www.makeovermagic.org


**EDIT: 6/8/06 SITE HAS BEEN COMPLETELY UPDATED.**

Ok, two things:

Most important for you: The meta-tags are missing. I mean, the first page is the most important for a website, it's the one completely indexed by the search-engines. You got a splash-page (oh I don't like em :) ) which basically has nothing in it. I'd put up a splash-page, if you need one anyway, with a lot of text to be indexed.

Second one is a little lazy-guy thing. In your galleries, I'd prefer to have a mouse-over instantly, without a new page. You use a lot of javascript on your page, which is a cpu- and memorykiller anyway, but I'd include something that changes the picture if you hover over the thumbsnails and changes before/after when hovering over the big image.

And sorry, I couldn't resist to put a hand on this awesome beauty in your gallery. Happen to have her phone-number? ;)

...

p.s. don't have her number

..........

Hi My openion is only that you should learn retouching in a gr8 depth you have a beautiful photographs but dinnt beauitfy them at all website is nothing its only a presentation just improve your work its constructive criticism..

Meta tags are really unimportant with todays modern search engines, the only one you might want to consider is description - a lot of search engines will use this as the 'blurb' about your site in the listings, if provided.
eg.
<meta name="description" content=Breif blurb about your site here" />

Your home page looks good - despite being an unecessary splash page, but it goes downhill from there. Center aligned text doesnt look good - it makes the content of your page look slap-dash and disorganised.
The gallery is terrible in firefox - your bottom text overlaps the images and it jumps around all over the place. As a web developer I had to have ie on machine too :( so I checked how it look in that. Page transitions are BAD, like really 1997, ditto with the gallery transitions, they're proprietary (non-standard) code that only works in ie.

Overally I'd say the graphic design (only really apparent on the first page) is greatly improved but the design still needs more structure and thought into layout - and less IE code.

..........

The most important thing here is the actual retouching. You need to tone down a bit. Some of the eyes are not looking realistic. Back things off a bit. Less is more. Try not to add in lens flare effects as this can be seen as cheesy. It looks like pageant style retouching - is this what you want to achieve? Keep doing tutorials and learning loads from this site. It really is a great place to keep on top of things.

Just a thought...

I looked into your source on your webpage, and it looks like you do have a meta part but you have not added info thats needed for the search engines to pick up. You have added your words but not in the right places, and your using a very old frontpage, and frontpage can add alot of html thats not needed, but at least your learning, and thats the good thing eh! Your at least having a go, i admire you for having a go!!!

I have frontpage too but the newer version, and it does cause some html problems sometimes, especially with different servers. I opened the source up and saw you had alot of spaces that i removed, if you want the new source for you to add to your splash page, then email me...I havent done the meta for you, i think you need to google and find the info for yourself, but your on the right lines.

..........

Your welcome Martha i just emailed you back. Hope it helps!

For being a begginer, you seem on the right track but here are some things I noticed. One, I'm not real keen on the click on the picture to return to the gallery thing. It would be nice if it went to the next picture in my own personal opinion. Then again, others may like that go back to the gallery thing. Second, I agree with toning it down but for me it was the backgrounds etc. Some of the edging is too sharp, too cutout and some of the backgrounds don't seem to match the brightness of the photos. Also, on some of the photos where you painted in the makeup... the makeup is much darker than even the pupils of the eyes which makes it look like someone took a marker to it. Some of the photos I think you did well on. Trust me... I'm still looking at some of the beginning photos I did and telling myself what I should have done. It's all a learning experience. I try to keep in mind when making my page to keep it user friendly but also try to maintain a very professional look. I think people tend to feel more comfortable purchasing something from a site that looks very professional and well established and if it's easy to navigate that helps too. Best of luck to you.
:bigthmb:

..........

OK, i'm ready for a final critique on my website that i designed myself; please comment on overall design and content.


What immediately drew my attention is your gallery. The "after" image is before "before" image. There is a very good reason to reverse it. When you say it, it is more likely to say "before and after" then "after and before". As your target audience most likely to use left-to-right languages (are they?) it is natural for them to have after later. There are lots of theories behind this, but to keep it short: before and after, start to finish, from the beginning to the end, take photo then retouch.

best of luck!

You should also get permission before using other peoples images.

..........

..........

I would take Nancy's advice about the photos, as using others images can land you in bother or with a bill for using them. The other thing I noticed is your pages are made up of 1 background image with the text etc in them. Doesn't work for me, as I like to have text I can edit. That way I can update the site and info on it at any time.
I messed around with frontpage, dreamweaver, flash mx and photoshop for my site. But have now settled for Joomla, as it's got all the flexibility I could ever want and I can edit the site on the fly :cool: . PLUS I'm a tight fisted Yorkshire man who also likes the fact that Joomla is free :cool: :hat: :cool:

Do you use Joomla as a CMS or as an editor?
I thought Joomla was a content management system...

