Up and running.
Dudley Hanks
My new site is up and running.
http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's tribute
to follow shortly.
I hope you enjoy, and, as always, please let me know if I screwed up.
Mistakes aren't always evident with a screen reader.
Take Care,
Dudley
Paul Furman
Clean & simple, works perfect for me. The colors make my eyes twitch, I
don't know if that's intentional... the green ring & teal/aqua
background vibrate as if they were complimentary colors. Maybe it's the
'orange' (tan) backdrop and 'blue' teal matte.
A very handsome portrait.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
Dudley Hanks
"Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message
news:r%8Wj.486$BL6...@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> My new site is up and running.
>>
>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
>>
>> Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's
>> tribute to follow shortly.
>>
>> I hope you enjoy, and, as always, please let me know if I screwed up.
>> Mistakes aren't always evident with a screen reader.
>
> Clean & simple, works perfect for me. The colors make my eyes twitch, I
> don't know if that's intentional... the green ring & teal/aqua background
> vibrate as if they were complimentary colors. Maybe it's the 'orange'
> (tan) backdrop and 'blue' teal matte.
>
> A very handsome portrait.
>
> --
> Paul Furman
Thanks, Paul, I appreciate the feedback.
My daughter, Amelia (grade 6), did the post-processing on the pic, so the
colour scheme is a bit youthful. But, I want to build her enthusiasm, so I
just let her run with it.
As it is, she figured out most of the steps to photoshop the image on her
own. All-in-all, I think she did a pretty good job.
The pup, Elliot, is a 10-month old Lab my family was bording for the
weekend. He really livened up the place. He-ll make a great therapy dog
for somebody, soon.
Take Care,
Dudley
Paul Furman
> "Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message
> news:r%8Wj.486$BL6...@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> My new site is up and running.
>>>
>>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
>>>
>>> Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's
>>> tribute to follow shortly.
>>>
>>> I hope you enjoy, and, as always, please let me know if I screwed up.
>>> Mistakes aren't always evident with a screen reader.
>> Clean & simple, works perfect for me. The colors make my eyes twitch, I
>> don't know if that's intentional... the green ring & teal/aqua background
>> vibrate as if they were complimentary colors. Maybe it's the 'orange'
>> (tan) backdrop and 'blue' teal matte.
>>
>> A very handsome portrait.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Furman
>
>
> Thanks, Paul, I appreciate the feedback.
>
> My daughter, Amelia (grade 6), did the post-processing on the pic, so the
> colour scheme is a bit youthful. But, I want to build her enthusiasm, so I
> just let her run with it.
Good young energy!
> As it is, she figured out most of the steps to photoshop the image on her
> own. All-in-all, I think she did a pretty good job.
>
> The pup, Elliot, is a 10-month old Lab my family was bording for the
> weekend. He really livened up the place. He-ll make a great therapy dog
> for somebody, soon.
>
> Take Care,
> Dudley
>
>
>
>
Jeff
> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> My new site is up and running.
>>
>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
>>
>> Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's
>> tribute to follow shortly.
>>
Just a note about the image size. You have the image resized by the
browser, rather than shrinking it in an image editor first. Hence it's
about 20 times or so to large, a bit punishing for anyone with dialup!
Aside from that, very bold!
Jeff
Jürgen Exner
>My new site is up and running.
>
>http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
Much better than the old version. Now text stays in place, doesn't
overlap, and wraps correctly rather than jumping around all over the
page when resizing the browser window as in the previous version.
jue
Frank ess
Jeff wrote:
> Paul Furman wrote:
>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> My new site is up and running.
>>>
>>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
>>>
>>> Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's
>>> tribute to follow shortly.
>>>
>
> Just a note about the image size. You have the image resized by the
> browser, rather than shrinking it in an image editor first. Hence
> it's about 20 times or so to large, a bit punishing for anyone with
> dialup!
> Aside from that, very bold!
>
> Jeff
>
Here y'go:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2332/2489980432_1bd8130b2f_o.jpg
Perfectly satisfactory for Web viewing.
