MicrostockGroup

Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Photography Discussion => Topic started by: FiledIMAGE on October 11, 2017, 00:50

Title: Thoughts on our new website
Post by: FiledIMAGE on October 11, 2017, 00:50
Hi,

We are in the process of launching our new website we have been working on for about 6 months. Its a collaboration between an old friend of mine and myself, based around travel photography advice. Really aimed at helping people to maximize their time at a location for getting great photos. Lots of locations, advice, travel info etc. Places to eat we liked etc etc. I will feature articles about microstock too and my findings pros/cons etc after 4 years of doing stock.

Its a 50/50 mix of paid and free so plenty for people to see easily.

https://photobasecamp.com/

Would love some feedback on what people think of the idea.

Enjoy!

Chris
Title: Re: Thoughts on our new website
Post by: JuliaDacy on December 15, 2017, 09:18
Hi Chris.

I liked your site. But I think it can push away new users, because your site opens soooo long. I have very quich internet, and despite of it, it took about 3 minutes, while the site was opening. 
Title: Re: Thoughts on our new website
Post by: nitrus on December 15, 2017, 09:46
I didn't have any problems with the speed of opening and I live in an out of the way small town in Texas. I was wondering how they plan to make money though. It's a nice site and I wish them success
Title: Re: Thoughts on our new website
Post by: memakephoto on December 15, 2017, 12:29
Hi Chris.

I liked your site. But I think it can push away new users, because your site opens soooo long. I have very quich internet, and despite of it, it took about 3 minutes, while the site was opening.

The main image, with the basecamp newsletter sign up graphic, is 4,896px × 2,051px (3.34mb) which may have some bearing on load times. The black and white mountain image is 2,320px × 1,401px (no watermark). Why would they need such a massive image in a slide show? Silly and unnecessary.

There's many many validation warnings and code errors as well, probably due to the use of the $49 wordpress theme.

Doing a speed test the page size came in at 10.9mb and got a performance rating of 63 making it faster than a whole 16% of websites.

Could be improved some more.