Wed, March 30th, 2005 by east3rd
That is the question...
Since its inception, my site has thumbnailed... now my thumbnails have been a little bit larger than average (300px wide or tall), but they are thumbnails nonetheless. I've chosen this way of doing things for a couple reasons, the most important of which is that, in the past, I would post an "Alternate" photo along with the photo of the day. The alternate might be a different point of view, or maybe the same photo but cropped differently... you get the idea. I liked having the alternate photo on the same page, for the sake of easy comparison. I suppose other considerations for using a thumbnail approach include users with slower connections, and displaying more text and technical details along with the photo.
Anyway, I've realized that I don't do alternate photos much anymore, so I've been thinking about switching over to the "one large photo" idea that a lot of the popular sites use. From a user interface standpoint, which do you prefer and why?
-Dave (east3rd.com)
March 30th, 2005 at 2:41 pm
wow - i'm first! I'd definitely go for one big image - to me that's the main point of a photoblog. If you've got a low-speed connection then you're probably not a fan of photoblogs anyhow.
March 30th, 2005 at 2:42 pm
~Dave...I have always preferred thumbnails, in a mini-gallery format and I honestly cannot point to any one reason why except a personal preference. Maybe it is because the person who designed my site set it up as a collection of smaller thumbs, 160px height max, and the viewer could mouse click on any thumb they'd like to see in a larger pop-up. I like it that way because I do not post every single day, mostly in essay form or in bunches, so that way the viewer does not see one single image residing on the main page for a few days or longer, or if I post a photo essay they don't end up just seeing one out of a collection of images, no matter how many there are. So, I suppose based on my own site and posting frequency, I prefer to seeing a collection of thumbs, like a gallery so to speak. And when I stop by other sites I enjoy the same set up or something similar...nothing wrong with a single image, I believe that works best for an every day posting photoblogger~
March 30th, 2005 at 2:44 pm
To be honest, I'd rather you'd put the big shot up first, with a link to maybe a pop-up window with tech notes and comments. I know loads of people do this and it's not very original but hey, it works. I might be a bit biased though since I use your RSS feed, so I've already seen one thumbnail before even getting to your site.
March 30th, 2005 at 2:45 pm
if it were me, i'd take a poll on photoblogs.org, find out what the cool people are doing, then go from there.
oh, wait.
March 30th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
*SIGH*... there's always one... and it's always you, Ian.
March 30th, 2005 at 3:17 pm
My preference is for a single big photo, with the option to click through to more information about the photo. I like how some sites have info and comments on the same page, along with a thumbnail of the photo.
The thing about thumbnails is that sometimes you get the sense that they're going to be wonderful in full size and so you click on them. But other times the thumbnail doesn't do justice to the full-size version and so you miss out if you don't click through. I have to confess that I don't always click through to the larger version on your site if I'm strapped for time. I usually just do it when I'm moved enough by the thumbnail and so I want to verify by looking at the full-size image that it's really as intersting as it seems.
Do you have your stats set up to tell you whether your visitors always click through to the larger image?
March 30th, 2005 at 3:50 pm
It'll be pretty obvious to anyone that visits my site that I like the one (overly, maybe) big image thing. I save the thumbnails for my archive pages, and what I do there is make a 300px by 300px crop from the 600x900 main image, then resize it to 75x75. With a square thumb, it's easier to arrange them on a page regardless of the orientation (vertical or horizontal) of the original (though I am personally off of the vertical program for now).
When I crop for the thumbnail, I get to make a compositional decision, and I may crop in a way that intends to lead the viewer a little when they get to the big picture, or maybe - if I'm feeling particularly obstinate - I'll crop way off target, or make it so there's some surprise or something when the whole thing comes up.
But that's just me.
March 30th, 2005 at 4:20 pm
Definitely one big image, Dave. When I visit your site I almost always click the thumbnail to see the larger image anyway, because I know I'll see more detail. Your work is too good to display in miniature. Go for it!
