How do you solve the discoverability issue? A platform. Gives you some place where people could stumble upon you, while a website is an island in the middle of an ocean. That people had to actively browse to. Do you crosspost your new work no more to get the word out? I find it hard to believe that people would like to browse to x differnt websites to see if an artist has new works, only to find out that they don’t. To find new artist a central place or a free like a platform can provide seems to be nearly impossible to replace.
Comment on The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Simple Websites
stoy@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
I have had an account on Deviantart for almost 20 years, and up untill last year I used to upload my photos to my gallery there.
However over the years it has only gotten worse, it is slow, annoying and have had features removed that I wanted.
So last year, I set up a simple menu system and started generating photo galleries in digiKam, and upload galleries there instead, and it is soo much more responsive.
The menu I wrote is built in HTML and CSS, the galleries digiKam exports for me do use Javascript but only to aid in navigating the galleries with the arrow keys, so everything loads instantly.
When I publish new galleries I do need to edit the HTML code in the menu (and one line in the gallery) but it is as easy as I can make it while still giving me some options.
Gloria@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
stoy@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
I don’t really use it for advertising, I have actively added the directory to the robots file and requested that search engines not index the page, I like it being hidden, but available for me to show people on their own computer, I also have a link to the page on my CV under hobbies.
jadero@programming.dev 9 months ago
I find it hard to believe that people would like to browse to x different websites to see if an artist has new works, only to find out that they don’t.
RSS FTW!
Every site I’ve ever created or been involved with in even the tiniest capacity has supported RSS. Sometimes it was enabled just to shut me up.
I’m not sure how to better promote the use of RSS and get people to use feed readers, but I think it is the answer to at least that particular issue.
My personal opinion is that a “platform” should really be just a collection of searchable and categorized feeds with it’s own feed. That way there is both discoverability and the ability for individuals to construct their own personal feed on their own personal device (no server required!) while staying abreast of new feeds on the master feed aggregation “platform.”
There are innumerable ways for people to get their own content into something that supports RSS and that feed could be easily submitted to the master feed aggregation “platform” to deal with the discoverability issue. For example, Mastodon and most compatible systems support RSS and registration is child’s play on any server that allows public registration.
In fact, the “platform” could set up a crawler to automatically discover RSS feeds. If the author has done the metadata right, the results would even be automatically categorized.
Done right, the “platform” might actually run on a pretty small server, because it would be linking to sites, and only pulling summaries from them.
Even comments could be supported with a little creativity. As I said, there are innumerable ways for people to get their own content out there. If there were a standard metadata tag “comment: <link to article or another comment>”, some fancy footwork could produce a threaded discussion associated with a particular article, even if the original author has no internal commenting system. (And my favoured internal comment system would permit nothing but pure HTTPS links to the commenters own content, extracting a short summary for display.)
Side note: I acquired a domain explicitly for the purpose of setting up such a feed aggregation “platform.” Now that I’m retired, I’m slowly working on creating it. Everything is highly experimental at this point and, to be honest, shows no visible progress to that end, but that is my ultimate goal.
brisk@aussie.zone 9 months ago
This is an interesting sounding project, do you have a feed/blog/mastodon/mailing list you’re likely to announce on?
jadero@programming.dev 8 months ago
Thanks for your interest!
Apart from here and “self-hosting” and other communities, if you’re a glutton for punishment, you can see what’s up at walloftext.ca. I’m currently in the process of rebuilding everything from the ground up, including an associated mastodon-compatible instance. I’ve not yet rewritten my project outline to account for all the new stuff I’ve learned about in the past few months, but it’s coming in the next few days.
Just note the most important part of my tagline: “Unstable by nature”. Some would argue that applies more to me than the stability of the site and projects. 😛 Either way, chaos is probably the order of the day for at least the rest of this year. (And I mostly take summers off to reenergize by fishing, working in my shop, etc.)
projectmoon@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Where are you uploading galleries? Just your own HDD connected to a static website?
stoy@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
Currently I borrow space on my dad’s web host, he wasn’t using it and was ok with me doing it.
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 9 months ago
Not OP but I would use a CDN like bunny.net. It’s cheap and you get geo redundancy and all kinds of perks with it.
You can set the Bunny CDN to pull from your home server or you can upload your files to a Bunny storage and it can pull from there so it doesn’t matter if your home server is on or not.
I’m currently running only the dynamic parts at home (CMS, generators etc.) and I “host” all the static generated stuff on there.
projectmoon@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. I am using photoprism for photo management. It doesn’t really support S3 or any CDN. You could use a fuse filesystem or something, but it’s very slow.
lemmyvore@feddit.nl 9 months ago
It’s probably better to export the photos if you want to make a presentation gallery. Many image viewers can create static HTML pages for a given set of images, GThumb, DigiKam etc.
mox@lemmy.sdf.org 9 months ago
I love sites like this. Fully functional with plain HTML and CSS. JavaScript used only for optional enhancements. Fast, light, and trustworthy.
stoy@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
Exactly, even now after half a year of using it, I am blown away by how fast it loads, and I love how I know exactly what is going on when it loads.
I even tried it on my phone, and the galleries have a responsive design, but better yet, they recognize swipes, making it easy to navigate on phones and tablets