SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    M e d i a M i n g l e . c o m review - What image search should be!

    Please review my site w w w . M e d i a M i n g l e . c o m . This site has just gone through a major overhaul. We have redesigned the main page and have added lots of features. Please try to be critical. I am interested in knowing

    1) What you think of the design
    2) What you think of the way we plan to monetize traffic
    3) Other monetization ideas
    4) Other feature requests
    5) good or bad comments
    6) Anything else
    Last edited by longneck; Apr 1, 2008 at 10:44. Reason: spaces inserted to stop spiders
    MediaMingle.com Finally, what image search should be!

  2. #2
    SitePoint Member thinkthank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I like the 2.0 design look, this is a pretty cool way to use ajax for gettoing traffic.
    Maby you should have a banner next to each image.
    I think a option to use their own text on the image should be great to.
    Overall this thing look pretty slick and will have good future.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Enthusiast Paintingblack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB
    Posts
    27
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I quite like the design, it's very professional and Web 2.0-ish. It's nice not having to actually scroll, but I think you should use AJAX instead of iFrames. Most people don't like pressing the back button numerous times for the exact same image.

    There were a few things I was unclear of. When I first go on to this website, I don't immediately know this is an image search site. Looks like an AJAX text search, which isn't that far off, but you need to have the word "images" somewhere.

    For the "size" option, it was also very confusing. "Small, Medium, Large" can mean anything. If you are going to use it by size, measure in pixels, don't make people guess.

    The "Download Image" button doesn't work all that well, it turns out I'm downloading an HTML file. Even then, it doesn't do anything at all in IE. I can't even right-click/save half of the pictures for some reason!

    Take off the "Image Size" icons (the three trees near under the search bar). They may look flashy, but nobody needs to see a pixelated version of what they already saw, and thats just 2 mores times I'll have to use the back button.

    "Follow Me™"... what does that mean? Just the fact that you added the ™, makes it seem like an ad, and makes me not want to click it. Plus, I'm still not even sure what it does, just gives me a new set of similar images? From the same website? You might want to have an explanation. I'd prefer to see what the title/name of the image is, instead! It's very misleading.

    Ratings are badly placed. I wouldn't have even noticed them if I hadn't scrolled down. Try putting them above the image?

    The "back" and "next" buttons are also badly placed. I wouldn't have noticed them.

    You should have some sort of home page with an explanation. It'd help a lot of people, especially if you had a video. The logo should also link back to the home page.

    EDIT: Oh wait, theres more!
    - Not Valid XHTML, oh wait, you have no doctype!
    - Not valid CSS? Really. Check your global.css.
    Last edited by Paintingblack; Oct 8, 2007 at 09:21.
    PaintingBlack.com - Quality Articles and Web Design

  4. #4
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for you posts, I really appreciate them

    thinkthank
    , I didn't understand either of your suggestions, can you expound a little bit.

    Painting black, thank you for your in depth review.

    1) I agree about using ajax instead of iframes. I just haven't gotten to that yet but I will get there
    2) I thought people would have a hard time figuring out what the site was for, I am currently creating a better front page that describes the site a little bit better and the page you saw will only be used after the image is already searched.
    3) Download bar - Ill check up on it
    4) All the other stuff is great also, I will look into each of them

    Thanks again for your reviews.
    MediaMingle.com Finally, what image search should be!

  5. #5
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Looking for more reviews if anyone would like to help out
    MediaMingle.com Finally, what image search should be!

  6. #6
    Word Painter silver trophy Shyflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Winona, MN USA
    Posts
    10,053
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Where are your permissions to use these images? Where are your links back to the sites of origin? In my opinion, your site is in violation of copyrights all over the web.

    Your home page has no explanation of why its there, terms of use, or how to use it.

    It looks like a made for adsense site and I wonder just how long Google will let it - and your adsense account - stand.
    Linda Jenkinson
    "Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean." ~Unknown

  7. #7
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would have to say you have a great point.

    1) We had the links back to sites of origin but It broke and still needs to be reprogrammed. This will be complete when the site is out of beta
    2) The site has the same permissions that Google and yahoo have to show images on their site.
    3) The explanations and terms of use are coming.
    4) The site at first had no adsense but because of development costs and ongoing maintenance we need to have a source of income just as any other site does. The reason the site was made was to make it eisier for people to find and look at images they want to look at instead of having to search through sites to get there.
    5) There should be no reason Google would need do away with 1 mysite or 2 my adsense account. I have not violated any terms of service with them. I would like you to expound a little bit more on your reasoning for this. If sites that use Google's adsense to monetized them self were banned, Google would have no business.


    I appreciate your comment and have noted our critiques.
    MediaMingle.com Finally, what image search should be!

  8. #8
    Word Painter silver trophy Shyflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Winona, MN USA
    Posts
    10,053
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    First of all, the reason Google and Yahoo show images is because people submit their sites to the search engines, knowing full well that when they do, their images - as part - of their content will appear in the search. Both major search engines also have programs for removal of any links you don't want indexed.

    Copyrighted Material
    Website publishers may not display Google ads on web pages with content protected by copyright law unless they have the necessary legal rights to display that content. Please see our DMCA policy for more information.
    Linda Jenkinson
    "Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean." ~Unknown

  9. #9
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    First of all, the reason Google and Yahoo show images is because people submit their sites to the search engines, knowing full well that when they do, their images - as part - of their content will appear in the search. Both major search engines also have programs for removal of any links you don't want indexed.

    You are right and wrong at the same time

    First yes, some people submit their sites to both yahoo and google but not everyone. I have a couple of sites that I have never submitted to any search engine and they still are indexed by most major search engines including google and yahoo. I have never specifically given them the right to index my site.

    Second, where do you think the content comes from? Answer = Both google and yahoo's index. The previous design gave the user the option of searching through both indexes but with the redesign it currently just uses google's image index. Soon the user will be able to choose which image search to use in thier control panel (yet to be built).

    I hope these answer your questions. Again, thanks for our comments and your research
    MediaMingle.com Finally, what image search should be!

  10. #10
    chown linux:users\ /world Hartmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Houston, TX, USA
    Posts
    6,455
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteposter View Post
    First of all, the reason Google and Yahoo show images is because people submit their sites to the search engines, knowing full well that when they do, their images - as part - of their content will appear in the search. Both major search engines also have programs for removal of any links you don't want indexed.

    You are right and wrong at the same time

    First yes, some people submit their sites to both yahoo and google but not everyone. I have a couple of sites that I have never submitted to any search engine and they still are indexed by most major search engines including google and yahoo. I have never specifically given them the right to index my site.

    Second, where do you think the content comes from? Answer = Both google and yahoo's index. The previous design gave the user the option of searching through both indexes but with the redesign it currently just uses google's image index. Soon the user will be able to choose which image search to use in thier control panel (yet to be built).

    I hope these answer your questions. Again, thanks for our comments and your research
    I think one difference is that Google keeps a cached version of the image on their servers instead of pulling the image directly from the site. They (Google) also display the image in context by displaying the site it came from in the frame below.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •