IMatch 5 Web Site

[Mario]

This is the thread to comment on the test web site for IMatch 5.

See the Announcement for details.

[nordkapp]

just a few thougts:
- some of the screenshots I would like to see bigger i.e. zoom in/view fullscreen to see the details
- sitting in front of my small notebook display 1280x800 I have to scroll to see the text or if something interesting in the text I have to scroll to the screenshot
- some of the images you show there a very old 2002/2003. first thought if I see it on a website is that it must be old (not maintained) screenshots. But maybe the goal is to show that IMatch has that long history

btw. until now I havn't changed the window layout in my installation, they look really flexible. I will play with it soon. And I realize that I have to learn a lot and will hopefully benefit a lot from this new features

[joel23]

Hi Mario,
first impression of the site is very good.
But you should think about using a dynamic / wider template, especially because of the presentation (or make the screenshots click-able). Its a shame that only a 1.024px wide range is used - on large monitors there is a lot of unused space. People who don't know V5 yet, only can guess what they are looking at.
If you thought of mobiles I believe it would be better to create a separate mobile site, because the images are already quiet small even when viewed at a large monitor.

btw: wasn't able to login with my iPhone.

ps
I see someone else feels the same

[Menace]

Looks great, but...

• Have you one or two more sophisticated screenshot of IMatch with "grey symbols"?
  
• And one with favorite application like PS and others but just with symbols? 
  
• Is there a possibiltiy for wider screens?
  

[JohnZeman]

Whenever I'm considering buying some new software that I've never used before, one of the things I look for are actual user testimonies.  It's expected that software developers will promote their product, however it's more likely to entice me to at least try it out when I read the positive comments written by users.

In regards to Joel's suggestion I have a different opinion.  As a webmaster who has to deal with web site appearances on a daily basis I've been limiting most of my web sites widths to 1000px or less simply to optimize the way they'll look on mobile devices like iPads, and iPhones.  If you need to go wider, I'd set the width to a percentage of the viewers screen resolution width but doing that totally changes the way a web site has to be laid out.

I do agree the screen shots could be larger, if it were me I'd make each screen shot clickable.  So clicking a screenshot would open a popup window showing a much larger version of the screenshot.  I use Likno software to do this.

[herman]

Hi Mario,

First impression: I am impressed!!

Some thoughts.....
Initially I missed the text, just saw the slides.
Reason was that I had the vertical size of my browser window not large enough.

One of the unique features of IMatch is the excellent help file.
Wherever you are in the program, click a panel, press <f1> and the appropriate help is there.
You could perhaps mention that in the presentation as well.
A lot of applications these days come with just a PDF manual, no context-sensitive help at all......

Another thing you might mention is the slide show?

[cytochrome]

Whenever I discuss catalogs on a forum and suggest IM the answer is "we already have LR, it does all that is needed".

Most photographer that will visit the web site use LR and believe they have the alpha and omega of cataloging, already. They will not be convinced just with nice colors and smart panels (by the way they are to small, you need a put zoom tool°

I think the web page should emphasize what IM does more than other dam, is faster, etc. Maybe a comparison chart, or a fact chart. Geeks adore figures like index so many files/sec, so many in database, so many file types, etc...

Francis

I just read Herman's comment about the excellent help. Which is true of course. You should offer to download it, even if one cannot get the gist of a program simply from reading the help, people would be impressed by the range and depth of possibilities

[ChristopherFoto]

Hallo Mario,

der Aufbau und die kurzen Texte die die Verschiedenen Arbeitsbereiche / Darstellung beschreiben, finde ich sehr gut.
Auf der BUY Seite fehlt aber noch der upgrade Preis, ansonsten ist mir erst mal nichts aufgefallen was fehlen würde.
Ich würde sagen das hast du super gemacht, mir gefällt deine IMatch 5 Promotion Seite sehr gut.

Weiter so.

[pajaro]

It looks really nice!

I just repeat what others said: the font could be larger and screen shots clickable.

