Getting yet another new website

[Benny Smyth]

I'm getting a new website built as we speak (and this time, not a Webnation jobby!), and since my last photoshoot was about four years and six stone ago, I figured I'd get a refresh on that too. I also decided that I wanted to do something a bit different to what you'd expect from a website for a wedding DJ. Below is a selection of the shoot, and I was hoping to get a consensus on which one you think would be best for an 'About Me' picture (this was all done for one picture for the about me page). I'm also feeling out past and current clients for their opinions but I thought I'd see what the DJs say!

Pic 1
http://i68.tinypic.com/a165ci.jpg

Pic 2
http://i67.tinypic.com/669pu1.jpg

Pic 3
http://i66.tinypic.com/sdp8pc.jpg

Pic 4
http://i66.tinypic.com/30d842c.jpg

Pic 5
http://i65.tinypic.com/2z8qlq9.jpg

Pic 6
http://i64.tinypic.com/2nm0svm.jpg

Pic 7
http://i63.tinypic.com/2h6dhd3.jpg

Pic 8
http://i65.tinypic.com/2nicnrb.jpg

Pic 9
http://i67.tinypic.com/2820z7m.jpg

Pic 10
http://i64.tinypic.com/34sp8uc.jpg

Pic 11
http://i67.tinypic.com/28r08qc.jpg

Pic 12
http://i66.tinypic.com/34ha14i.jpg

Pic 13
http://i64.tinypic.com/2z3tp4h.jpg

Pic 14
http://i67.tinypic.com/ixds13.jpg

Pic 15
http://i66.tinypic.com/25u1sap.jpg

[Excalibur]

12. Just shades 11.

[Daryll]

I like 1 and 9 , but saying that, they all all good

Daryll

[rth_discos]

Be careful with the image you present through these photos. You may come across a little too "alternative" (unless that's the style you're going for). It's looking a little too urban in places (so unless you're a rap/hip hop dj you may be communicating the wrong message)

I think this one is best for your website

http://i67.tinypic.com/28r08qc.jpg

[Benny Smyth]

Be careful with the image you present through these photos.

I just want to quickly reply to this, because I don't want you to think that I'm ignoring you. I think that this is an interesting conversation to have, but I wanted to wait a bit first to get a consensus of people's favourite(s) before having it.

And Peter, as strange as it seems, you and I have the exact same preference. :eek:

[Excalibur]

I just want to quickly reply to this, because I don't want you to think that I'm ignoring you. I think that this is an interesting conversation to have, but I wanted to wait a bit first to get a consensus of people's favourite(s) before having it.

On the grounds that you're a deep little soul, I refrained from saying what I thought. My disquiet about the piccies isn't a million miles away from Gavin's.
I'm sure Benny has a cunning plan which will make us all wish we'd thought of it first.


And Peter, as strange as it seems, you and I have the exact same preference. :eek:

I don't know whether to be flattered, or worried!! :eek:
I am however intrigued as to what you have in mind.

[Benny Smyth]

I'm running a bit of a poll on Facebook where I have reduced the options to six photos, and I have also sent emails to past and present clients looking for feedback and there seems to be a lot of love for #2, closely followed by #12 and then #7 & #9 in joint third. So the photos where I am smiling are the favourites (which, to be fair, is an easily anticipated reaction) but I was surprised to see that the 'moody tattoo & bench' shot get a decent percentage of the votes. I'm going to keep polling for thoughts as the new site is still a few weeks away from being complete, giving me the luxury of time, but I don't anticipate the results changing.

I guess that since the voting on here seems to have completed (although if there are more thoughts out there, I would love to hear the feedback), now would be a good time to answer this:


Be careful with the image you present through these photos. You may come across a little too "alternative" (unless that's the style you're going for). It's looking a little too urban in places (so unless you're a rap/hip hop dj you may be communicating the wrong message)

Indeed I am aiming to come across as alternative - an alternative to what potential clients expect from their Wedding DJ. Like I mentioned earlier, I had to get a refresh of snaps done as it's 4 years since the last shoot and I wanted something a bit fresh for the Mobile DJ. In my research, I did a Google search for 'Mobile Disco Birmingham', 'Wedding DJ Birmingham' & 'Wedding Disco Birmingham', opened up every website on the first three pages of Google for each search term and I found two things:

- For an industry where you often hear the term "People buy people", there is what I would call an alarming number of websites where I couldn't tell you what the DJ looks like.
- For the rest (with the exception of one website), all the other pics were either the DJ in a suit next to his setup, a big grin holding a mic or an 'in action' shot.

In no way am I looking down my nose at the concepts of those shots (the execution of said shots on the other hand...), but when I did a studio shoot four years ago, they were the sort of pictures that were floating around then. The question is are those shots the 'classics' that never go out of style? The floor is open for that one.

I've mentioned before that I get my inspirations from the levels above me, namely clubs and theatres. I looked at the websites of the more famous DJs to see what they are doing, and there was one photo on Armin Van Burren's website that inspired me to go with this style of shoot:

http://www.arminvanbuuren.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/newsitem-afb.jpg

That is on the bottom of his homepage. I liked the industrial look, the sillyness and it was kinda cool and fun looking. That's why I selected Digbeth in Birmingham for my shoot - it's industrial, has amazing wall art, the fantastic colours of The Custard Factory and I dare say that every potential client from Birmingham - or any who know Digbeth - will see that the 'winning pic' (for want of a better phrase) is Digbeth. For us Brummies, you can spot it a mile away. Digbeth is one of the most vibrant and interesting parts of the city, and rife with culture.

I'm 32 years old. My target audience are couples who are getting married and, for the most part, they are aged between 25 and 35 years old. I cannot stress enough that I am not looking down my nose at those photo concepts on the DJ websites that I have come across, but I believe that the style of shots I have gone for, in that outfit and that backdrop, is more relevant to couples in their mid-20s to mid-30s in 2017 than a man standing next to some lights and speakers in a suit.

So that's my logic. I await the barrage of abuse. :p

[Excalibur]

I'm sure Benny has a cunning plan which will make us all wish we'd thought of it first.







