Comments on: The Future of Flash and Photography! Not That Flash, the Other Flash http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash Wedding Photographer Blog Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:42:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Bryan Mitchell http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-5962 Bryan Mitchell Sun, 04 Apr 2010 17:52:49 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-5962 I don't like flash websites and I really dislike music on photo websites. I have had many people and clients tell me they were glad I didt't have either. I don’t like flash websites and I really dislike music on photo websites. I have had many people and clients tell me they were glad I didt’t have either.

]]> By: DWF » Blog Archive » Photographers Will Your Next Website Use Flash http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-4254 DWF » Blog Archive » Photographers Will Your Next Website Use Flash Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:58:43 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-4254 [...] iPad looming could this be the final nail in the coffin for Flash as we know it? We wrote about it a week ago and this week other sites are left pondering the same thing. Is Flash on death’s [...] [...] iPad looming could this be the final nail in the coffin for Flash as we know it? We wrote about it a week ago and this week other sites are left pondering the same thing. Is Flash on death’s [...]

]]> By: Marty Thornley http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-4021 Marty Thornley Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:26:49 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-4021 Anything that helps lead to the downfall of Flash (as a way to do an entire site) is fine by me. @Ivan - I agree about the compelling nature of a well-done flash site but those are few and far between. If the aesthetic value of well-done Flash is really needed, they should be used as parts of a page, not the whole thing. An animated logo or header for example. A Flash based image gallery can be impressive but images have a lot of SEO value when done properly in HTML as well. BTW - A Flash site that uses mirrored HTML content is NOT a good SEO tactic. In fact it is a terrible one. Just look at Google's Webmaster Guidelines where it says specifically that this is a bad idea that can even result in removal from Google's index: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66355 Like Ben Jamieson mentioned above, most Flash sites do not do anything that a little javascript can't do. And if the only SEO solution is to offer a mirror site in HTML (as anyone selling a Flash product will tell you, even though this is wrong), then why not just stick with the HTML in the first place? It can look just as good for the most part and is the only option for good SEO. For anyone worried about those Flash elements showing up on an iPhone or iPad, they can easily be swapped out for an image or alternate content for those visitors, while maintaining the rest of the page and not trying to trick search engines. Serving an entirely different page or site is not a good idea. You don't have to take my word for it, read the link I included above and the rest of the Google Webmaster Guidelines. Anything that helps lead to the downfall of Flash (as a way to do an entire site) is fine by me.

@Ivan – I agree about the compelling nature of a well-done flash site but those are few and far between. If the aesthetic value of well-done Flash is really needed, they should be used as parts of a page, not the whole thing. An animated logo or header for example. A Flash based image gallery can be impressive but images have a lot of SEO value when done properly in HTML as well.

BTW – A Flash site that uses mirrored HTML content is NOT a good SEO tactic. In fact it is a terrible one. Just look at Google’s Webmaster Guidelines where it says specifically that this is a bad idea that can even result in removal from Google’s index: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66355

Like Ben Jamieson mentioned above, most Flash sites do not do anything that a little javascript can’t do. And if the only SEO solution is to offer a mirror site in HTML (as anyone selling a Flash product will tell you, even though this is wrong), then why not just stick with the HTML in the first place? It can look just as good for the most part and is the only option for good SEO.

For anyone worried about those Flash elements showing up on an iPhone or iPad, they can easily be swapped out for an image or alternate content for those visitors, while maintaining the rest of the page and not trying to trick search engines. Serving an entirely different page or site is not a good idea.

You don’t have to take my word for it, read the link I included above and the rest of the Google Webmaster Guidelines.