In the introduction you may also mention search capabilities of IMatch. For me, search functions are key features of DAM software and search in IMatch is very flexible and fast. It may be also worth mentioning that IMatch runs smoothly on both 32- and 64-bit systems.

[jch2103]

Very nice! Overwhelming in an excellent way!

Some specific (picky) comments based on a quick beginning-to-end look:

The size of the screen shots is reasonable for a slide show. However, some of the text for specific slides refers to details that may not be easily visible in the screen shot. Ideally, the user could zoom in but that won't work with a slide show, so I'm not sure how this could be improved (and perhaps it's another spur to download and try IMatch!).

The Media & Folders View: "(using the label color to tone the thumbnail panels)". This may be somewhat confusing to folks who don't yet know about labels. The screen shot shows the colors OK, but it's not apparent what they're based on.

The Category View:
Minor: Should be "categories, _e.g.,_ to see". (Likewise for later iterations of "i.e.".)
The text discusses metadata, including the 10,000 fields IMatch supports. Some who see this may not understand the metadata concept, and mentioning a big number might make them think that's all information they would have to enter (vs information that already may exist in their files). (Or perhaps those who will see this page already know all this?)

The Category View: Should say "Expanded and in color _are_ some of the sample".

The Collection View: Should be "individual collections. _These allow_ you to ".

The Timeline View: Should be "To see all files created _on_ a certain day".

Working with Geo Data (2): Should be "coordinates given by a location and _its_ radius and much more."

The File Window (4): Should be
"Just _one_ example of how customizable file windows are".
"If desired, you can _set up_ similar file window layouts".
"a file window can also _be_ set to show".

Annotations: Will face detection be working before the Beta is released?

Stacking:
Should this perhaps say: "reduce the number of _visible_ files to manage"?
"or you _can_ let IMatch"

Import & Export: Can you clarify this phrase: "fine details over metadata export"?

Apps: Should be "users can _set up_ custom information panels".

This test web page is very impressive. I assume you'll continue a 'soft' roll-out of IMatch, to shape the ramp-up of new users (and their questions/support needs). I assume you also already have a sequenced target list (websites, social media, e-mail, etc.) for all this new information.

Again, this is very impressive. For people who understand the benefits that IMatch conveys, it should be an easy sell. A more difficult target are those who would greatly benefit, but don't know realize it yet (I'm thinking, for example, of people who use Lightroom as an all-in-one solution for their needs). This slide show should let some of them think that there are benefits in trying something new.

[clpratt]

Hi Mario,  The IMatch Web Site looks very exciting.
I like the idea of so many screen shots each showing a different aspect of how IMatch works, but I agree they should be larger but not necessarily expandable unless they could expand whilst hovering over them perhaps?
Very Important feature of IMatch is its support so I suggest additional text saying "Unrivalled customer support from the Developer of IMatch and the IMatch user community"

[Sorted]

Very attractive - a huge undertaking in itself. Just a few initial remarks:

• strawberry image draws too much attention away from slideshow. Strawberry image is attractive but space could be used for an eye-catching heading of text on graphic
• screenshots should be larger
• text should be brighter and larger
• perhaps remove links from the right to make space for screenshots
• consider larger fonts for headings etc. Perhaps use coloured fonts
• consider widening the page for larger screens
• well produced Youtube videos would be particularly useful for explaining IMatch's features.

I appreciate I'm reiterating some comments above mine and hope my comments are constructive.

[dcb]

Oswald! Excellent.

I'd swap the Buy and Download Free Trial buttons around if the goal is to get trials downloaded first.

What is "Digital Asset Management".

* Your photos and videos are some of the most precious items you own.
* The shoebox of photos in the cupboard is a thing of the past in today's digital age.
* Have you ever looked at a photo and wondered where or when it was taken? Will your children know?
* IMatch - the most powerful shoebox you will ever own.

Just brainstorming.

[mastodon]

Unboxing IMatch video?
In a video you can show the speed and the all the things (ex. user script) that IMatch do better/faster than LR.

[herman]

We beta testers may be tempted to compare IM5 to other DAMs like LR, ASP, IDI, .......