Indeed I am aiming to come across as alternative - an alternative to what potential clients expect from their Wedding DJ.


I'm 32 years old. My target audience are couples who are getting married and, for the most part, they are aged between 25 and 35 years old. I cannot stress enough that I am not looking down my nose at those photo concepts on the DJ websites that I have come across, but I believe that the style of shots I have gone for, in that outfit and that backdrop, is more relevant to couples in their mid-20s to mid-30s in 2017 than a man standing next to some lights and speakers in a suit.

So that's my logic. I await the barrage of abuse. :p

You see, I told you he had a cunning plan. :) I wish I'd thought of it first. :(

I'm 62. Guess that makes my target audience between 60 and 70. Not a lot of weddings , but a few birthdays and anniversaries. Benny, do you think that tam tog of yours would rattle me off a few happy snaps of me in a nice cardie, holding a mug of Horlicks? :whistle:


Right, I've taken the tablets. Be serious Peter, there's a good lad.

Abuse, Benny? No way. You're thinking outside the box, creating what may appear to be an USP, and targeting your main client base. Got to be a good idea. In theory. I applaud your inventiveness and boldness. Well done that man. It's not for me, but I'm sure you're regarding that as proof positive that what you're doing is right.

[Imagine]

Benny, do you think that tam tog of yours would rattle me off a few happy snaps of me in a nice ....

I must be tired....I started reading the start of that sentence and for some reason imagined it ending in the word "man-kini"
I can't unthink that thought now.....I may need counselling :o

[Excalibur]

I must be tired....I started reading the start of that sentence and for some reason imagined it ending in the word "man-kini"
I can't unthink that thought now.....I may need counselling :o

I'm minded to delete this post before that Scot with Photoshop sees it. He's a bit too handy with it for my liking. Since that would be over zealous censorship, I can't justify it. :(

[rth_discos]

Indeed I am aiming to come across as alternative - an alternative to what potential clients expect from their Wedding DJ.

I look forward to seeing your new site.

It's good to stand for something, and be 'different'.

As you say, too many DJs are all too similar. It's one of the reasons they get compared on price - because there's little else to distinguish them from their 'competitors'.

What I'll be interested to see is how you tie up the image with the rest of your site and the wording you use, so that you come across as an alternative choice, but not 'underground' (unless of course, that's the direction you're heading).

[Imagine]

I'm minded to delete this post before that Scot with Photoshop sees it. He's a bit too handy with it for my liking. Since that would be over zealous censorship, I can't justify it. :(

I'm a dab hand with the Shoppe of Photos myself....but really can't bring myself to do it at this time of night and not have nightmares ;)

However....a vast quantity of Meade will be required on Sunday night to prevent future yearnings to create such an image ;)

[yourdj]

Be careful with the image you present through these photos. You may come across a little too "alternative" (unless that's the style you're going for). It's looking a little too urban in places (so unless you're a rap/hip hop dj you may be communicating the wrong message)

I think this one is best for your website

http://i67.tinypic.com/28r08qc.jpg

To me this would scream 'rock dj', but then again beards, tattoos, graffiti is trendy at the moment so I may be just being old.

worth asking some female friends of yours, they might like the edgy rock star look for their wedding DJ. After all this is one of the best paid DJ's in the world:

18416

I would personally usually use one with a smile, no 2 is the obvious candidate for a wedding/private function dj website. I always like the idea of one 'out of the job' photo (with the family is always nice) and one or two Djing photos.

(Admin, I don't know if its just me but having to resize images to under 800 x is really getting on my nerves, I am sure you must have installed something before that auto resized, as it only started after the new hosting plan) :)

:)

[DJ Jules]

My personal favorites out of these are 2 and 11.

Putting preferences aside for a second, on a technical note, it might be worth taking a flash with you on the next session (or doing some selective lightening in post). On some of these your face and front are in deep shadow (9, 11, 12 and 15 and to a lesser extent, 2 and 4). On some it adds to the character of the image, in others you're just either losing the detail in your face in shadow or blowing out backgrounds.

Julian

[ukpartydj]

It's quite an interesting concept to somebody who hasn't tried to nail down a specific niche. I think it could work for you though, when I see your photos I think I wouldn't pick those photos for my site if it were me but I don't think I wouldn't hire that DJ for my wedding, in fact I have quite the opposite opinion looking at the photos.

#2 or #3 for me

[Benny Smyth]

So I've been given access to the Beta of the new site.

It's very much still being developed, so the content and pictures will need updating but the overall feel and the layout of the site is pretty much there (although the site needs a bit of tweeking for mobile devices - you'll see why if you have a looksie).

So here it is (http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/). What do you guys think of the overall 'feel' of it? I'm really happy with the look, if I'm honest.

[ppentertainments]

So I've been given access to the Beta of the new site.

It's very much still being developed, so the content and pictures will need updating but the overall feel and the layout of the site is pretty much there (although the site needs a bit of tweeking for mobile devices - you'll see why if you have a looksie).

So here it is (http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/). What do you guys think of the overall 'feel' of it? I'm really happy with the look, if I'm honest.

Love the video at the top of the homepage - why not maybe do a video intro on your "about" page too if you are confident in front of the camera - I think photos are great but video is definitely the way forward.

Maybe check spelling - Corporate ;););)

[Shakermaker Promotions]

At first glance after clicking on the link, I'd say it looks like the dogs dangly bits Benny.
The quality of the video is great and most importantly, shows you at work and I think that's a big plus point straight away.
As a fellow DJ, albeit a part-time one nowadays, I was impressed when I saw it and I think the casual viewer will be more than that.

I'll have a good look around the site but first impressions are that it looks great.

EDIT - Just one thing I am not sure of and that's the font used. Looking at the 'Latest News' page, the font looks ok in large format as a main title on the page but the 'Magma T-Shirts...' subtitle is a bit hard on the eyes when the font is smaller and looks like it is bold.

It might just be me though. I've literally just started wearing glasses as my eyes are going downhill a bit.