March 30th, 2005 at 4:51 pm
My most recent image is always large, and center justified on screen. I keep about 10 thumbnails below for quick reference of what I've been posting recently. I do this for myself and other viewers. I try to keep them a reasonable distance away from the main image so as not to distract the viewer.
I like thumbnails because I visit my favorite sites about once a week (I have a lot so I visit about 10 a day). It helps to see how much updating has been going on and if it's worth sticking around.
March 30th, 2005 at 4:55 pm
I wish I could figure out how to do thumbnails for my archives. That's my spring project, but I digress...
I'd go with the one big image, Dave. From merely a blog/web design standpoint, the less clicks the better for viewers. I personally use 700 pixels for the width of my blog but I've seen some adventurous types make them even larger. All I can say is, the bigger it is, the better the detail, IMHO.
March 30th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
thumbs --- it's all about navigation ... I like the way your site is set up -- thumbs are the way to go -- imho -- don't listen to Ian -- what does he know anyway?
March 30th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
Wow, this group is sharply divided!
Well thanks for your input everyone, I've got a lot to chew on.
March 30th, 2005 at 5:06 pm
your shots are fine small, but amazing at full size. i think arriving at your site with a nice, big, beautiful image would have much more impact. showing it scaled down initially may take away a little of the wow factor. just to be clear though... your shots are not lacking in wow factor! i need to spend more time there - great stuff.
March 30th, 2005 at 5:11 pm
if you do use thumbnails, making sure your visitors know they can be viewed in a larger format is a must, imho. although i use a larger version on my site, i like both versions on other sites. as long as the navigation is easy to understand and the images are easy to view, i'm a happy camper.
also, i have been doing some alternate versions of my images lately in a large part due to YOUR inspiration dave. so thanks!
March 30th, 2005 at 5:34 pm
Dave, if you ask me I think the alternative photos on your site need to make a storming come-back. Not because the first posts are poor, but because it's a great way of letting others see how you think (and therefore the decisions you make, to produce such a good final shot).
I agree with bob too "it's all about navigation".
March 30th, 2005 at 5:56 pm
"If you've got a low-speed connection then you're probably not a fan of photoblogs anyhow."
I´m a photoblogger and a fan of photoblogs, and only got a 64kb wireless connection that in this underdeveloped part of the world costs U$S 100 plus taxes per month! And visiting sites with only one image per page gets really slow sometimes. But I agree that aesthetically looks better.
March 30th, 2005 at 10:45 pm
Yep, one big image definitley looks better...if only I could get Hello to post my images bigger...*sigh*
March 31st, 2005 at 10:21 am
I just changed my layout from one big shot and four thumbs of former shots to the often used single shot style. I prefer this because I want the shot to be discrete. But this might depend on the general topic of your blog. There are a lot of blog where this way doesn't fit because these guys allways post a collection of shots to a subject.
March 31st, 2005 at 11:07 am
ted--i use hello/blogger for my photoblog too. to make the images larger you just have to type in how large you want them on the settings page of the bloggerbot.
i have mine set at 150px on the inline image, and 640px on the archive image. i then use the 150px url for my thumbnail galleries and the 640px url for my actual post pages. i have some that are 1024px wide in a clickable larger version, which is as large as you can go.
there are more tips in the picasa/hello forums too.
April 1st, 2005 at 12:25 am
" If you've got a low-speed connection then you're probably not a fan of photoblogs anyhow."
Wow - owen, that's a pretty clueless remark!
Are you suggesting that if you're from a developing country where dialup is pretty much as good as it gets, you can't be interested in photoblogs?
Being first isn't always a good thing.
To answer Dave, I like it when the front page doesn't take 10 minutes to load because someone thinks they're preparing an image for print and decides to upload a 500kb behemoth. (Or two or three 150kb ones)
A photoblog is still a website, though granted one with a bias towards images, and therefore should be subject to the same standards of regular websites. Of course what those standards are isn't cast in stone, but I like 75-100kb max on the front page.
August 10th, 2005 at 2:45 pm
Well, thanks everyone for the input. I'm now part of the "one big image" camp. So long, thumbnails!