I don't think it is smart to do such a thing in the promo material though.

IMO it is far better to emphasize the unique selling points of IMatch.

A potential customer can then compare these points to what the competition has to offer.
No doubt the review sites will make these comparisons as well.

IMO one of the very strong points is that IMatch will never lock you in, when you decide to drop it and use an other DAM all tools are there to migrate.
Another very strong point is that it supports not only images but also office files, PDF, music, you name it.
Last but not least: out of the box it is fully MWG compliant.

There is no need to mention that Adobe has a slightly different approach with LR

[sinus]

oswald ... 

The site looks very good.

Your sentence "Since 2003" .... hmmmm, I must have a look, I thought, maybe wrongly, that I uses IMatch since 2001!?

[RainerG]

Sorry, but where is the imatch5 testwebsite?

[sinus]

Sorry, but where is the imatch5 testwebsite?

https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=1756.0

[Mario]

Sorry, but where is the imatch5 testwebsite?

Please see the Announcement for link and instructions.

[grauschaf]

Hi Mario

Had a quick view to your web site, will have a closer look later.

1. In IE8 Slideshow isn't working, text is not visible  . With Firefox 17 everything works well.

2. A nice idea, to make the single slides adressable with the small grey dots at the bottom. But if I want to jump to a specific slide, I have to do it by trial and error. An overview would help.

Gerd

[ChristopherFoto]

1. In IE8 Slideshow isn't working, text is not visible  .

I can confirm that

[JohnZeman]

What is "Digital Asset Management".

That is an excellent point.  Undoubtedly some people who visit the web site will see Digital Asset Manager displayed there at the top and quit reading right there because they have no idea what a Digital Asset Manager is.  All they're looking for is a program to organize their photos.

So at the top of the web site below the banner, I would put something to catch and hold their attention, something like "IMatch 5, the ultimate tool for managing your photos and other media."

And then follow that with the more detailed description.

[Mario]

1. In IE8 Slideshow isn't working, text is not visible  . With Firefox 17 everything works well.

Please use a fairly recent browser. Many of the popular JavaScript toolkits don't support it anymore (including the one I use for the slide show, apparently). IE is at version 10 and Firefox at version 27.

[JohanEkerot]

Mario
I think IMatch 5 looks like an excellent product but I'm an old user and the presentation is good as well.

A few notes though:
As noted before I believe in making the slides clickable to full screensize.
However I must emphasize that the explanatory text below each slide should be in view together with the slide, at least the first few lines.
Perhaps but adjusting the view such that the slide remains ion the top of the page for every new slide..

I missed  the text for the first slides.... the scrolling down to read made me lose focus on the ">" sign for next slide! Thus making me scroll up and down for essentially every slide...

Regards
Johan

[Mario]

What is "Digital Asset Management".

That is an excellent point.  Undoubtedly some people who visit the web site will see Digital Asset Manager displayed there at the top and quit reading right there because they have no idea what a Digital Asset Manager is.  All they're looking for is a program to organize their photos.
So at the top of the web site below the banner, I would put something to catch and hold their attention, something like "IMatch 5, the ultimate tool for managing your photos and other media."

And then follow that with the more detailed description.

I have not yet studied all comments, but some comments of more technical nature:

1. I did not change my entire web site for this experiment, only this one single page.

2. The colors, banner image (on top), fixed size layout etc. has not changed since the last relaunch of the site

3. The content area (where the slide show resides) is fixed to 640 pixel width. I will not change that (and cannot, not without writing a new WordPress theme).

4. I could program a way to display the images bigger (with some effort), but I don't really want to. If a user is hooked by some of the pictured and wants to see the real thing, he can download the software and try it out.

5. Side-by-side comparison between products like you see so often on U.S. web sites ("Look: All the features the competition does not have!") can become a legally fishy thing here in Germany. If you make a mistake you can get sued. And that it's one poor Mario against the several hundred lawyers the big company have at their disposal...

6. The "Digital Asset Management" claim at the top is there for two years. IMatch is a DAM software, after all. Image management and photo management are mentioned on the site or as keywords and hence are picked up by the search engines. And if a visitor is drawn to the site he should be able to tell that IMatch manages images and other digital assets.