[Excalibur]

Definitely looking good so far, well done.

[ukpartydj]

Very impressive. Especially how quickly that video loads and the quality of the footage which feels quite cinematic.

[yourdj]

Looks amazing, best DJ website I have seen, with thanks to the consistent video and photo footage.
God knows how they can misspell Corporate though. :)

What wordpress template package have they used?

[Pe7e]

Am I alone in not being able to see the video?
When I click on the link I get transferred to the first page displaying a happy couple dancing with 2 photographers pointing their cameras at them, when I scroll down the page a little I can see what I assume to be a video displaying in the 8 - 10mm gap between the initial photo and the 4 photos on the left of the 'Hello There' page. From what I can see the video seems to be playing full size behind the first photo. The computer I have is a HP EliteBook Pro 8560w running Windows 7 Pro operating system with Outlook Explorer. My computer is displaying all other website video content correctly as far as I'm aware, is there a compatibility issue with this website regarding windows operating systems?

[Marc J]

What wordpress template package have they used?

Not everything is Wordpress, Toby ;)

Hard to tell what they've used here, but definitely not Wordpress, and something using CodeIgniter so my first guess (if using a CMS) would be Expression Engine.

The site is good, but videos aren't supposed to auto play on mobile devices, Android and iOS make it that way so that video isn't forced on users, eating mobile bandwidth. This has been worked around here, but I'm not sure how many people would appreciate a 60Mb payload on the homepage being forced upon them each visit...? It's considered bad practice.

[Imagine]

The site is good, but videos aren't supposed to auto play on mobile devices, Android and iOS make it that way so that video isn't forced on users, eating mobile bandwidth. This has been worked around here, but I'm not sure how many people would appreciate a 60Mb payload on the homepage being forced upon them each visit...? It's considered bad practice.

Completely agree.

Whilst I like the idea of video banners (I've toyed with them myself.....Gavin has something similar too), the vast majority of my visitors now are coming in via mobile devices so I can't really justify the cost and hassle of having a decent video made just to have it ignored.

[mbp]

Looks like a Mobirise web template (the software I use for my website) and, generally, it's good BUT as previous thread mentions.....I too cannot see or view the video

[rth_discos]

Whilst I like the idea of video banners (I've toyed with them myself.....Gavin has something similar too), the vast majority of my visitors now are coming in via mobile devices so I can't really justify the cost and hassle of having a decent video made just to have it ignored.

Yes, my video is used on my desktop site. On a mobile device, the user receives a static image instead.

One vital thing for video is that the video is streamed to the user, rather than downloaded. It looks like Benny's is self hosted (so downloaded), rather than streamed.

Definitely something to consider for those on a slower connection.

And I'd absolutely recommend it not being showed to those on a mobile device - it's a lot to download on a mobile connection, and many still have limited data allowances.

As for the website itself, I feel the home page is quite strong.

I'm not too keen on the headline font (the swirly one), maybe if it wasn't bold it might work better.

There's a lack of a call to action at the bottom of the home page - where do you want them to go next?

The about page is fine - but again lacks a call to action - where to go next?

Your Event in the menu is a bit strange - I'd have expected a drop down menu - not to click to then be presented the options.

I'm guessing the rest is currently work in progress, as there's no testimonials, the latest news is very messy, and venues and contact are to come.

[Marc J]

One vital thing for video is that the video is streamed to the user, rather than downloaded. It looks like Benny's is self hosted (so downloaded), rather than streamed.

A self hosted video can be streamed, which is what happens in this case. It starts playing more or less immediately (if on a decent connection), before it's anywhere near completely downloaded - that's the definition of streaming (https://techterms.com/definition/streaming). If you stay on the page you'll download it all (60Mb), which would probably be cached on your device for some time so at least revisiting the same page again in a short period wouldn't hit you with another 60Mb download...:eek:

[rth_discos]

A self hosted video can be streamed, which is what happens in this case. It starts playing more or less immediately (if on a decent connection), before it's anywhere near completely downloaded - that's the definition of streaming (https://techterms.com/definition/streaming). If you stay on the page you'll download it all (60Mb), which would probably be cached on your device for some time so at least revisiting the same page again in a short period wouldn't hit you with another 60Mb download...:eek:

Mine is on Vimeo - it has adaptive streaming, which means it'll stream a quality of the video that's suitable to the connection. I'd recommend Benny looks in to such an option.

I would hope that a decent browser cache duration is set for that asset to stop it being redownloaded every few minutes!!

[Marc J]

It's very much still being developed, so the content and pictures will need updating but the overall feel and the layout of the site is pretty much there (although the site needs a bit of tweeking for mobile devices - you'll see why if you have a looksie).

So here it is (http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/).

Make sure part of their tweaking is to remove any hover effects touchscreen devices (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/23885255/how-to-remove-ignore-hover-css-style-on-touch-devices), as there is no hover!

[Benny Smyth]

Thanks for the feedback, folks.

Like I said, the website is still being built, so the copy and pics are definitely going to change (including spelling!). My web guy has essentially nicked the content from the old site and it'll be up to me to update and edit when he's done his bit.

With regards to the video, it's one of the first questions I asked about when the idea was put forward to me. I was told initially that it would just be a picture but since then, Apple have apparently made an update that allows video to be streamed (so not a work around). My web guy is going to look at how far he can reduce the file size without effecting too much quality but if it does turn out to be still far too high on people's data, it will be just a pic. I guess, ideally, I'd like to see it be a pic for data but a video for when connected to Wi-fi, but I guess that's not doable? To be fair, I think the video doesn't look amazables on a mobile phone anyway, as the second scene doesn't show anything other than a plinth and a beam of light as it seems to narrow the field of view. On top of that, the responsive needs to be done as well as when you flip your phone sideways, it merges the logo and the Premier Event DJ line.

