As the only place I've seen on the web that routinely takes to task some of the best photographers working today (and even some dead ones), I can't think of a better place to get some honest and blunt comments on my website.

I'll preface that I'm unhappy with it but I can't put my finger on why other than it's clumsy. Also, I'm not a website or graphics pro and never will be so consider those my limitations (among my many others).

Another thing, I'm having a tough time getting my web pictures sharp. They are all sharpened in Photoshop but they still come out a bit soft after being reduced from the original 55mb scans. Could that be the problem, that they are reduced from such huge files?

Thanks for any opinions.

http://www.daveyoder.com

-- dave yoder (lists@home.com), March 17, 2002

Answers

Dave, I'll confine myself to comments about the web page, & not the images (which speak for themselves). A criticism: The Images Menu text is thin as hell -- I've got great eyesight & am viewing this on a 21" LaCie monitor that's calibrated for graphics/photo work. But I found the text irritatingly thin. Would boldface be better? Not as fashionable, but far more friendly. That aside, once into the images themselves, I loved the lower neg strip, & particularly the negative (literally) rollover that occurs when I mouse over an image. Nice touch. Of course from a technical point of view, I was looking for type-of-camera & film comments in the Info section, but in reality, that's probably not appropriate or interesting to the general viewer... All in all, nice site--!

-- Patrick (pg@patrickgarner.com), March 17, 2002.

Okay, David, you asked for it...

1. Don't preface that you're unhappy with your site..a photographer's greatest detriment in the mind of an editor or viewer is his/her lack of confidence in the work they've done, even if it's just the way something is laid out. 2, Move away from the wide- angley stuff. You have some very nice compositions, but some of your stories seem 'distant' because of the formula shots...these are gimmes in PJ, and not always representative of good story telling. I'd like to see more about what goes on in ONE of the bounty hunter's lives, for example, why do they do this for a living? 3. PLEASE take out the circus fashion...it's okay not to be a fashion photographer, your strengths are elsewhere. 4. Push yourself with your portrait lighting. The 3/4 softbox trick is tried and true, but also tired. It's not always about environmental portraits. Maybe a polaroid back will help...

That being said, I really liked your site and looked at everything. You have good story ideas and good instincts. I think the site is well organized and easily accessible... you'll find the tuning as you live with it. I didn't notice any sharpness problems. Are you a recent transplant to Italy?

Best regards...

-- Carlin (carlinm@abac.com), March 17, 2002.

Dave i cannot see anything wrong with your web-site.Maybe full screen would have more impact.Your photographs are what photography is all about,and speak for themselves.

I'd like to see more about what goes on in ONE of the bounty hunter's lives, for example, why do they do this for a living?

I too would find that interesting,you have wetted the appetite.If you know of more sites with a similar theme to yours i would like to visit them.

Regards Allen

-- allen herbert (allen1@btinternet.coma), March 17, 2002.

Dave First couple of pages doesn't do your work justice, I'd put whatever you consider your best shot on the frontpage rather than the camera graphic. The 'scattering of prints' on your home page doesn't work for me either, and the change from black to white background is a bit odd. Great work though! Have a look at these sites and see what you think http://www.zednelson.com/ http://www.pinkheadedbug.com/

Hope this helps and doesn't sound too negative!

B

http://www.briandavidstevens.com/

-- Brian (briandavidstevens@talk21.com), March 17, 2002.

Without first looking at the photos, I've got two comments about reducing pix for web viewing. First, images always benefit a lot with another round of sharpening after resizing. There's something about resizing that softens them up just a bit. Second, though the jpeg dialogue box in Photoshop implies that lower settings give lower quality, I've found that the best idea is to view the image at 100% when saving it, and with the preview box checked on the compression menu, try using your eyes on the image to see what the different settings actually do--sometimes a certain compression value works better than the one on either side of it. Usually, below around 4 quality drops a lot without much change in image size, so I don't go there.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 17, 2002.

Thanks all and keep them coming--some very helpful stuff, I'm just replying to a couple questions...

Yeah I'm a recent transplant to Italia... following my wife who is from Milan (and I got fed up with newspapering in the States).

The ideas on focusing on one bounty hunter were actually how I started it, way back when I was in J-school. I was rather nomadic at the time though, following internships, and I decided to make it more essay than story and show a more diverse representation of the profession by picking it up wherever I went (also I was in a rather unconventional frame of mind at the time, rejecting the idea of the "photo story," which was silly now that I look back on it). I started it about 11 or 12 years ago, and I'm pretty sure I was the first to do anything substantive on the subject. It's been done to death since then of course (but not because of my story of course, mine is largely unpublished). It was also my first color story and where I learned about the sublime qualities of Kodachrome and transparency in general, and how icky color neg is.

I haven't read anything I disagree with... I am however putting a broader range of pictures on it because that is what is getting me work at the moment. Most of my jobs here in Italy were had off my website, and if I was only showing one kind of work I know I wouldn't have gotten some of the assignments I've had. So it's not all for vanity...

Thanks dave

-- dave yoder (lists@daveyoder.com), March 17, 2002.

Dave,

I really like your photography. Some of the best I have ever seen.

The others have addressed the issues about your website. I agree with the criticism's each have brought forth. Frankly, your website is not up to par with your photo's.

Your photography, style, and craftmanship is excellent.

Thanks for the pictures. I get sensory overload with the volume of your work but would very much enjoy you posting a shot now and then to the website our enjoyment. Very nice stuff.

-- David Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), March 17, 2002.

I found your text too hard to see...the red text against the black background makes it hard to read, and, yes, my monitor (19 in.) is well calibrated. Your other text colors need to be brighter as well.

I'm not a fan of having to scroll sideways on a page. I like your thumbnails, but I bet if you monitor your logs, your shots at the end of the line will have less hits because folks are too lazy to scroll sideways. Also, having "next" and "previous" buttons makes it easier for people to navigate.

These aren't major issues, but your photographs are great, and making them easier to navigate will get folks to spend more time on your site.

-- Jim Tardio (jimtardio@earthlink.net), March 17, 2002.

Dave

Shots are great, but they do need sharpening. As others say, you need to sharpen after reducing the images to the final size. I also agree that a vertical "negative strip" is more elegant, even if inaccurate. I think your lens use is good and you show a good awareness of composition. I have to say I thought the garage door set was a little uninteresting really, although I do appreciate your attempt to make it interesting. Certainly if you can do that with a rather dull topic, then I can imagine what you could do with a good topic!

I think the arrivals gate set was a neat idea.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.