Replies

1. 
   PhillGiles | Sep 29, 2003 04:32pm | #1

   To me, the picture on the opening page doesn't portray anything: may I suggest a wider shot that shows the jig/form described in the text.

   .

   Phill Giles

   The Unionville Woodwright

   Unionville, Ontario

1. 
   BillHartmann | Sep 29, 2003 04:51pm | #2

   I agree.

   I even when to the "beginning", the index page.

   And I have no idea of what the purpos of the artical is.

   What you need is an intro that shows the finished product and a few sentence about what you are going to show.

   And then maybe break it down into "chapters" or major steps so that there aren't so many pictures on the first page.

1. 
   clampman2 | Sep 29, 2003 08:49pm | #3

   Thanks to you both,

   You are absolutely right. I need to have an overall view of the completed thing with a short description; then break it up into separate segments like you suggest. I did the thing on some automatic software, and the thumbnails are worse than useless because they just add confusion. I think I know how to work the software now.

   Did the pics load in a reasonable time? Were they clear enough? Do you think the text should be at the top so there is something there while the pics are loading? Should I put in a broadband option for higher resolution pics?

   Thanks

1. 
   PhillGiles | Sep 29, 2003 09:44pm | #4

   I think from your "ideas" list that you have a much handle on this than you give yourself credit for. I like your idea of a little text visible as the picture fills in. I also prefer to have a smaller picture while the page loads with an option to get a bigger version by clicking on it (you could also add a clickable hi-res option view for those that want it).

   But the real key, I think, is to go to a peel-the-onion presentation style of starting with the whole idea and then moving to more granularity. .

   Phill Giles

   The Unionville Woodwright

   Unionville, Ontario

1. 
   clampman2 | Sep 29, 2003 10:18pm | #5

   Thanks Phil,

   I'm working on it now. Got to get real work done sometime today though.

   Clampman

2. 
   BillHartmann | Sep 29, 2003 11:07pm | #6

   No the two are 3 pictures that I looked at had more than plenty resolution. But as Phill said there is no prospective.

   I would like to see a front page that show 2-4 pictures of the finished project. At least one overview and possilbe a couple of closer shots of different areas.

   Maybe with the overview I would undersand better, but formbend does not mean anything to me.

   Maybe start with lookdowntwistout so show what the purpose of the jig is. Then discribe the jig, etc.

   I would like to see 2-4 pictures on one page showing a major step.

1. 
   clampman2 | Sep 30, 2003 04:59am | #7

   Bill and Phil,

   Here is what I came up with for a better plan. The links to the different sections are not hooked up with, but I'm thinking it's a lot better for a general overview.

   Thanks again.

   Clampman

   http://miterclamp.com/radius/pages/Radius%20cabinet%20photo%20essay.htm

2. 
   caseyr | Sep 30, 2003 07:14am | #8

   As a once-upon-a-time professional photographer, I tend to cringe a bit at the "hot spots" in your photos - particularly the bottom one in your last spread.  This is most likely from your using an on-camera flash.  If you are using a camera with a built in flash, I am not sure what you can do about it.  A pro would use a diffuser to soften and create a more even light.  I have a hot-shoe mounted flash on my 35mm camera which I can flip up and have a large white piece of cardboard above it which softens, spreads and diffuses the flash as it reflects it onto the subject.  With the harsh light in the hot spot of the photo, it tends to highlight any imperfections in that area - and it looks like some finish imperfections are highlighted in the bottom photo (hopefully, it is just an illusion from the lighting...).

   With my larger format cameras, I would set up light stands and use "soft boxes" on studio strobes to give a soft, uniform lighting of the entire piece.  Some items such as paintings (and possibly cabinets) are very difficult to light without reflections, even with various diffusers.  On those items, polarizing filters are often used to tame glare from various surfaces. 

   I won't go into the special lenses and/or view camera tilts to correct "keystoning" and perspectives.   

   It often requires more equipment and is more difficult than one might think to produce the kind of photographs that are typically in product brochures, catalogs, and high end home magazines. 

   You did ask for some photographic criticism, right?

3. 
   PhillGiles | Sep 30, 2003 05:32pm | #9

   Wow, what a difference. You may want to take another pass through your html code, on my system I'm getting the dreaded one-word lines that generally indicates that you've got both a maximum line length and eol/nl hidden tags in every line (these are apparently sometimes very difficult the find with some of the WYSIWYG tools in use).

   Casey talked about the photo's - doesn't look like a picture-friendly ceiling and the flourescents aren't helping you either. If you're looking for a quick & dirty flash bounce medium, glue ink-jet paper onto a piece of cardboard..

   Phill Giles

   The Unionville Woodwright

   Unionville, Ontario

4. 
   caseyr | Sep 30, 2003 08:23pm | #10

   The ceiling lights were pretty obvious in the first couple of pictures - but I didn't want to lay too many negatives on him all at once...  One normally turns off any normal lights close to the subject when taking pictures.  Flourescents tend to give strange colors as well as glare - typically a sickly green, although it depends on whether they are "warm whites" or "cool".  There are a number of lens filters available to correct the color cast, but it is hard to get an exact match to give a true color.  Photoshop may be necessary to correct the color if the flourescent hues are unavoidable.  Incandescents tend to give a reddish hue, which can actually enhance many types of wood.