Thinking about it, when would someone look a DJs website on their mobile devices? I'd dare say that it will rarely be while you're on the move and be more likely in the comfort of your own home, where there will be Wi-Fi. Add to that the endless supply of free Wi-Fi spots, maybe it won't eat too much data overall? I watch a lot of videos on my phone, but I only ever use about 200mb a month as I'm always to connected to some sort of Wi-Fi. I'm not saying that I am an accurate representation of every human being on the planet but maybe, in 2017, it's not that much of an issue.

Indeed it's not WordPress that's been used. I believe the system they use is based off something that is (or, at least, was) existing, but it didn't suit their needs so they made a lot of changes to it. I think it's called Magma.

[Marc J]

With regards to the video, it's one of the first questions I asked about when the idea was put forward to me. I was told initially that it would just be a picture but since then, Apple have apparently made an update that allows video to be streamed (so not a work around).
You're right, that restriction has been relaxed and muted video is now allowed to autoplay (latest iOS (https://webkit.org/blog/6784/new-video-policies-for-ios/) and Chrome (https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2016/07/autoplay)), but I'd still consider a 60Mb payload to be out of order, IMHO.


I guess, ideally, I'd like to see it be a pic for data but a video for when connected to Wi-fi, but I guess that's not doable?
Even if it was doable (which I don't think it is), it wouldn't be reliable. There are times when a device on WiFi could still be using mobile data further down the line - When not at home my iPad's WiFi connection is actually to the mobile hotspot on my phone, for example, and some people use a mobile dongle in a router rather than have a landline / broadband connection.


Thinking about it, when would someone look a DJs website on their mobile devices? I'd dare say that it will rarely be while you're on the move and be more likely in the comfort of your own home, where there will be Wi-Fi. Add to that the endless supply of free Wi-Fi spots, maybe it won't eat too much data overall? I watch a lot of videos on my phone, but I only ever use about 200mb a month as I'm always to connected to some sort of Wi-Fi. I'm not saying that I am an accurate representation of every human being on the planet but maybe, in 2017, it's not that much of an issue.
IMHO you shouldn't be making that assumption, or making the decision for people. To some 60Mb is a lot of mobile data, and that's being forced on them when they visit your site. It may not seem a lot to you, but what if they're roaming abroad? On o2, from the USA (http://international.o2.co.uk/internationaltariffs/travelling_abroad), it would cost £432 to visit you homepage (if they didn't cap it at £40 / 50Mb).

If I were you I'd autoplay on desktop, but I'd put the first frame (or something else) as a still image on mobiles, with a youtube style play button giving the visitor the choice.

[DJ Jules]

IMHO you shouldn't be making that assumption, or making the decision for people. To some 60Mb is a lot of mobile data, and that's being forced on them when they visit your site. It may not seem a lot to you, but what if they're roaming abroad? On o2, from the USA (http://international.o2.co.uk/internationaltariffs/travelling_abroad), it would cost £432 to visit you homepage (if they didn't cap it at £40 / 50Mb).

I wonder what PayPal do with their full page video? I've never looked...

Julian

[Marc J]

I wonder what PayPal do with their full page video? I've never looked...

There's no video on Paypal's home page? :confused:

On https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/personal they do what I suggest above - a still image with an option to view a video. That's on desktop and mobile, as far as I can see.

[DJ Jules]

There's no video on Paypal's home page? :confused:

On https://www.paypal.com/uk/webapps/mpp/personal they do what I suggest above - a still image with an option to view a video. That's on desktop and mobile, as far as I can see.

Interesting - there was for a period, but I'm guessing they dropped it. My bad.

To make up, have a page with links to 16 sites with video (http://www.creativebloq.com/web-design/video-backgrounds-2131982) :D

[Marc J]

Interesting - there was for a period, but I'm guessing they dropped it. My bad.

To make up, have a page with links to 16 sites with video (http://www.creativebloq.com/web-design/video-backgrounds-2131982) :D

#1 - https://mediaboom.com/ - video only plays on desktop
#2 - https://www.myprovence.fr - video only plays on desktop
#3 - https://www.spotify.com - no video at all now
#4 - http://www.lifeofpimovie.com/ - no longer live
#5 - http://telly.com/about - no video at all now
#6 - http://fernando.is/ - Small video (1.5Mb) plays on all devices. IMHO excusable as it's a designer's site and kept small.
#7 - http://windwardapp.com/ - no longer live
#8 - http://www.matter.to - no video at all now
#9 - http://eagleclean.co.uk/ - video only plays on desktop
#10 - https://www.dromoland.ie/ - no video at all now (uses image slideshow)

...at which point I got bored. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make....but I think mine has been made ;)

[DJ Jules]

#1 - https://mediaboom.com/ - video only plays on desktop
#2 - https://www.myprovence.fr - video only plays on desktop
#3 - https://www.spotify.com - no video at all now
#4 - http://www.lifeofpimovie.com/ - no longer live
#5 - http://telly.com/about - no video at all now
#6 - http://fernando.is/ - Small video (1.5Mb) plays on all devices. IMHO excusable as it's a designer's site and kept small.
#7 - http://windwardapp.com/ - no longer live
#8 - http://www.matter.to - no video at all now
#9 - http://eagleclean.co.uk/ - video only plays on desktop
#10 - https://www.dromoland.ie/ - no video at all now (uses image slideshow)

...at which point I got bored. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make....but I think mine has been made ;)

I wasn't :) I was giving examples of where it's been used elsewhere, to allow others to look at how it's been done "acceptably". As you say, looks like your point has been made as everyone else is coming to the same conclusion. Looks good, but it's only really acceptable on desktop (if at all) because of bandwidth/power requirements.

Julian

[Nakatomi]

Anyway... I have to say I was blown away by the content, Benny. Awesome video, which I'm assuming didn't play on my phone because it didn't get a chance to load. I'd definitely book you on the back of what I've seen on the unfinished site alone... And I'm a skinflint picky bugger!

There's an outfit up here who have a talking man on their site extolling the virtues of their services. Don't go down that route please - it's so hard to get right & I dunno where that company found their guy but his intonation & word emphasis is just WEIRD which for me defeats the whole point of him being there. It's like there's too much emphasis on words that were bold in his script.. So unnatural looking & sounding. I think you'd have to hire someone in at a very high cost unless you're a seasoned talking to camera type person yourself.