7. The banner image at the top changes from time to time. It's not always the photo I've taken with my smartphone from my breakfast bowl (strawberry and peach, Yummy) which was mentioned. Currently it's a crop from a vintage car I took last year.

8. For the IMatch 5 landing page I use a "Coming Soon..." banner right now, which picks up the motive used in the slide show in several places. The "Coming Soon..." could be replaced with a better claim once IMatch is rolled out, like Carl suggests.

[Mario]

I missed  the text for the first slides.... the scrolling down to read made me lose focus on the ">" sign for next slide! Thus making me scroll up and down for essentially every slide...
Regards
Johan

When you scroll the browser up once, the slide usually remains at the top and you can see at least part of the text. The scrolling behavior depends on the browser, some are more clever than others. I could only prevent the automatic scrolling by putting the text into a fixed size box with it's own scrollbar, but usually scrolling down the page with the wheel is much faster than picking at another scroll bar.

Many people won't read the text at all or give it only a cursory glance. If a user is really interested in the text, it's no problem for him to scroll (IMHO). There is only so much vertical space in a browser, and so much horizontal space. Most visitors on my web site use screen resolutions of 1280x1024 to 1600x1200 pixel. And if they are in th habit of using a smaller browser window, they will have to scroll more.

The current design is a trade-off between screen estate usage, technical limits given by the overall web site layout and theme and the amount of effort I'm prepared to put into implementing all this. When I put another week or more into programming I can come up with a better solution. But that time would not be spent on IMatch 5 itself, which is not good. As so often, I have to compromise and put my limited resources to the best usage. I worked almost three days on this slide show alone!

[Mario]

I did a change and gave the the text area a fixed height. This apparently prevents the browser (IE, FF, Chrome) from scrolling up and down when the text height varies, so the slide show stays in place. Let me know.

I've made a change to the style sheet and at least on my system it runs with IE 8 as well.

[ianrr]

Hi Mario, looks well presented, but the colours for "buy or try" stands out way too much for my liking. Not necessary ...

[Winfried]

I miss one topic: How does IMatch cooperate with different programs

This is to my opion quite important, since IMatch does not contain a photo-editor or a raw-converter.

So my question is:
How can it be used with (or better show, that it can be done)
- Photoshop
- GIMP
- Paintshop Pro
...

or with different raw-converters
- Lightroom (also containing some kind of database)
- Capture One (Pro) (also containing some kind of database)
- dxo
- Silkypix
- Photo Ninja
- RawTherapee
- ...

or printing applications like RIPs, Mirage, Qimage

or ...

Just a quite look on the programs I use with IMatch:


It is important to point out that IMatch can serve as some kind of glue
to create a workflow consisting of many different applications. With IMatch you are able to create a best of bread-workflow.
With IMatch staples you can glue for instance an article you wrote (*.doc-file) with the photos you used to illustrate the text.
And you can even staple the invoice you sent to your customer for it with the article and the photos. This cannot be done with Lightroom.

Winfried

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Sorted]

I did a change and gave the the text area a fixed height. This apparently prevents the browser (IE, FF, Chrome) from scrolling up and down when the text height varies, so the slide show stays in place. Let me know.

I've made a change to the style sheet and at least on my system it runs with IE 8 as well.

Good: no need to scroll any more on FF browser; ∴ much easier to use slide show. Oh, and the new 'banner' looks fantastic!

[jdk]

I think you've made a very good start -- particularly in the opening paragraph which correctly emphasises two key elements:

• You've been around a long time
• You have both individual and corporate customers

All those customer groups you mention would be looking for IMatch's most important strengths -- that it is:

• Stable
• Scalable
• Flexible

Those basic points should be enough to make anyone who is looking for a DAM program try IMatch. Those three elements together are rare -- certainly in a relatively inexpensive DAM program.

[Graham]

Mario,

Perhaps additional examples could be added (over time) to illustrate the amazingly diverse uses for IMatch.