--
Frank ess
Dudley Hanks
"Jeff" <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote in message
news:UuOdnawu3coYwLTV...@earthlink.com...
> Paul Furman wrote:
>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> My new site is up and running.
>>>
>>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Light-And-Sight/index.html
>>>
>>> Other than "Elliot's Portrait," there isn't much there yet. Dima's
>>> tribute to follow shortly.
>>>
>
> Just a note about the image size. You have the image resized by the
> browser, rather than shrinking it in an image editor first. Hence it's
> about 20 times or so to large, a bit punishing for anyone with dialup!
>
bandwidth; I forgot about dialup limitations.
After using a site with only 15 megs of disk space and a 4 meg bandwidth, it
was hard to resist just slapping down the image and resizing it. I'll
shrink it later tonight.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
"JT's Ghost" <justa...@mad.scientist.com> wrote in message
news:4ffWj.280$ll1.1@trndny06...
> portrait could be just a tad smaller (square vs. rectangular). The
> copyright notice line "All rights reserved," probably should be on the
> same line as the copyright notice itself.
>
>
> - JT
>
Actually, JT, I learn a lot from nit-pickers.
I don't think this particular image will be up long enough to worry about
changing it, but I'll make a note of your comments and do a double check the
next time I post something similar -- which could be early next week.
There's a good chanced we'll be bording another pup this coming weekend, and
we'll be taking it to a neat dinosaur museum, so opportunities for picks
will abound. If I do a portrait for Macey (the 9-month old pup) the square
format will get used.
As for the copyright notice, I've got it in my notes to check out a few
other sites to see how other people post their notices. I'll try to adopt
something more main stream then.
Take Care,
Dudley
Russell D.
Nice. Simple. Easy on the eye. No Flash. Two thumbs up here.
Russell
Dudley Hanks
"Jürgen Exner" <jurg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:109j24ht93391jieg...@4ax.com...
Thanks, Jurgen, I got this one right because you (and a few others) pointed
me in the right direction the last time.
In the future, with my increased disk-space and bandwidth allowances, I hope
to get into doing some multi-media mini-documentaries. But, I'll keep your
preference for non-audio content in mind and try to post a silent,
photo-essay equivalent. That way, there will be something for everyone
regardless of a visitor's personal preferences or hardware / software
limitations.
Thanks for your comments. If I don't know what people prefer, I can't give
it to them.
Take Care,
Dudley
Jeff
Even not considering the bandwidth (this is about 6 seconds on many
DSL connections), images tend to look better if your image editor does
the sizing rather than having the browser size it. Browsers do a poor
job of anti aliasing edges. Not really a problem with your image due to
the extreme resampling.
On another note, you can ditch the table layout if you wish and get
nearly the same look. That may help with accessibility, just float the
image right, is all.
Jeff
>
> Take Care,
> Dudley
>
>
Dudley Hanks
> nearly the same look. That may help with accessibility, just float the
> image right, is all.
>
> Jeff
>>
I tried something similar to that for an earlier version (on my other site),
and the text tended to get screwed up when browser windows were small. So,
I opted for the table approach as per some other users suggestion.
As far as accessability goes, table lay-outs work fine; they are just a
pain to set up when using a screen reader.
But, I'm getting better at it.
However, I'll re-read my info on positioning images and maybe give it a try
again. It will probably get easier when I get into using cascading style
sheets, in a few weeks.
Thanks for the comments,
Dudley
Peter
news:FP8Wj.1961$Yp.194@edtnps92...
I almost completely agree with Krish's comments. I don't intend this to be
patronizing, but I think your work and attitude are a valuable lesson to all
of us and we have much to learn from you.
--
Peter
Jeff
>> On another note, you can ditch the table layout if you wish and get
>> nearly the same look. That may help with accessibility, just float the
>> image right, is all.
>>
>> Jeff
>
>
> I tried something similar to that for an earlier version (on my other site),
> and the text tended to get screwed up when browser windows were small.
How was that?
So,
> I opted for the table approach as per some other users suggestion.