[Marc J]

I know it's not finished, but I ran http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/ through PageSpeed Insights and got: -

Mobile: 32/100
Desktop: 35/100

Not great, so I re-did just the home page quickly on a $16 template I've used before and uploaded it to http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/ and ran that through the same test: -

Mobile: 74/100
Desktop: 89/100

I also got the video down to 28.5Mb (mostly by reducing it from 1080 to 720) and set it to play only on desktop (which I think you've now done as well). It's not a perfect recreation, I didn't spend much time on it, but it shows where you should be aiming for performance-wise...hope you don't mind!

There's also http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/youtube which uses a YouTube hosted background video, with YouTube handling the video quality / streaming (as Gavin mentions Vimeo also does in post #28). This has the added bonus of not costing you in bandwidth but the video does start lower quality (before kicking in to higher quality if the connection can handle it)...but I think the video tends to start a little later than with the self-hosted option...

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

Pic 15

They're all great tbh but as has been touched on - they don't really tie in with the wedding vibe, particularly the colour ones. I suppose it depends on what the rest of the website is going to look like but you cutting about some trendy urban city scape doesn't sell "hey, I'm an experienced wedding DJ used to playing in 5 star hotels and stately homes..."

[Imagine]

I know it's not finished, but I ran http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/ through PageSpeed Insights and got: -

Mobile: 32/100
Desktop: 35/100

Not great, so I re-did just the home page quickly on a $16 template I've used before and uploaded it to http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/ and ran that through the same test: -

Mobile: 74/100
Desktop: 89/100

I also got the video down to 28.5Mb (mostly by reducing it from 1080 to 720) and set it to play only on desktop (which I think you've now done as well). It's not a perfect recreation, I didn't spend much time on it, but it shows where you should be aiming for performance-wise...hope you don't mind!

There's also http://bennysmyth.preview-web.uk/youtube which uses a YouTube hosted background video, with YouTube handling the video quality / streaming (as Gavin mentions Vimeo also does in post #28). This has the added bonus of not costing you in bandwidth but the video does start lower quality (before kicking in to higher quality if the connection can handle it)...but I think the video tends to start a little later than with the self-hosted option...

OK - I'm officially confused with Google Page Speed (and in fact, don't actually trust it!)

I'm in the middle of moving hosting providers (eek! It's b:Censored:y scary moving from a provider you've been with for the past 5 years).
However, the sites I've moved so far are lightning quick in the browser. It's a noticeable change! The page load is literally instant (including on a mobile with a 3G connection).

However, I ran them through PageSpeed which actually ranks them as poor!!!!! Yes on both desktop and mobile (which is my main source of traffic nowadays)...Google shows a big red speed ranking! :(

Apparently I need to turn on compression (done!), enable cacheing (done!) and optimise everything (done!), and yet those sites rank lower in PageSpeed than my old provider? :confused:

Anyone know how much this actual metric relates to SERPS?

[rth_discos]

OK - I'm officially confused with Google Page Speed (and in fact, don't actually trust it!)

However, I ran them through PageSpeed which actually ranks them as poor!!!!! Yes on both desktop and mobile (which is my main source of traffic nowadays)...Google shows a big red speed ranking! :(

Anyone know how much this actual metric relates to SERPS?

I don't 'trust' Google Page Speed either.

It doesn't seem to base its results on the actual loading time - more a load of metrics that you get marked down on if you don't 'pass'.

I've seen some very fast loading sites with poor scores on PageSpeed, because they hadn't done certain things. And some slow sites score well as they're done everything that was required, yet still had a lot of media and content on the website.

However, as for more much the metric relates to SERPS - well, Page Speed is owned by Google, and the search engine is Google. So to a degree, we can only assume that PageSpeed is based on the method Google uses to determine how fast your website loads.

But the loading time of a website is only a very small ranking factor. Getting PageSpeed to 100 won't shoot you up the list. What's more likely is a poor PageSpeed result, and a genuinely slow loading website, will get visitors hitting the 'back' button quickly, returning to the search results. Google notices that, and dislikes high bounce rates (it suggests the content wasn't relevant to the search result), so that will see you plummet.

Get that bounce rate down, and that will help your ranking - along with all of the other many factors Google takes in to consideration when deciding where to rank your website.

[Marc J]

I'm in the middle of moving hosting providers (eek! It's b:Censored:y scary moving from a provider you've been with for the past 5 years).
However, the sites I've moved so far are lightning quick in the browser. It's a noticeable change! The page load is literally instant (including on a mobile with a 3G connection).

However, I ran them through PageSpeed which actually ranks them as poor!!!!! Yes on both desktop and mobile (which is my main source of traffic nowadays)...Google shows a big red speed ranking! :(

Apparently I need to turn on compression (done!), enable cacheing (done!) and optimise everything (done!), and yet those sites rank lower in PageSpeed than my old provider? :confused:

Anyone know how much this actual metric relates to SERPS?

Not wanting to hijack Benny's thread, there's a discussion on this and other tools here: Test tools for Websites - post them here! (http://www.forum.mobilediscodirectory.co.uk/showthread.php?43946-Test-tools-for-Websites-post-them-here)

As per the title, Google Page Speed Insights is to give you an understanding of what may be slowing your site down, or what may be improved upon. It's really only the "reduce server response time" which you, or any visitor, would notice in a real world test of page loading times. Everything else (caching, minifying, compression etc.) would make little measurable difference to anyone visiting the site, unless they were extreme examples. There are other tests (see the above link) which are better if page load times alone are what you're targeting. Google announced way back in 2010 (https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html) that load times would be a factor in ranking, how much so is anyone's guess.

That said, a page with a Google Page Speed score of 20 is likely to load slower that a page with a score of 80. It's an indication and highlights things you may want to look at to improve the visitor's experience.




It doesn't seem to base its results on the actual loading time - more a load of metrics that you get marked down on if you don't 'pass'.

