails. I saw a site the other day that
had 12k thumbnails, when I clicked on them I
got a 16k image. What's the point of having the thumbnail?
Keep thumbnails to about 3-4k.
Long pages.
No long pages with hundreds of images, even if they
are only thumbnails. These pages can take ages to
load (see next point). If you find that a page is
getting like this it's usually time to break it up
by adding a hierarchy that the viewer can 'drill down'
into.
(PS I have some pages like this myself, so I won't
be too hard on a site with the same)
No image sizes.
If the images sizes are not defined in the HTML the
viewer has to wait until the browser has laid out
the entire page before it can display anything. If
the sizes are defined the text will appear quickly
and give you something to read while the images load.
Banner sites. OK I know we can't all have our
own URL, and the services provided by GeoCities et
al are useful, but the constant popping up of banners
is annoying.
Loud backgrounds. Bright fluorescent colours and
boldly patterned backgrounds are a definite turn-off.
Hard to read text. This usually is caused by a
lack of contrast between the text and the background,
ie. blue text on a black background. |
| Absolute
no-no's |
Forced
downloads.
Some sites actually won't work or allow you in without
having the latest version of "FlushPix"
or whatever installed. This is an instant "go
somewhere else" signal. |
So there you have it, as you can
see there are a lot of things that work against a site being
included and that's just how it should be.
No one, two or three turnoffs will
necessary put me off the site (I'm sure this site has a few
of them) but it all adds up.
At the end of the day if these
lists have only 20 of the world's best B&W landscape and
nature photography sites then that's just fine by me.
|