As an amateur guitar player, I have large collection of different types of video, audio, text, word, and various music scores and even the odd image. IMatch5 is proving brilliant for organising this mess into order - I love it.  I'm finding the grid view the most useful. And I'm having to change from my old habit of using categories to keywords. The data generated categories from the keywords is very flexible and useful.

I haven't yet started on my electronic stuff but I suspect IMatch5 will prove just as useful.

So for me the exciting features of IMatch5 are:

1. The ability to organise and manage a wide variety of documents/media/images/files for a wide variety of applications, and

2. The ability to interface with and add value to existing applications which are often specific to an activity such as music, design, etc and lack the whole of project felxible, extensible management that IMatch5 offers.

Cheers,

Cheers,

[Mario]

Add a download button for the help (non functional yet).
Some new wording on the first slide.
Also looks good on smart phones now.

Will slowly incorporate your feedback. Currently busy ripping the search engine out of IMatch...     Have to finish that before shipping the 5.0.140.
Old search engine is dead, long live the new search engine.

[sinus]

Add a download button for the help (non functional yet).
Some new wording on the first slide.
Also looks good on smart phones now.

Will slowly incorporate your feedback. Currently busy ripping the search engine out of IMatch...     Have to finish that before shipping the 5.0.140.
Old search engine is dead, long live the new search engine.

Ahhh, I am very curious on this!!! 

[herman]

You never stop surprising us, don't you?
Replacing the search engine seems a major operation to me.....

I just saw some unexpected side-effect occurred when you tuned the website.
It seems that the + shaped bullets lost some pixels on the left side of the horizontal line.
I see this both on FF 27 and IE 11.

See attached screenshot.



[attachment deleted by admin]

[Mario]

The old search engine, based on the search engine which is part of the database system I use on the lowest level of IMatch had one advantage: it was hilariously fast. Really. Sub-second search times for 100,000 files. Amazing!

But...

as many comments of the testers and my own observations have shown, it also has many disadvantages.

First of all, it's not really designed for a system like IMatch, with it's high frequency of changes. The frequent updates of the search engine got badly in the way of other IMatch operations ("Updating Index..."), we all know that.

Second, it has a very specific (aka limited) query language. They support boolean like OR or AND and all that. But they can only search in complete words, so when you search for "123" the search engine will be unable to find a file name like "_DSC123".

IMatch ended up where I don't want it to end up: Different search syntax in the Filter Panel and the File Window search bar. No good. Searching is what we often do, and it should be easy, predictable and fast. In that order!

Over the past two months I've analyzed the performance data IMatch writes to the log files. Every log file upload here or sent to me contains information about how IMatch performs on your systems, and this information helps me to 'tune' the right parts.

The search engine and related functionality bugged me to no end. And, since changing this requires substantial changes in the user interface, the database and even the help, I need to change this before I can ship the final version of IMatch.

After doing some real hard thinking for a week, and spending many hours trying out different approaches that I came up with, I'm now pretty confident that I have a technology which:

a) Does not require any extra updates or index runs (faster, no interfering with other background tasks)
b) Will be easy to use and identical in both the file window, the filter panel and the scripting language
c) Will support simple syntax but also OR, AND, NOT and even ( and ) to control precedence if needed
d) Will be fast enough (not as fast as the original search engine, but fast enough for 99% of all typical search cases)
e) The worst case so far was 8 seconds for searching everything (!) in a 120,000 files database. Searching all data for 5000 files (e.g. a big folder or category) takes less than 2 seconds.

I had the first successful test runs today in a test application. If I find no problems tomorrow, I will rip out the old search engine in IMatch and plug-in the new one. This will be no fun, but is doable in two days, including the UI and help updates etc.  I cross my fingers hat it works, and that we get rid of the "updating index" forever.

[Mario]

I just saw some unexpected side-effect occurred when you tuned the website.

Fixed. Thanks.

[ChrisMatch]

Much appreciate your effort and taking the step to improve/change the search engine 

[HansEverts]

Great job Mario, congratulations.

However, you can tell it was the developer who designed the slides: all details are critical.