I've seen some very fast loading sites with poor scores on PageSpeed, because they hadn't done certain things. And some slow sites score well as they're done everything that was required, yet still had a lot of media and content on the website.

Exactly ;)


However, as for more much the metric relates to SERPS - well, Page Speed is owned by Google, and the search engine is Google. So to a degree, we can only assume that PageSpeed is based on the method Google uses to determine how fast your website loads.

But the loading time of a website is only a very small ranking factor. Getting PageSpeed to 100 won't shoot you up the list. What's more likely is a poor PageSpeed result, and a genuinely slow loading website, will get visitors hitting the 'back' button quickly, returning to the search results. Google notices that, and dislikes high bounce rates (it suggests the content wasn't relevant to the search result), so that will see you plummet.

Get that bounce rate down, and that will help your ranking - along with all of the other many factors Google takes in to consideration when deciding where to rank your website.

Agreed. There are loads of factors in SEO, ignore any of them at your peril :eek:

[Benny Smyth]

Not wanting to hijack Benny's thread, there's a discussion on this and other tools here: Test tools for Websites - post them here! (http://www.forum.mobilediscodirectory.co.uk/showthread.php?43946-Test-tools-for-Websites-post-them-here)

Its still reasonably on topic, so crack on, I say!

With regards to my site, it's done for the most part. The responsive needs to be done and I need to add content to the blog section (plus the pics on the testimonials are doing something odd which needs fixing).

Basically everything I can do at this point is done. It's back to the developer now to fix a few things, then I can finish adding content.

One thing I have liked though - and I know this'll sound egotistical, but I did smile when I realised that while you can still tell the difference between the pro pics and my pics, there isn't much in it anymore. Apparently a good website makes my pics look better! :p

[yourdj]

there isn't much in it anymore.

Keep it up Benny, you are starting to make me look humble. :p

[Benny Smyth]

Right...home stretch!

The website is petty much there. From my web guy's point of view, he just needs to add the social media icons to the footer of the Blog pages and remedy an issue where instead of opening hyperlinks in a new tab when requested, it just opens in the same window. Beyond that, he's currently transferring my domain names which will apparently take a few days. Once that's done, it goes live!

From a copy and photos perspective, it's all done. I had a copywriter look over the site and I've implemented the tweaks that she has suggested (although I'm proud to say that these were mostly grammatical errors over poor content...wait...should I be proud of poor spelling and grammar? You know what I mean!).

I've shown this website to a few folk and with some suggested tweaks (which my web guy and I have implemented), it has gained positive reactions. I'm actually excited to get this launched, and then go head first into getting some expert help with the SEO.

So here is the final product (http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/). I thought I'd put this here just in case that anyone has any more thoughts. :)

[Imagine]

Right...home stretch!

The website is petty much there. From my web guy's point of view, he just needs to add the social media icons to the footer of the Blog pages and remedy an issue where instead of opening hyperlinks in a new tab when requested, it just opens in the same window. Beyond that, he's currently transferring my domain names which will apparently take a few days. Once that's done, it goes live!

From a copy and photos perspective, it's all done. I had a copywriter look over the site and I've implemented the tweaks that she has suggested (although I'm proud to say that these were mostly grammatical errors over poor content...wait...should I be proud of poor spelling and grammar? You know what I mean!).

I've shown this website to a few folk and with some suggested tweaks (which my web guy and I have implemented), it has gained positive reactions. I'm actually excited to get this launched, and then go head first into getting some expert help with the SEO.

So here is the final product (http://bennysmyth.bluechilligroup.co.uk/). I thought I'd put this here just in case that anyone has any more thoughts. :)

Only had a very quick look, but I REALLY like it! It's different to the other DJ sites out there and it's certainly a polished look and feel (or it is through my weary and heavy eyes at this time of night).

AND...I found your link. I think I'm going to have to put my prices up ;)

As for the SEO - there's a friendly chap in this 'ere forum place who's rather good at that sort of thing and taught me an awful lot

[yourdj]

Only had a very quick look, but I REALLY like it! It's different to the other DJ sites out there and it's certainly a polished look and feel (or it is through my weary and heavy eyes at this time of night).

AND...I found your link. I think I'm going to have to put my prices up ;)

As for the SEO - there's a friendly chap in this 'ere forum place who's rather good at that sort of thing and taught me an awful lot

Dead on my pricing. I never thought I would be earning that on a weekly basis but I am (with a lot of work and triaining obviously). Hosting is obviously extra on top. I think i could probably double it with some very bespoke and cleverly crafted options, but i would want to half the work load as a result as the prep would be doubled and the delivery would have to be spot on, on the day! :)

I think I might remove the prices page and do a link in the text option to get people to read the info. He is right. I think people go straight to the price page and don't soak up the rest of the website. having the prices on a "what you get for your money" is a good option though, as i bet they will look at the prices and then go back to see why they are higher than the rest of their quotes.

Having said that I only usually ever get pitched against people of a similar price structure. i never even hear about the lower priced DJ's or agencies. I think being transparent and not being the slightest bit worried about competition really works well. I often encourage people to go and meet with other DJ's as 'we are all different'. if they book me then thats up to them, all I can do is present them with what I do and take an interest in them. :)

http://yourdj.co.uk/prices/

[Benny Smyth]

Did either of you find it a hindrance to click on the hyperlink to get the prices, or were you indifferent?

If the latter, do you think that may be because you knew it was there?

[Imagine]

Did either of you find it a hindrance to click on the hyperlink to get the prices, or were you indifferent?

If the latter, do you think that may be because you knew it was there?

I went deliberately looking for it :)

Whether a bride would see it....dunno. I regularly playback what people do on my website and it's amazing just how little they actually read at times. As you mentioned yesterday, they hunt for the pricing bit first.

Whether they'd take the time to read the content and find the link is another matter - only time will tell on that one.