>
> As far as accessability goes, table lay-outs work fine; they are just a
> pain to set up when using a screen reader.
> But, I'm getting better at it.
>
> However, I'll re-read my info on positioning images and maybe give it a try
> again. It will probably get easier when I get into using cascading style
> sheets, in a few weeks.
Are you taking a course?
Screw the wait and do it now. Take a look at the fluid layout site
that the "Not so Fat Man" did. That's nice work. But you don't need
something that complex.
Your site has a lot of weird white space where you don't need it. I'd
be suspicious of anyone who hasn't mentioned that. It's kind of all over
the place.
BTW, give it a strict doctype, I'm surprised Blinky didn't mention
that. You'll need that later when you get more advanced...
Jeff
Rob Morley
> As for the copyright notice, I've got it in my notes to check out a few
> other sites to see how other people post their notices. I'll try to
> adopt something more main stream then.
In the meantime you might want to fix the typo in your code - it says
'alighn' rather than 'align' on the "All Rights Reserved" line. :-)
Dudley Hanks
> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>> On another note, you can ditch the table layout if you wish and get
>>> nearly the same look. That may help with accessibility, just float the
>>> image right, is all.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> I tried something similar to that for an earlier version (on my other
>> site), and the text tended to get screwed up when browser windows were
>> small.
>
> How was that?
Users who sized their windows down a bit reported that the text would
overlap the image and was hard to read. See:
http://geocities.com/hanks.dudley/index.html
I think the page is still there. I have to shut it down properly yet.
> So,
>> I opted for the table approach as per some other users suggestion.
>>
>> As far as accessability goes, table lay-outs work fine; they are just a
>> pain to set up when using a screen reader.
>> But, I'm getting better at it.
>>
>> However, I'll re-read my info on positioning images and maybe give it a
>> try again. It will probably get easier when I get into using cascading
>> style sheets, in a few weeks.
>
> Are you taking a course?
No, I'm just scanning a few books I got from the library. Unfortunately,
computer books don't scan all that well -- too many font variations and
weird column alignments -- so I have to do a lot of cross referencing with
web sources -- where possible.
Of course, when I've gone through the previous steps, I take a stab at it,
post it if I think it's working, and usenet members are kind enough to fine
tune my code.
Not the most efficient learning environment ever devised, but it works.
Taking an actual course is even tougher. In addition to competing with
sighted students, I have to add in the time it takes to scan the material
and sort through it. While I have a fairly high IQ, I need to work within
the limitations of my disability, which entails taking extra time. When
it's all said-and-done, the credentials won't do me any good anyway, so I've
opted to just do it myself. Hence, my new site. It's cost me a couple of
hundred bucks, but I can go through the books, try it out, and then
implement something that is more likely to be compatible with my situation
than if I were to try a more traditional approach. Taking a course would
probably cost no less, and I wouldn't learn as much. I can tailor this
project to my own needs, and vary it as I please if things don't work.
Besides, even when I had more sight, I was more apt to go my own way than
follow the main stream.
>
> Screw the wait and do it now. Take a look at the fluid layout site that
> the "Not so Fat Man" did. That's nice work. But you don't need something
> that complex.
Thanks, I'll check it out. My screen reader will butcher the visual appeal
but it will be rendered in a nicely linear fashion. Using hot keys
(provided both by Microsoft and the screen reader company), I can jump
around to major components / objects. It's all very business like, but not
very conducive to appreciation of the site's finer points.
>
> Your site has a lot of weird white space where you don't need it. I'd be
> suspicious of anyone who hasn't mentioned that. It's kind of all over the
> place.
Thanks for the heads up. I'll start keeping closer tabs on my wife....
Just kidding...
As content increases, I'm sure my white space will become more normal.
Also, the amount of white space is probably directly related to monitor size
and browser window resizing. If someone is running a browser maximized on a
21" monitor, white space will abound; for a quarter of a 15" monitor,
things might even be a bit cluttered given the size of the image. I have no
control over layout when viewed in those terms.
