html web page

[jhart]

I posted a question about supplying an html browser proof template with photomechanics.  I was told to use PM Classic, the standard one available.  I have been complaining about that for years.  That format is clunky, ugly, and not something I would like to send to my clients.  I am not a designer and don't want to design a page using the rudimentary controls supplied with the software. The flash pages with the interesting formatting look great but people cant pull the photos off to their desk top for their own additional editing.  Would you please supply a good looking, professionally designed html browser proof with PhotoMechanics.  I hate using Photoshop because it is sooo sloooow.  I will continue to purchase the upgrades as this feature is not a deal killer but it would make my life a lot easier if you included.

[Kirk Baker]

I posted a question about supplying an html browser proof template with photomechanics.  I was told to use PM Classic, the standard one available.  I have been complaining about that for years.  That format is clunky, ugly, and not something I would like to send to my clients.  I am not a designer and don't want to design a page using the rudimentary controls supplied with the software. The flash pages with the interesting formatting look great but people cant pull the photos off to their desk top for their own additional editing.  Would you please supply a good looking, professionally designed html browser proof with PhotoMechanics.  I hate using Photoshop because it is sooo sloooow.  I will continue to purchase the upgrades as this feature is not a deal killer but it would make my life a lot easier if you included.

I'm sorry you don't like the PM Classic template.  But telling me that it is ugly does nothing to help me figure out what you would like.  Why don't you point me to a URL of a webpage written in HTML only that you actually do like?

Then I can look into adding another HTML Exporter template that suits your needs more precisely.

-Kirk

[jhart]

Kirk,

I have created a sample web page in PhotoMechanics PM Classic and Photoshop dotted border white on black for comparison purposes and posted them on my web site.  They can be found at:

http://www.jhartphoto.com/pmweb      (photomechanics)

http://www.jhartphoto.com/psweb       (Photoshop)

I feel that the Photoshop web gallery has a much more sophisticated look and feel to it than the PM classic does.  I am in a visual industry and how things look are important.  "just the facts mam" won't work for me.  I could use the Photoshop gallery but yours is so much faster, especially when using raw files.  If there is any way you could get a html gallery that looks as good as the Simple Viewer flash gallery, I would be very happy indeed.

[Kirk Baker]

I have created a sample web page in PhotoMechanics PM Classic and Photoshop dotted border white on black for comparison purposes and posted them on my web site.  They can be found at:

http://www.jhartphoto.com/pmweb      (photomechanics)

http://www.jhartphoto.com/psweb       (Photoshop)

I feel that the Photoshop web gallery has a much more sophisticated look and feel to it than the PM classic does.  I am in a visual industry and how things look are important.  "just the facts mam" won't work for me.  I could use the Photoshop gallery but yours is so much faster, especially when using raw files.  If there is any way you could get a html gallery that looks as good as the Simple Viewer flash gallery, I would be very happy indeed.

Wait.  Are you saying you want a gallery that looks like your psmweb version or are you wanting a SimpleViewer gallery?  If you want a SimpleViewer gallery, use the SimpleViewer Export template.

-Kirk

[jhart]

Kirk,

I don't want to use the simple viewer gallery because it is flash based and my clients can't download the low rez photos to their desk top.  I also don't necessarily want the gallery to look like the dotted lines in Photoshop.  I used that as an example of an html gallery that looks finished and professional as opposed to the PM classic gallery which to my mind looks clunky and amateurish.  I know that many engineers are not interested in aesthetics and can't see the difference between the two.  Unfortunately I am a photographer and can see the difference.  I am not asking for a rip off of Photoshops galleries but am interested in an html based gallery that look as good as the photoshop galleries or the flash galleries already supplied with Photomechanics.

[runner]

I'd like to see a gallery page, where you could click on a image to get a preview say 800 pixels with keywords etc, with a link to download the high res original.

[Kirk Baker]

I don't want to use the simple viewer gallery because it is flash based and my clients can't download the low rez photos to their desk top.  I also don't necessarily want the gallery to look like the dotted lines in Photoshop.  I used that as an example of an html gallery that looks finished and professional as opposed to the PM classic gallery which to my mind looks clunky and amateurish.  I know that many engineers are not interested in aesthetics and can't see the difference between the two.  Unfortunately I am a photographer and can see the difference.  I am not asking for a rip off of Photoshops galleries but am interested in an html based gallery that look as good as the photoshop galleries or the flash galleries already supplied with Photomechanics.

Well, then you're going to have to show me one that you like just the way it is and I can likely make one that looks just like it.

The differences I see from your two examples is the dotty border around the images (which I think looks too busy) the lack of header information at the top, the position of the owner page links at the bottom, and different navigation.  Also, the sharpening didn't produce a good result with your thumbnails, but you could turn that off.

-Kirk

[jimb]

I am not asking for a rip off of Photoshops galleries but am interested in an html based gallery that look as good as the photoshop galleries or the flash galleries already supplied with Photomechanics.

Well, then you're going to have to show me one that you like just the way it is and I can likely make one that looks just like it.

-Kirk

Kirk,
This thread relates to an earlier discussion of having a token-based html exporter available as a PM export option. This would allow many of us with html experience to produce a gallery to our liking. With all due respect, it strikes me that you producing yet another Ruby-based template that looks like a gallery one other person wants isn't the most productive use of your time. I, and I suspect many others, would welcome the token-based approach used by Photoshop, Breezebrowser, and other software. This would let us customize the html pages to our liking, and keeps you out of that loop. Back in March you stated this was under consideration. Can you update us on the status? Thanks.

[Kirk Baker]

This thread relates to an earlier discussion of having a token-based html exporter available as a PM export option. This would allow many of us with html experience to produce a gallery to our liking. With all due respect, it strikes me that you producing yet another Ruby-based template that looks like a gallery one other person wants isn't the most productive use of your time. I, and I suspect many others, would welcome the token-based approach used by Photoshop, Breezebrowser, and other software. This would let us customize the html pages to our liking, and keeps you out of that loop. Back in March you stated this was under consideration. Can you update us on the status?

I agree.  I plan to get such a feature implemented in the 4.6 version of Photo Mechanic.  I have researched token-based schemes quite a bit and have found that iView Media Pro has a nice implementation with over 200 very nice looking templates already available.  It seems to me that emulating their tokens with our variables would be the best course of action.  So that's the plan.

-Kirk

[kwell]

I have used iView to make my own templates, and it works very nicely. It would be very nice if it would hide the "engine directives" (added as HTML comments within the template markup) from the final output pages. 

I echo the sentiment that we don't want the PM crew to become a web design shop. Implementing a token-based HTML template approach would put the the ball back in the user's court to take responsibility for how their images are displayed.

Kevin

[vAfotoriporter]

Hi all,

I used Breeze Browser to generate my galleries, I HTML edited them and my whole website is based upon the re-edited HTMLs generated by that program. Since I am unable to edit (maybe lack of my knowledge but what was and is enough for editing a Breeeze web output is not enough to get a similar outcome from a PM webpage output) the PM generated sites to look the same or anything similar to my current page I still have to use Breeze for this purpose.

I am happy to see this token-based solution coming and hardly wait it. This way soon I will be able only to use PM not needing Breeze or any similar program (besides PS and a RAW converter of course)...

I like the way PM is evolving! Great work!