[Alex Lindsay]

My name is Alex Lindsay.

I worked at ILM and Lucasfilm on SW1.

I have started a new site dedicated to training visual media artists...
www.dvgarage.com

We have been slowly getting the word out to artists and we're about to make a more significant launch soon...I would like to get your input as to what you think of the site before we launch officially...

Thank you in advance.

a

[Nex]

looks quite okay if not a bit sterile to me.
the round text is kind of hard to read though.

however i am no web designer so I hope someone else will be of more help here.

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you for taking a look.

Did you look at the tutorials?

a

[Chapel]

I think the site is awesome. The tutorials are great and I think anyone who comes to this forum should check it out. Really great stuff. This gets two enthusiastic thumbs up from me.

Just one little thing that bugs me though is the navigation. After you watch a tutorial you have to back up with the browser. There should be a nav bar or something. Also there doesn't seen to be a direct way to get to the previous tutorials without watching the daily one first.

[This message has been edited by Chapel (edited March 09, 2001).]

[Kenzo Tanaka]

Great site! Big fan of your work, glad to see the site come together so well. It's my new starting home page in IE.

Kenzo

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you for your input...

we are still working out the navigation bugs...

We hope people find it a useful resource...I kind of feel like we are giving people what they really need to know about this work...stuff that most don't know or won't talk about.

a

[Chapel]

I think everyone can benefit from it for learning and to use as a great reference site. I'm pretty sure even Craig Mullins, Ron Lemen, and Francis may find a few things interesting.

[surferboi]

i liked your website.. a lot of work n time went into making it, as with the tutorials.
I think they are informative.

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you...

And thank you for checking it out.

a

[Francis]

It is VERY helpful and very useful. I hope you guys get the investment you need to keep this going.



------------------
Francis Tsai
TeamGT Studios

Conceptual Design Forum

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you...

We just lots of vistors and lots of enthusiasm...if we can prove that artists are willing to come...

this is the tip of the iceberg...

a

[Brain]

Wow, this is a most kewl site. Something really handy to everyone out there. Proceeding to tell friends... @:-)

Keep up the very grouse work!

------------------
Brain
http://brain.gamekey.com/

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you...

The more...the merrier...(literally)...

a

[Justin Kramer]

ideas and potential: A+
site design: F

Sorry to be negative, but I'm giving you my honest input because it looks like you guys are doing good things. I'm a web designer/developer with experience creating both graphics-heavy sites (e.g. for gaming) and minimal sites (e.g. straight-laced business sites), so while I may just be flapping my yap, you might find at least some of my spewing a little bit helpful.

Honestly, your design is really slow and really hard to use. The only reason I waited for the ridiculous amount of images to load is because others here said the site was worth looking at and because I wanted to give some feedback. Especially considering that you're interested in broad outreach ("no one left out"), you should make your site narrowband compatible. Most of the images on the site are totally superfluous: images of text should be replaced with text(!!), navigation links should be replaced with text or text with an icon. At least allow users to see the basics of the navigation and content without forcing them to twiddle their thumbs for five minutes. If you're going to provide big images, make them secondary, so people can read the text while the rest loads.

The navigation is often confusing or outright incomprehensible. It took me a while to find out exactly what this "dv garage" entity even is. I first clicked on "Find out who we are", only to find (after waiting for the images to load) biographical info on a bunch of people, which wasn't very useful at that point. I suggest making your purpose clear right at the outset: put a small blurb on the front page about who you are and what you do. And make the links to your other content more concise and less ambiguous. Who's going to know that "see the world through new eyes" is a link to daily/weekly tutorials (I didn't)? If you're going to be poetic/creative, do so in the appropriate place.

The tutorials are, I assume, presented in those videos. Since I'm on a 28.8, I didn't take the time to download them. I suggest you provide text/images versions for those who won't/can't wait for a huge video to download. If the tutorials only work in that medium, maybe provide smaller and/or streaming videos for those of us with measly dial-ups. If you're dead set on the idea of keeping big videos and images, at least be honest and say it's a "broadband only" site so narrowbanders don't waste their time registering.

I recommend you have whoever is designing your site go read O'Reilly's "Web Navigation" and get familiar with the ideas of Jacob Neilson (useit.com) and other usability/design pundits (Tufte, Tognazzini...).

While the site doesn't have to be totally bland and barren, I think it should be significantly simplified/clarified.

Again, I don't mean to be overly harsh, but you should seriously consider these kinds of things, as they could have a real effect on whether the site sinks or swims.

Good luck...

[Alex Lindsay]

Wow! That's a lot to bite off...

It's interesting...you are the first to really take us to task on our design...and you make some good points.

I admit...we are a little heavy on the graphics... While I don't want to leave anyone out...96.4% (just looked) registrants had DSL, Cable, and T-1. It's the industry we are in...everyone wants a fast connection...building a parallel site is a definite possibility when we have some more resources. I think it would be appropriate for the reasons you mentioned.