>
> BTW, give it a strict doctype, I'm surprised Blinky didn't mention that.
> You'll need that later when you get more advanced...
With the meager limitations on my last site, I was using a text editor I
compiled myself to edit the html. Now that I've got a more useable site,
I'll try out some of the better editors to see if I can find one that works
with my reader. Word is fairly compatible, but I would like to find
something that is a bit less Microsoft oriented.
Out of curiosity, does giving it a doc type make that much of a difference?
If I try maintaining a fairly general level of compatibility with html 3.2
or 4 will I need that particular element?
>
Thanks for the advice. I'll do my best to learn from it.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
"krishnananda" <k...@ashram.in> wrote in message
news:482a2640$0$7703$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
> In article <xClWj.2013$Yp.437@edtnps92>,
> "Dudley Hanks" <hanks....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your comments. If I don't know what people prefer, I can't
>> give
>> it to them.
>
>
> The site is, as you say, somewhat bare bones and hard to comment on.
> However, I would like to mention something about the content.
>
> Before I read your blog on "why I use a guide dog" I had absolutely no
> idea what the day-to-day experience of blind and nearly-blind people. I
> think that part of your blog, or perhaps an excerpt, belongs front and
> center on your web page. Your writing is quite evocative -- and
> especially with the accompanying photo of the kind of sidewalk hazards
> we sighted folks take for granted.
>
> Also your photo of Dima interacting with the little kid in the food
> court is a fantastic photo! It also belongs on your main website (IMHO).
> I know your mission in life is not to educate the sighted,
Thanks, Krishnananda, I appreciate you sharing that with me.
I hope sighted people don't think I'm trying to educate them. I take pics
of obstacles like the ones you mentioned not to educate, but to illustrate
that the camera is a tool I use to get a better "view" of the world around
me. If I can't figure something out, or if I think I've got something
figured out but would like a bit of confirmation, I whip out my pocket
camera and take a few clicks. Later, I get somebody with sight to tell me
what they see. It's just another way to make my life a bit easier.
Rest assured, the pics you mentioned will end up on my site. Although, I
was wishing I'd taken my camera along the other day when I encountered a
twisted car bumper stretched across the sidewalk. It would have been even
more dramatic than the pile of tree clippings.
I hope that people understand that I simply love to take pictures.
Photography was a big part of my life when I had better eyes, but technology
(and a bit of stubbornness) is making it possible for me to continue doing
what I love.
Also, I have many stories yet to tell about how my guides, both Bonner and
Dima, saved me from serious injury (maybe even death). And, I'm sure my
next guide will do the same. I just have to find a balance between taking
pics, writing narratives and getting all the technical details of web
publishing out of the way.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
"Peter" <pete...@nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:482a2b95$0$13892$8f2e...@news.shared-secrets.com...
Hey, Peter, I think I've given enough people a rough enough time to ensure
that we've gotten past the patronizing point.... :)
Thanks for your support,
dudley
Dudley Hanks
"Rob Morley" <nos...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:68uuvgF...@mid.individual.net...
Thanks, Rob, I'll fix that right away. My daughter said the copyright lines
looked a bit strange, but I haven't gotten around to check out why. That
typo explains it.
Thanks a lot. Looking for typos like that can be painful. A spell-checker
is basically useless in an html doc, and my screen reader pronounces align
and alighn exactly the same. You might say it's acoustically invisible.
Without your help, I would have had to arrow through that section one
character at a time until I found it (assuming I could stay awake long
enough to get that far).
Take Care,
Dudley
Jeff
> "Jeff" <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote in message
> news:Ar-dnbeP8sOTqLfV...@earthlink.com...
>> Dudley Hanks wrote:
>>>> On another note, you can ditch the table layout if you wish and get
>>>> nearly the same look. That may help with accessibility, just float the
>>>> image right, is all.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> I tried something similar to that for an earlier version (on my other
>>> site), and the text tended to get screwed up when browser windows were
>>> small.
>> How was that?