[Benny Smyth]

Ok...wow....so it's now live - a turnaround that took me and Webmaster J by surprise! :lol:

[surround sounds]

Link does not work

[Benny Smyth]

My bad - Its live now, so not on the original link.

www.bennysmyth.co.uk

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

You know what mate. The first incarnation I saw of this I really wasn't a fan, it was far too busy and I'm really not a fan of those scrolly websites everyone seems to be battering the life out of on wix just now but seeing that in action, it looks great.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

Dead on my pricing. I never thought I would be earning that on a weekly basis but I am (with a lot of work and triaining obviously). Hosting is obviously extra on top. I think i could probably double it with some very bespoke and cleverly crafted options, but i would want to half the work load as a result as the prep would be doubled and the delivery would have to be spot on, on the day! :)

I think I might remove the prices page and do a link in the text option to get people to read the info. He is right. I think people go straight to the price page and don't soak up the rest of the website. having the prices on a "what you get for your money" is a good option though, as i bet they will look at the prices and then go back to see why they are higher than the rest of their quotes.

Having said that I only usually ever get pitched against people of a similar price structure. i never even hear about the lower priced DJ's or agencies. I think being transparent and not being the slightest bit worried about competition really works well. I often encourage people to go and meet with other DJ's as 'we are all different'. if they book me then thats up to them, all I can do is present them with what I do and take an interest in them. :)

http://yourdj.co.uk/prices/


Pertinent.

I had my last all day wedding of the year today. A 4 figure shot which by time all is said and done I've put in I reckon around 45 hours worth of work - This is the one I mentioned in the client meets thread about spending a whole Sunday driving to Aberdeen to meet them.

The day ran like clockwork and at the end of it the groom came over and said to me something along the lines of: "We've got lots of pals due to get married asking where we got you from because you were amazing doing the MC earlier and you've smashed it with the DJing tonight. I'm just telling them we paid good money for it and it was well worth it and I've got your number if they want it."

Successful shift by all accounts....

As I was having my meal I checked my phone and I had a missed call from a mobile. I get next to nothing direct phone wise so I've no clue where they came across me but the conversation went something like this:

"Hi it's Jim here, I had a missed call from you?"

"Ah yeah, I'm looking for a DJ, I'm getting married next year in venue X on date Y."

"Ok. I'm actually just taking a quick breather from a gig I'm in just now but if you let me know your e-mail address I'll send you through a full quote and breakdown of service either tonight when I get in or first thing in the morning."

"No I'm just wondering what you charge" [at this stage she's clearly not that interested in what I can actually offer / do for her]

"My price starts at £545 for the evening package and you can add on to that depending on what enhancements you want..."

"Sorry that's too pricey for us. Bye"


:rolleyes:

Being newly(ish) married myself I understand that every penny is a prisoner but :Censored::Censored::Censored::Censored: me, every single one of us must have been to a birthday party or wedding where the music was pish purely because the person had booked a cheap, rubbish DJ.

I thought it was quite fitting that tonights clients had burst their budget to get me and it paid off then you've got people who will balk at the price without even knowing what it includes.

[Excalibur]

then you've got people who will baulk at the price without even knowing what it includes.

Music, lights, and errr.............................................. ..................................:confused::confu sed::confused:

Nope. That's me out of ideas.

[yourdj]

I thought it was quite fitting that tonights clients had burst their budget to get me and it paid off then you've got people who will balk at the price without even knowing what it includes.

thats just the way it is. Being a generous persons that has a reasonably disposable income I should not judge, but some people are just tight and don't get the concept of value for money, or care about other people other than themselves. A hair dresser once said "I am making my cupcakes the day before (as the pro ones were £2-3 each). I 'I said, your going to be rather busy, would you rather not just pay someone to do it properly and concentrate on more important things'. 'Nah, I bet they will be crap but I don't even like cake anyway'. I felt like saying, 'whats the point then, or do you not care about your guests eating your terrible cakes' but it was falling on deaf ears. The way i see it is people can carry on booking cheap crappy or ill suited entertainment options for their weddings as it makes me look good. If everyone was charging £600 + and upped their game, I would have a lot less work. :)

[Imagine]

Music, lights, and errr.............................................. ..................................:confused::confu sed::confused:

Nope. That's me out of ideas.

For an all day wedding....a hell of a lot more!


Ceremony music
Master of ceremonies
Receiving lines
Toast intros
Staging of the cake cutting
Staging of the first dance
Love story
Shoe game
Liaising with other suppliers
Keeping everything to the timeline


Need more ideas? ;) :sofa:

[Nakatomi]

Obviously the ££££ a night DJs all have mind control devices to make people dance no matter what, right? :rofl:

So. Getting back on track... Love the new site & as you're aware Benny it's given me a kick up the rear to crack on with my own. Goodbye Wordpress!

[Excalibur]

For an all day wedding....a hell of a lot more!


Ceremony music
Master of ceremonies
Receiving lines
Toast intros
Staging of the cake cutting
Staging of the first dance
Love story
Shoe game
Liaising with other suppliers
Keeping everything to the timeline


Need more ideas? ;) :sofa:

Master of Ceremonies? I understood that. :thumbs_up: That's just me talking on the microphone, which is included free in all my discos.:)

[ppentertainments]

For an all day wedding....a hell of a lot more!


Ceremony music
Playing around a dozen songs
Master of ceremonies
Saying a few things on the Microphone
Receiving lines
Getting everyone in a line like at school
Toast intros
Another few things on the mic
Staging of the cake cutting
As Above
Staging of the first dance
As Above but also play a song
Love story
Take over the best mans and Brides Fathers Role
Shoe game
Great laugh and a bit of Mic skill needed
Liaising with other suppliers
Saying 'Hi, I am the DJ'
Keeping everything to the timeline
Hurrying up the photographer and venue staff


Need more ideas? ;) :sofa:

Above was said in jest, but really we have such a simple job that we like to embellish into something challenging.

[Benny Smyth]

So. Getting back on track... Love the new site & as you're aware Benny it's given me a kick up the rear to crack on with my own. Goodbye Wordpress!

How's that coming along?

[rth_discos]

Above was said in jest, but really we have such a simple job that we like to embellish into something challenging.