I didn't pay much attention to web convention because, for the most part...I hate the web...the look anyway...the it is too busy...makes me crazy. The varying text colors are to have you focus on what is in specific areas as opposed to the whole page. I admit I'm horribly dyslexic so I have an adversion to text of all kind...hence the images.

It's actually not designed to be too obvious... I'm playing a dangerous game of trying to increase traffic but not make it completely easy to play...I want everyone to visit and only those that are really serious about developing themselves to stay...they can be coming from varying degrees of experience...they just have to be searching...and willing to look a little...if they're not...I don't want to expend energy on them when I could be serving the ones who are. The maze of the site is the first test...

The movies are heavy...we have spent a considerable amount of time reducing the size (they are 1/8th what they were when we started). They were designed to be tolerable at 56K but i admit...28.8 would be very painful. We may provide the text in the future...It's a good idea.

I really don't think learning through text is very effective...but I do see the need you mention.

Thank you very much for spending your Friday evening visiting our site so completely. I really appreciate your comments and I will looking at how to handle some of the issues you pointed to.

a

[Nex]

I totally overlooked the tutorials!!

Whow.. great resource.

[Dizzogg]

I like it a lot actually. It looks to be a very powerful site, but as others have said the nav does not do it for me either.

The tutorials are very very cool and they are exciting to see.

Nothing is ever free though.....When are you guys going to start charging a fee to come to your site. Or when are you selling a CD with bump maps and the like. I probably wouldnt want to hang out if it was a pay site, but I might fork over some $$ for some cds or something like that with tutorials and textures and what not....I dont know if this is the route your guys are going but...

Over all it looks to be a very cool site to come and get information from. The internet is such a powerful tool eh?

Thanks for posting and looking forward to more stuff...

[immi]

Hey, cool. I really like the concept of the site, and what you guys are aiming to do. Interesting stuff.

I do however agree with a few things that Justin had to say specifically in regards to the navigation. I think it needs some fine tuning.

Let me know if you'd like me to publisize the site as I run a small game art site called 3D Palette (www.3dpalette.org . about 2500 unique visitors daily.) Also, could definately help get the news on larger sites like CGChannel.com/

Oh yeah, pretty cool seeing your Zimbabwe footage and images as I lived in the region (botswana actually) until 6 years ago.

[This message has been edited by immi (edited March 10, 2001).]

[quaternius]

Alex - great site!
Obviously, the tutorials aren't just for those building realistic CG models - great "observation" resource for mostly 2D artists and illustrators too! Your audience may be even wider than you think!

Thanks for developing this vision and making the site - it's going to be a daily visit.

Q

[frostfyre]

Killer website! The video segments are well thought out, though I think in some cases, you may want to let people know how to access certain functions in common applications like photoshop. Some of these packages are deep enough that people never actually use some functions, and therefore wouldn't know where to find them.

That said, the tutorials focus a lot more on painting and 3D techniques, which are digital based, but not DV based, in particular. You may wind up with many dissappointed users expecting tips on getting the most out of their DV cameras, only to discover the site is more for artists, not cameramen (or is that camera-people?)

Last thought, and I'll shut up I really like the concentration on details in images, but most of the techniques discussed seem to be pixel based photoshop techniques.There are good, solid procedural ways to generate many of the effects that are described in the "daily" stuff, for example. In particular, a familiarity with different noise types and thresholding could create results identical to those used for the pumpkin. Furthermore, doing it procedurally would allow for a whle field of equally detailed pumpkins to be created, with only the manipulation of a few parameters.

I'm being insanely nitpicky, and this is a painters sort of forum, and not a procedural rendering demo. Its good stuff! I really like the Mac based approach. Keep up the good work!

[Nex]

this is a painters sort of forum, and not a procedural rendering demo

Nope. its a digital art forum.

[Alex Lindsay]

Ok...I took the afternoon off and missed a few replies...
_______________________________
Nothing is ever free though.....When are you guys going to start charging a fee to come to your site. Or when are you selling a CD with bump maps and the like. I probably wouldnt want to hang out if it was a pay site, but I might fork over some $$ for some cds or something like that with tutorials and textures and what not....I dont know if this is the route your guys are going but...

--We will start selling tools and training products pertaining to stuff no one else is really doing...we hope we move enough product to make it all work...There will eventually be a membership but the free content will continue to grow and even expand in scope...Our primary form of marketing will be through free service to our community through a variety of outlets.
_______________________________
Let me know if you'd like me to publisize the site as I run a small game art site called 3D Palette (www.3dpalette.org . about 2500 unique visitors daily.) Also, could definately help get the news on larger sites like CGChannel.com/

--any help would be great...I would love to get promotion on those sites...we are really depending on great content and user support to make the engine turn...it's more than an expense thing...I just think it has the most integrity.

Oh yeah, pretty cool seeing your Zimbabwe footage and images as I lived in the region (botswana actually) until 6 years ago.

--- More to come...Are you from Botswana? Email me directly...there is much more to come from Africa.
_______________________________
Alex - great site!
Obviously, the tutorials aren't just for those building realistic CG models - great "observation" resource for mostly 2D artists and illustrators too! Your audience may be even wider than you think!

-- VFX is just where we are beginning...

