07-23-2010, 12:36 PM
Hi Sylvain,
[quote name='Sylvain' date='23 July 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1279885046' post='1251']
Wim, first, plus one to you again, nice resource links ! [/quote]
Thank you! Having done the research, I 'd thought I share. With a bit of luck it'll save someone some time <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
I find that SSP actually displays my images the same way on all my (calibrated) monitors. The thing that bugged me most with many gallery applications or add-ons, that shared a good representation of the colour gamut of a picture, is that the sharpening was way off. Either too much or too little, making stuff look oversharpened or very soft. With SSP you can control that very easily, IME. You either tell it exactly how much sharpening you want, or you replace the images it creates with your own. Since I like to control exactly how much sharpening to use, and any other form of PP, I prefer the latter, and unlike many other galleries/portfolio apps and add-ons, it will display them in that case as is.
Anybody wanting to try another that does that, for free, is Deziner Folio Gallery. Just that I personally don't like the style of the layout, especially the dark grey background, and some of the small bugs in the admin panel. However, it does work very well, and is as fast as SSP. Essentially, SSP gives you more control.
SSP is an add-on specifically created for photographers, and from their forum it looks like many use it without doing very much to it anyway. I am fortunate enough to have relevant IT-experience, so I can develop around the tool, which is exactly why I got it in the first place, and of all the cheaper tools I tried so far ($0 to $50 category), this is the best. Better than many where you pay even more. I actually even got so far to I got their ThumbGrid and Director tools, basically because SSP is so good, although I still haven't used the latter yet - no need, as I am perfectly capable of managing my own site anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
Well, for web publishing I use sRGB. You don't have control over how a monitor used to view pictures is profiled or calibrated, so that's the best one can do. My pictures look fine on most monitors, but especially so on calibrated ones, is my experience.
Yes, and between that and complicated stuff, the possibilities are endless. I use it embedded, currently, including the main gallery page. There seems to be little speed difference between local use and remote use (via the internet).
Which ones? Javascript? Ajax? HTML? PHP? And which provide good simple options for photo portfolios and galleries, while keeping control over your own pictures?
I think that you'll find that often it is a mishmash of the above. Personally, I find that for my needs, so far, embedded Flash works very well indeed. And because it is embedded, I can still uses anything else for other needs, if so required.
From my experience PHP is more complex to program, I think, and not extremely safe, Javascript isn't safe either, and HTML even less. Ajax to me is really an extension, although some will probably disagree <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. It's still under development anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. Hence Flash to me was the natural way to go, for now. In a few years time that may change again, but so far I am quite happy with it.
My next project is to embed this in Joomla in a way that is user friendly, and works. I have tried most of the available flash embedding tools for Joomla, and so far they don't work, work only partly or are extremely difficult to get to work. Of course, that may just reflect my level (read: lack of) of experience in this field <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.
Kind regards, Wim
[quote name='Sylvain' date='23 July 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1279885046' post='1251']
Wim, first, plus one to you again, nice resource links ! [/quote]
Thank you! Having done the research, I 'd thought I share. With a bit of luck it'll save someone some time <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.Quote:I'll have to check them out!
On colour management.I don't really see your point in your reply. It has nothing to do with applications messing with your images, resizing them or whatever, but rather that the flash renderer will by default not know about your profile needs and will display pictures with what often results in overly saturated reds. But the picture itself remains intact. This is something SlideshowPro might also been affected with AFAIK.
I find that SSP actually displays my images the same way on all my (calibrated) monitors. The thing that bugged me most with many gallery applications or add-ons, that shared a good representation of the colour gamut of a picture, is that the sharpening was way off. Either too much or too little, making stuff look oversharpened or very soft. With SSP you can control that very easily, IME. You either tell it exactly how much sharpening you want, or you replace the images it creates with your own. Since I like to control exactly how much sharpening to use, and any other form of PP, I prefer the latter, and unlike many other galleries/portfolio apps and add-ons, it will display them in that case as is.
Anybody wanting to try another that does that, for free, is Deziner Folio Gallery. Just that I personally don't like the style of the layout, especially the dark grey background, and some of the small bugs in the admin panel. However, it does work very well, and is as fast as SSP. Essentially, SSP gives you more control.
SSP is an add-on specifically created for photographers, and from their forum it looks like many use it without doing very much to it anyway. I am fortunate enough to have relevant IT-experience, so I can develop around the tool, which is exactly why I got it in the first place, and of all the cheaper tools I tried so far ($0 to $50 category), this is the best. Better than many where you pay even more. I actually even got so far to I got their ThumbGrid and Director tools, basically because SSP is so good, although I still haven't used the latter yet - no need, as I am perfectly capable of managing my own site anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.Quote:[url="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/quickstart/color_correction_as3/"]http://www.adobe.com...correction_as3/[/url]
Well, for web publishing I use sRGB. You don't have control over how a monitor used to view pictures is profiled or calibrated, so that's the best one can do. My pictures look fine on most monitors, but especially so on calibrated ones, is my experience.
Quote:On Flash, I think the general misconception comes from its early life when it was mainly seen as a SFX language. So any pages made with flash would feature "funky" effects that have been used ad nauseam. It is also true that still too many photographers force you through unnecessary "funkiness".
But you can also do simple things with Flash, nobody put a gun to your head.Just look at Wim's suggested SlideShowPro, they have a "demo" of a very minimalistic mode : just the picture, and two click zones.
Yes, and between that and complicated stuff, the possibilities are endless. I use it embedded, currently, including the main gallery page. There seems to be little speed difference between local use and remote use (via the internet).
Quote:I think that, beyond the discussion about who's locking who into what ("open" vs "closed" standards, true W3C technologies, Apple compatible, battery drain...etc...), Flash/Flex has now evolved into a rich and clean web framework and I can imagine the benefits on architecture & maintenance. (YES, there are other powerful languages)
Just my two €cents...
Which ones? Javascript? Ajax? HTML? PHP? And which provide good simple options for photo portfolios and galleries, while keeping control over your own pictures?
I think that you'll find that often it is a mishmash of the above. Personally, I find that for my needs, so far, embedded Flash works very well indeed. And because it is embedded, I can still uses anything else for other needs, if so required.
From my experience PHP is more complex to program, I think, and not extremely safe, Javascript isn't safe either, and HTML even less. Ajax to me is really an extension, although some will probably disagree <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />. It's still under development anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. Hence Flash to me was the natural way to go, for now. In a few years time that may change again, but so far I am quite happy with it.My next project is to embed this in Joomla in a way that is user friendly, and works. I have tried most of the available flash embedding tools for Joomla, and so far they don't work, work only partly or are extremely difficult to get to work. Of course, that may just reflect my level (read: lack of) of experience in this field <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....