Ever watched a 'friend' of the family act as Master of Ceremonies? That's when you realise it's not such a simple job.

Usain Bolt has a very simple job - run for 100 metres.

I dislike the 'simplification' of what we do.

In that case, we just play a few songs during the evening... and therefore anyone can do it (which we know it won't).


it's given me a kick up the rear to crack on with my own. Goodbye Wordpress!

Out of interest, why 'goodbye' to Wordpress (and what are you planning on using instead?)

[Nakatomi]

How's that coming along?

I'm stuck in copywriting hell. The usual.

[ppentertainments]

Ever watched a 'friend' of the family act as Master of Ceremonies? That's when you realise it's not such a simple job.


Oh yes :D:D

Although my train of thought has changed and is something I do encourage greatly now (friend of the family as MC), creates a much more personal day for a couples friends and family rather than a stranger undertaking the job. Although I am not talking about simply giving someone a mic and letting them get on with it

[Nakatomi]

Ever watched a 'friend' of the family act as Master of Ceremonies? That's when you realise it's not such a simple job.

Usain Bolt has a very simple job - run for 100 metres.

I dislike the 'simplification' of what we do.

In that case, we just play a few songs during the evening... and therefore anyone can do it (which we know it won't).



Out of interest, why 'goodbye' to Wordpress (and what are you planning on using instead?)

I'm not dropping wordpress completely but my main site will be running on a flat file based cms called Grav. Most of the features I want are in place now as is the styling so it's just down fo populate it with cintent.

So why? Mostly because wordpress is clunky & full of bloat. Sure you can add plugins to minify css & javascripts but for serving content that's mostly static... Is it really needed? Nope.

I'll keep wp on for the mdjm plugin though & I intend to get a lot more use out of that next year.

[Excalibur]

Above was said in jest, but really we have such a simple job that we like to embellish into something challenging.

We have a job that's easy to do, unquestionably. :agree:




But it's exceedingly difficult to do it properly.


And those who can do it properly make it look so easy, that any :muppet: thinks he can do it too.

He can, but he'll make a horlicks of it.

There are some jobs best left to the Professionals.

[rth_discos]

So why? Mostly because wordpress is clunky & full of bloat.

Whilst there are many Wordpress themes that are full of bloat and can be very slow loading itself, I've never seen this as a criticism of Wordpress, only the badly coded themes. There are many excellent themes available for Wordpress that are very fast loading.

My personal opinion is that you're 'boxing in' your options without any real gain.

Wordpress powers around a quarter of all websites, so it can't be that bad!



but for serving content that's mostly static... Is it really needed? Nope.

Our websites should never be static. But as Grav has a 'CMS' behind it, I guess it can work. But we should be adding new content monthly as a minimum - ideally weekly - to help improve the search engine position of the website.

[Nakatomi]

Whilst there are many Wordpress themes that are full of bloat and can be very slow loading itself, I've never seen this as a criticism of Wordpress, only the badly coded themes. There are many excellent themes available for Wordpress that are very fast loading.

My personal opinion is that you're 'boxing in' your options without any real gain.

Wordpress powers around a quarter of all websites, so it can't be that bad!




Our websites should never be static. But as Grav has a 'CMS' behind it, I guess it can work. But we should be adding new content monthly as a minimum - ideally weekly - to help improve the search engine position of the website.

The problem with WP isn't so much the themes it's all the bloody plugins you need which end up weighing things down. Want a contact form? Oh you need this plugin. Want a datepicker for that? Another plugin. Oh you want a spam proofed captcha do you? Another plugin! And all these various plugins use their own JS, CSS. I've seen quick to load themes end up being very slow once you've added everything you need to make a working mobile DJ site. Not as slow as Wix mind you.

As for adding content weekly - that's probably going to be a blog or similar isn't it? Not changes on the actual main pages surely? Though that's easily tackled by having a bit of code to show post snippets on the front page I think.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

Above was said in jest, but really we have such a simple job that we like to embellish into something challenging.

To do it is simple, to do it really well is a completely different kettle of fish.

I'd honestly say in all of my years doing this and being guests at dozens of weddings of the past few years I've only ever seen one co-ordinator, MC etc... that I've thought was worth two bob. In fact I'll extend that to 2 and this guy was a fellow DJ / host... :D

The rest have ranged from well intentioned but couldn't get an atmosphere going in an orgy to the deer in the headlights "I really don't want to be doing this" type to the simply couldn't give a jobby types.

[ppentertainments]

To do it is simple, to do it really well is a completely different kettle of fish.

I'd honestly say in all of my years doing this and being guests at dozens of weddings of the past few years I've only ever seen one co-ordinator, MC etc... that I've thought was worth two bob. In fact I'll extend that to 2 and this guy was a fellow DJ / host... :D

The rest have ranged from well intentioned but couldn't get an atmosphere going in an orgy to the deer in the headlights "I really don't want to be doing this" type to the simply couldn't give a jobby types.

You must be really fortunate. I know of a lot of great mc/hosts in our area who do a fantastic job, unfortunately they undervalue themselves which is what causes the problem and they think they need to incorporate 'everything' into their service instead of concentrating on what they are good at.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

You must be really fortunate. I know of a lot of great mc/hosts in our area who do a fantastic job, unfortunately they undervalue themselves which is what causes the problem and they think they need to incorporate 'everything' into their service instead of concentrating on what they are good at.

Fortunate doesn't really come into it, if you do anything long enough AND have a passion for it, you should be an expert and do a great job in my opinion

- my 9-5 (3:30ish actually :D )involves me being on my feet talking most of the day, I've played out live in bands since I was 13 in some of the most coveted venues in the country, I've busked across Europe and I've plenty of experience in meeting and dealing with "high pressure" people from government ministers to Saudi royalty so for almost 2 decades I've been involved in "performing" and working in a pressured environments so I utilise that when I'm performing or hosting.

Someone that it's their "job" and isn't overly enthusiastic or passionate about it or someone who doesn't have enough experience to do it flawlessly are always going to let the ball drop somewhere.