>
> Users who sized their windows down a bit reported that the text would
> overlap the image and was hard to read. See:
> http://geocities.com/hanks.dudley/index.html
That's all table based. And the problem here is that you have some
tables aligned right and some center. It's just weird html.
Plain old html won't lap text on images on you have set negative
margins ar force things out through relative positioning.
>
> I think the page is still there. I have to shut it down properly yet.
>
>> So,
>>> I opted for the table approach as per some other users suggestion.
>>>
>>> As far as accessability goes, table lay-outs work fine; they are just a
>>> pain to set up when using a screen reader.
>>> But, I'm getting better at it.
>>>
>>> However, I'll re-read my info on positioning images and maybe give it a
>>> try again. It will probably get easier when I get into using cascading
>>> style sheets, in a few weeks.
>> Are you taking a course?
>
> No, I'm just scanning a few books I got from the library. Unfortunately,
> computer books don't scan all that well -- too many font variations and
> weird column alignments -- so I have to do a lot of cross referencing with
> web sources -- where possible.
> Of course, when I've gone through the previous steps, I take a stab at it,
> post it if I think it's working, and usenet members are kind enough to fine
> tune my code.
Try an html group. Everything you should want should already be
online, this is after, what is all about!
I don't think so. It's just poor flow with one of tables or rows trying
to flow past the image, I believe.
If you'd like, I can set this up very simply so it can be styled.
>
>> BTW, give it a strict doctype, I'm surprised Blinky didn't mention that.
>> You'll need that later when you get more advanced...
>
> With the meager limitations on my last site, I was using a text editor I
> compiled myself to edit the html. Now that I've got a more useable site,
> I'll try out some of the better editors to see if I can find one that works
> with my reader. Word is fairly compatible, but I would like to find
> something that is a bit less Microsoft oriented.
There are a lot of text editors. Don't use Word. I use the free
version of Note Tab. But there are many inexpensive and free editors
that are better.
>
> Out of curiosity, does giving it a doc type make that much of a difference?
> If I try maintaining a fairly general level of compatibility with html 3.2
> or 4 will I need that particular element?
What is going is that you are running in what is know as "quirks mode".
Each browser will interpret that slightly differently. In "standards
mode", everyone is playing by similar rules (more or less).
Jeff
Rob Morley
> Looking for typos like that can be painful. A
> spell-checker is basically useless in an html doc, and my screen reader
> pronounces align and alighn exactly the same. You might say it's
> acoustically invisible.
You'd think there'd be a way of getting the screen reader to spellcheck
as it reads, and use macros so that when it encounters tags it reads them
in a way that makes sense, e.g. "paragraph tag" rather than "less-than
symbol, letter P, greater-than symbol". Or however it does it.
Dudley Hanks
Actually, that is possible -- but time consuming. There is a feature called
the "pronunciation dictionary which allows me to type in how something is
normally written and then a phonetical spelling which more closely resembles
the way the word is actually pronounced.
For instance, my wife's name is Rosalind, or Ros for short. But, without
correction, my reader pronounces her name as Rose. So, by entering the
letters Ros and then indicating that this should be pronounced as Roz, I've
corrected that little bug.
However, in the case of html it's arguable as to whether it's worth punching
in all of the tags and then corrections, or whether it's just more efficient
to train my ear to understand the various iterations the program comes up
wwith -- which is the path I've opted to take.
Regardless, the typo you spotted wouldn't be picked up by the speech because
it is pronounced exactly the same as the actual form of the tag.
This is one of those cases where the intricacies of communication come into
play.
Had my daughter said, "Dad, one of your copyright lines isn't centered." I
would have known what to look for, and I would have quickly checked out the
two lines in question -- character by character -- and I would have found
the problem fairly quickly. However, her simple statement that the last
couple of lines look a bit funny didn't raise any serious concern with me
because I had opted for the quick fix of using a sixth level heading tag to
display the text. Thus, I thought she just meant that the text was quite
small and bold.
Thanks, Rob, for pointing out exactly what the problem was. I appreciate
the time you took to check that out.
Take Care,
Dudley