Skip to Content


Gallery / Cruxman Photography« previous | next »

Cruxman Photography image

Cruxman Photography

Current rating: 5.3 (508 votes)

(you have already voted for this entry)

Review:

I'm going to go straight to the point with this little photography site. I like the colors, layout, background, typography and the overall feel. The site uses the scalable flash replacement technique extensively, and it works really well. However, the content is quite thin and the photography sections seem empty and pale. I also get strange rendering problems with the menu in IE5/mac. Still, a nice little site with a solid message and straight-forward approach to how a photography site could be built.

Reviewed by David Hellsing

There are 12 guest comments so far.

commentat 17:57 on 20 October 2004, Scott Upton wrote:

I agree with your assessment of the content -- I am also hoping the client will add more photos in the near future! It's in his hands at this point (there's a PHP-driven admin on the backend for him to use when he elects to add more images).

commentat 18:07 on 20 October 2004, Mark wrote:

Those wedding photos are pretty shocking! Surely they must have better one in the portfolio for the rates they charge?

commentat 18:39 on 20 October 2004, Aaron wrote:

Seven years of taking photos doesn't make a good photographer and the images don't gain vistors confedence either. For all I know he is shooting with a $200 camera. I would rethink what information and struture would benifit visitors. But I guess this isn't a site that showcases IA or content.

commentat 18:51 on 20 October 2004, Mark wrote:

I really like the navigation treatment.

BTW: Are you sure Scott Upton did this? The site gives credit to groupthirytone, not Uptonic.

commentat 18:51 on 20 October 2004, David wrote:

I agree, the wedding photos are almost wedding-photo irony. But stylegala is not here to showcase content, even though I love to see content that lives up to the design.

commentat 18:54 on 20 October 2004, Mark wrote:

Sorry, please disregard my previous. I guess g31 has some other relationship to Cruxman.

commentat 18:54 on 20 October 2004, Scott Upton wrote:

Seven years of taking photos doesn't make a good photographer and the images don't gain vistors confedence either. For all I know he is shooting with a $200 camera.

Interesting... So shooting with a Nikon F4 or D2H instead of a $200 camera would instill more confidence in his audience? Seems irrelevant what equipment is being used.

I would rethink what information and struture would benifit visitors.

Can you elaborate?

commentat 19:48 on 20 October 2004, Aaron wrote:

I shoot with a Canon 10D, but I suck worse then most with a one time use camera. Didn't mean that the equipment reflected skill. I found that the site did not gain visitor confidence. I have no idea if it is a 15 year old kid, or a seasoned pro. All I know is for $150 dollars an hour I get The Cruxman to come to my event and take digital photos, and takes a few days to burn a CD of untouched images. I would personally talk more about experience, awards, honors, etc. My two cents.

commentat 20:36 on 20 October 2004, Kyle Fisher wrote:

I like the site's look & feel. Most photographer sites are bad. This site is nice.

I do not particularly like having the image thumbs on the left side of the page, with the full version on the right. Since there is a scant amount of content, it looks akward.

I agree on the picture quality. The nature pictures are much better and should be featured instead of the wedding photos until he gets better wedding photos up there. The wedding photos seem somewhat harsh. Good site design overall.

commentat 00:17 on 22 October 2004, Monica Kerry wrote:

Nice site liked the layout.Wedding photos should be changed nature ones r not bad over all nice effort.

commentat 01:28 on 22 October 2004, Dante Evans wrote:

I hate it. I mean, I like the colours, but he didn't even take the time to make sure the menu worked in Opera, which really makes me mad. I can't give it any higher than a 5.

commentat 20:20 on 29 October 2004, Young Bride wrote:

I am not impressed.Real Photographers do a lot better work then this one.I guess he needs a lot to learn.Check out THis Bride Page U sure will love It. http://ebride.da.ru


Gallery by month:

Gallery by rating:

Gallery All Stars:

Comments / recent

About dan friml: This site is the abomination of what Stylegala is ... [more]

About dan friml: The layout is good and also cplors are pretty.... [more]

About dan friml: looks like photoshop barfed on a canvas. The way h... [more]

About dan friml: Bellissima l'immagine relativa al logo di Artworks... [more]

About dan friml: Overall a nice looking site. Two points of improve... [more]


Search

Features

Stylegala BookStore
The Stylegala BookStore has a massive archive of great books for you as a professional..
Bullet madness
Bullet madness is a list of 200 bullets, arrows and icons uploaded by our users.
CSS Reference
An alphabetical list over the most common CSS1 and CSS2 syntax and properties.

Sponsors

Logo design for $149

Advertise here