I would take Nancy's advice about the photos, as using others images can land you in bother or with a bill for using them. The other thing I noticed is your pages are made up of 1 background image with the text etc in them. Doesn't work for me, as I like to have text I can edit. That way I can update the site and info on it at any time.
I messed around with frontpage, dreamweaver, flash mx and photoshop for my site. But have now settled for Joomla, as it's got all the flexibility I could ever want and I can edit the site on the fly :cool: . PLUS I'm a tight fisted Yorkshire man who also likes the fact that Joomla is free :cool: :hat: :cool:

I think your website it nicely designed, serving its purpose. There was just two elements to it which distracted me a tad: being unable to get to the "Pricing section and not comprehending the point of an "Exit" button.

And by the way, as opposite to what somebody mentioned here previously, I like the way you retouch eyes. :)

Arandel

..........

Frank, My site is totally done using Joomla. It is content management based, but lets you apply mods such as skins and galleries etc. You create all your pages on the fly using it's own editor. The only thing I have done outside of joomla is my own flash content item on front page, and the secure sections I have created using server side tools. Everything you need to build your site is either in joomla or comes as a mod you can install. PAXX galleries etc are all freeware mods, and galleries such as my stock Photography one can be slotted in using the wrapper function. Personally I think it rocks, as it saves me a hell of a lot of time, and does exactly what I need it to do with my site.

Marsha, The problem comes when you use STOCK photographs to promote a service or goods. I have retouched many images from stock.xchng and sites like that, but I still can't use them. This is because although the licence gaunts you permission to use the photo on the web, the model hasn't granted you permission to use his/her face to promote your service. This is why most stock photography sites contain this in their licence agreement.

You may not use the Image

For pornographic, unlawful or other immoral purposes, for spreading hate or discrimination, or to defame or victimise other people, societies, cultures.
To endorse products and services if it depicts a person.
In a way that can give a bad name to SXC or the person(s) depicted on the Image.
As part of a trademark, service mark or logo.
SELLING AND REDISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGE (INDIVIDUALLY OR ALONG WITH OTHER IMAGES) IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN! DO NOT SHARE THE IMAGE WITH OTHERS!
Above text is copyrights stock.xchng 2006

If the photos are your own stock images (you took them), and you have model releases, then there is no problem. But if they are from stock photography sites, then you are running the risk of a model or photographer coming knocking at your door :cold: .

..........

It is quite messy really. But as I read it, there are no restrictions, other than those stated in the image license. I think it is only those images where a model release has been sign, that you can use to promote a product or service. This is because the photographer may be happy to promote your service. But the person in the image may not wish to be associated with your (anybodies) products or service. You are in theory using this person to promote a product/service, rather than the photograph itself.
I could be way off the mark, but that is how I read it, and I would rather be safe than sorry :dizzy: .

I have 6 none public galleries that I would love to show as examples. But because I can't ID the people in the photos (and get permission), I just can't risk using them.

Does it support scripting languages (asp, php, cfml etc...) or just HTML?


Frank, My site is totally done using Joomla. It is
....

Does it support scripting languages (asp, php, cfml etc...) or just HTML?

I couldn't really say on that one, as I haven't gone that deep in to it. I've literally messed about until I got what I needed out of it (most of the addons I have are php/CCS). You should be able to find all the info you require at http://www.joomla.org/
Different templates and addons all give you different functionality and features. Might be worth checking out their developers section ;)

chris,

speaking of permissions and such, i've wondered about some distinctions in the copyright laws myself. an example would be if i were using a stock, public domain photo of say jay leno to sell used cars, i would say i'd need his permission to use that photo for just the reason you mention. however, i probably wouldnt have worried about using that same photo to show an example of my work as a retoucher/restorer. i'm not using the photo as an endorsement of my work but only as an example of my work, especially if i had a before and after. i dont think anyone would assume from such a thing that i'm trying to say jay leno endorses my work.

i'm also smart enough to know that i dont know all the copyright laws. i also know that in a court of law the law isnt always the thing that wins out. so, like you, it's probably smarter to err on the side of caution.

craig

..........

Have you viewed the license for each image. They should all have the standard license from stock exchange.
Example:

http://www.sxc.hu/photo/528747

this states "There are no usage restrictions for this photo." , but the image license clearly states you can't use it "To endorse products and services if it depicts a person".

More discussion on this exact matter on their forum http://www.sxc.hu/forums/topic/9283

This link also give some good pointers
http://www.danheller.com/model-release.html

..........

Will be interesting to see their view on it. But as a safe guard to yourself, contact the photographers of each image. That way it can be shown that you have done everything in your power to conform to any copyrights law etc.
I've only been uploading images to stock.xchng for just over a week, but I've had quite a few official requests for use of my images. None of mine have any models etc in them, but people still request permission?
Example from today http://www.alamut.es/bizblog
It's only a macro shot of stones put in his blog, but the guy was kind enough to ask if it was OK to use and gave links to my site :hat: .

..........

I posted the question on their forum, and it seems it could be a breach in their terms?
http://www.sxc.hu/forums/topic/9938

Not many replies, but someone may come along to clarify the matter :happy:

..........

Interesting issue, it will definitely be interesting to see how they respond.