Thanks for developing this vision and making the site - it's going to be a daily visit.

-- Thank you...the more traffic we get, the more content we will be able to produce.
_______________________________

Killer website! The video segments are well thought out, though I think in some cases, you may want to let people know how to access certain functions in common applications like photoshop. Some of these packages are deep enough that people never actually use some functions, and therefore wouldn't know where to find them.

--We will slowly move that direction...the future products we are planning include very technical PDFs and allt he project files to what you see on the web...

That said, the tutorials focus a lot more on painting and 3D techniques, which are digital based, but not DV based, in particular. You may wind up with many dissappointed users expecting tips on getting the most out of their DV cameras, only to discover the site is more for artists, not cameramen (or is that camera-people?)

-- The folks looking for DV camera stuff won't be disappointed for too long

Last thought, and I'll shut up I really like the concentration on details in images, but most of the techniques discussed seem to be pixel based photoshop techniques.There are good, solid procedural ways to generate many of the effects that are described in the "daily" stuff, for example. In particular, a familiarity with different noise types and thresholding could create results identical to those used for the pumpkin. Furthermore, doing it procedurally would allow for a whle field of equally detailed pumpkins to be created, with only the manipulation of a few parameters.

-- I would beg to differ on this point...purely procedural implementations take alot of time and rarely provide the same level of quality. They are good for some things but I would be happy to compete with a purely prodcedural artist any day...it's not the same. Just to be clear...the pumpkin was created in less than 2 hours and the silver top in less than that. I do not think many prodcedural guys could do that in the same amount of time and the level of detail...

That said...mixing prodcedural and image maps is very powerful.
________________________________

Thank you all for checking it out...

Tell your friends...as we start to release products...those who have registered with proper emails will get advanced notice on discounts for the CDs and DVDs.

Much more to come...

a

[Krazykate]

Looks to be a good reference site, and I am strongly behind available training for people who are in areas that do not have access to mentors, schools, or even the monetary resources necessary.

[Alex Lindsay]

Eventually, we will provide an on-ramp to everyone...and if you look at the Zimbabwe page...you will see what I mean by everyone...all areas, all ages, all backgrounds...

a

[This message has been edited by Alex Lindsay (edited March 10, 2001).]

[frostfyre]

Nex: I stand corrected, and therefore, the ommission of procedural alternatives may be on topic. The majority of users here seem to be 2D based, though. Its one of the things I like about the place.

Alex: Let's agree to disagree on the point of procedurals (I'd hate to think this was an engineers vs artists sort of thing). In the specific case of the pumpkins, the techniques you describe could be just as easily applied via procedural effects in many standard 3D packages, with equivalent quality, in a short amount of time. I agree that the combination of procedural and image based rendering can be very powerful. I'd also agree that image based techniques provide the highest amount of control in many cases. I look forward to the "official" christening of your site!

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you...

The official launch is right around the corner...

a

[Bg]

Really good tutorials! I'm looking forward to seeing some more...

------------------
Timo Vihola

ICQ:101776026
http://www.mbnet.fi/~badgers/

[Gecko]

Just wanted to say I agree with everything justin said. Please work more on the navigation, I can't see how the 'maze-navigation' sorts out the right kind of people, instead, it will scare away some of your target audience and make others' visits a bit more difficult than they have to be.

Also I don't think there's any reason to have text as images, since even if the modem users are rare, do they have to go through the suffering of long loading times? I can't see how anyone benefits from them being images. Isn't pure text a lot easier to update/change anyway?

As a modem user the tutorials are completely out of my reach, but other than that, once I find my way through the navigation, I think the site will be of real help.

Good luck with the site!

------------------
Gecko
[email protected]
GeckoArt.Net

[Alex Lindsay]

Thank you for the input...

We will look at how to accomodate you needs in the not too distance future.

a

[Justin Kramer]

Alex--

I just checked out your site on a cable modem. The tutorials are pretty good--informative without getting too much into specifics. Bookmarked it to check out when I'm on this computer

Re not designing the site to be obvious... that's your choice, but I think it's a mistake. People who are serious about learning won't necessarily be willing to spend their time figuring out your design, especially when they aren't sure yet that what you've got is worthwhile. They may just as soon leave your site to find someplace that will give them content up front without making them jump through hoops. Willingness to decipher an interface isn't an accurate measure of skills or potential.

Re big videos etc, it's good you know the audience you're trying to appeal to (broadband-using visual learners), but do keep it in mind when you say things like "we don't care what you are using...just that you want to learn and play hard in this medium". I chuckled when I saw this on my 28.8 machine.

The reason you have 96.4% high-bandwidth registrants is probably because all the modem users gave up on the site before registering (I almost did).

Also (one more thing...), if you're really dedicated to being "platform agnostic", you should provide videos in other formats than quicktime. Linux especially has problems with quicktime, although it has a lot of potential for (cheap) visual media development.

Okay...sorry for rambling on... I've thought about this kind of stuff a lot lately (going from cable modem to 28.8 will do that), so my babbling here is sort of serving as an outlet. Hope you don't mind