]]> By: Ivan Sesma http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-4009 Ivan Sesma Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:44:58 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-4009 HTML and FLASH are just coding tools that designers and coders like myself use to accomplish a set of specifications. When I am given an assignment I pick the right tool for the job. The next version of HTML (html5) holds a lot of promise, but so does the next version of Flash. In terms of search engine optimization (SEO) there are services like LiveBoks and foliolink that create full solutions that do not merely address the presentation side of a website. Both have shadow HTML websites for search engine visibility and foliolink also offers device specific sites for the iphone, etc. In fact, it is easy to argue that the best photography website is the one that gives your visitors the best experience across all platforms (Flash or HTML, pc, mac, iphone, ipad...) and gives search engines the most content (Flash+HTML shadow or HTML only. In the end whether or not a photographer picks a Flash site with an HTML shadow site targeted to search engine visibility or an HTML only site is purely personal, but Flash done well plays a very compelling card when it comes to enhancing a site visitor's experience of visual content. HTML and FLASH are just coding tools that designers and coders like myself use to accomplish a set of specifications. When I am given an assignment I pick the right tool for the job. The next version of HTML (html5) holds a lot of promise, but so does the next version of Flash. In terms of search engine optimization (SEO) there are services like LiveBoks and foliolink that create full solutions that do not merely address the presentation side of a website. Both have shadow HTML websites for search engine visibility and foliolink also offers device specific sites for the iphone, etc. In fact, it is easy to argue that the best photography website is the one that gives your visitors the best experience across all platforms (Flash or HTML, pc, mac, iphone, ipad…) and gives search engines the most content (Flash+HTML shadow or HTML only. In the end whether or not a photographer picks a Flash site with an HTML shadow site targeted to search engine visibility or an HTML only site is purely personal, but Flash done well plays a very compelling card when it comes to enhancing a site visitor’s experience of visual content.

]]> By: Jim Petrosky http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-4006 Jim Petrosky Sun, 31 Jan 2010 11:40:57 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-4006 Sounds like a step backwards to me!! Sounds like a step backwards to me!!

]]> By: Ben Jamieson http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-3981 Ben Jamieson Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:13:38 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-3981 99% of photography sites using flash are using it to do nothing that can't be done with the HTML and javascript that has been around for the last 5 years. Transitions, slideshows, sliding thumbnails.... its all right there without Flash. Photogs go with Flash because that's what they've been told and sold, not because it the best option. It is in fact probably the worst option if you're not a 'big name' who doesn't need to ever show up when a potential client searches for you. 99% of photography sites using flash are using it to do nothing that can’t be done with the HTML and javascript that has been around for the last 5 years. Transitions, slideshows, sliding thumbnails…. its all right there without Flash.

Photogs go with Flash because that’s what they’ve been told and sold, not because it the best option. It is in fact probably the worst option if you’re not a ‘big name’ who doesn’t need to ever show up when a potential client searches for you.

]]> By: AJ http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-3978 AJ Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:24:11 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-3978 I use Photobiz and they offer an add on that redirects anyone using an iPhone to a special mirror site specifically for it. No extra coding required, all done automatically based on your main site. Also, there is an HTML version that users can choose over the flash one. I use Photobiz and they offer an add on that redirects anyone using an iPhone to a special mirror site specifically for it. No extra coding required, all done automatically based on your main site.

Also, there is an HTML version that users can choose over the flash one.

]]> By: Alberto http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-3976 Alberto Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:47:09 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-3976 Don't forget that you can write a script that will send certain browser's to a HTML site, so iPhone and windows mobile can be redirected to a low bandwidth site. I also think flash is overused especially on photo sites. Don’t forget that you can write a script that will send certain browser’s to a HTML site, so iPhone and windows mobile can be redirected to a low bandwidth site.

I also think flash is overused especially on photo sites.

]]> By: Loring von Palleske http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-3975 Loring von Palleske Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:41:36 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-3975 There are a lot of reasons not to use flash. Highest among them would be for SEO reasons. The iPhone and iPad are strengthening the growing (or maybe following) anti flash movement. There are a lot of reasons not to use flash. Highest among them would be for SEO reasons. The iPhone and iPad are strengthening the growing (or maybe following) anti flash movement.

]]> By: Jeff Wallace http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/the-future-of-flash-and-photography-the-other-flash/comment-page-1#comment-3973 Jeff Wallace Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:01:44 +0000 http://www.digitalweddingforum.com/blog/?p=9597#comment-3973 It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Google is shelving further development of "Gears" as it's thinking forward to push of HTML5 & YouTube is already preparing itself. I think Apple is banking on the same thing. But with how slow adoption can be with some advances, who knows how long it will take! It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Google is shelving further development of “Gears” as it’s thinking forward to push of HTML5 & YouTube is already preparing itself. I think Apple is banking on the same thing. But with how slow adoption can be with some advances, who knows how long it will take!

]]>