First I think you may have to clarify for yourself who you are targeting: the professional and serious hobby photographer or the amateur. As it is, the slide set and text are not for the latter. If that is what you want, I think you have to catch the eyes of the potential client with a maximum of 5 slides with very simple short text that will provide an answer to what this category of clients expects. If that raises the curiosity, he/she can go to the more in depth presentation.

The professional and serious hobbyist can immediately be guided to the full set. I would however here also recommend to shorten the comments and include references to the excellent help file.

Best wishes

[sinus]

I had the first successful test runs today in a test application. If I find no problems tomorrow, I will rip out the old search engine in IMatch and plug-in the new one. This will be no fun, but is doable in two days, including the UI and help updates etc.  I cross my fingers hat it works, and that we get rid of the "updating index" forever.

So, again a lot of work for you, Mario! 

But I am sure, at the end it will be a good thing for you and for the users. Your new search-system sounds cool!
Thanks for your effort! 

[Ferdinand]

The old search engine, based on the search engine which is part of the database system I use on the lowest level of IMatch had one advantage: it was hilariously fast. Really. Sub-second search times for 100,000 files. Amazing!

But...

Searching is what we often do, and it should be easy, predictable and fast. In that order!

Discarding something which is highly efficient is not an easy choice, but then it's of little use if you don't use it because it doesn't do what you want, no matter how efficient it is.  Which is why I didn't often use it.  I agree with your priorities for search.

Can I belatedly make some comments on the web page:  I think there are two different groups that you need to target: (i) Those who know what a DAM is and who need to understand why they need IMatch 5 rather than another product; and (ii) Those who need to understand why they need a DAM at all.  I'm not sure that what's there at the moment addresses either group very well, although I suspect that it addresses the first group better than the second.

[Mario]

I think you have to catch the eyes of the potential client with a maximum of 5 slides with very simple short text that will provide an answer to what this category of clients expects.

Interesting. Which five slides would you suggest?

The "user model" for IMatch (the 3 types of users I envision for IMatch) are not 'SOHO', 'beginner' or 'casual' users. Such users don't have a demand for a system like IMatch. I don't want to 'lure' users without a real demand for a system like IMatch into a purchase (or a demo download). They won't be happy with it, too much learning, too many features they will never user. And they often require a lot of support during the evaluation phase or post-sales. And/or spread bad reviews about IMatch within their community. A loose-loose situation.

Of course IMatch 3 has some "Mom & Pop" users who happened to buy it accidentally and have made their way through it. Some even surprise me at what they achieve with IMatch 3. But these users are the exception. Even if IMatch 5 is much slicker and (hopefully) easier to use than IMatch 3, this type of user is better of with the built-in features in Windows, Picasa, a photo sharing web site or Facebook. Or with what little DAM is in LR.

I target professional photographers, small agencies, corporate users, scientists, librarians and ambitioned amateur photographers. Everybody with a high volume of images and above-average demands on how to organize and utilize their collection. With IMatch 5 this extends to all kinds of digital files and documents.

Time may prove me wrong after the official release of IMatch 5. But I don't see it as a SOHO-market product. Not that I'm adverse to attracting the masses and shovel heaps of money into my backyard ;-)

[Mario]

I'm not sure that what's there at the moment addresses either group very well, although I suspect that it addresses the first group better than the second.

Can you give me some details?
The slides try to explain what IMatch does and how it does it, highlighting the most important features to answer questions a potential DAM user could have. Like how to work with keywords? How to categorize or group files? How to find files? How to view files?

If you find things missing or too much, let me know. This is why I opened this post.

[JohanEkerot]

Mario
The fixed text box made a big improvement for scrolling, keeping focus on the arrow

However, First time I get to the page I can see everything down to the bottom of the slide.
I don't see the dots and I get no clue at all that there are some text below!

I got a fairly normal screen @1920x1200. don't know how much of a problem this really is
but this happened to me and the first time I didn't even realise there might be some text with the slide.
And the text explains quite a few things for me. I would consider it important.

Just my observations, there might be other reasons for keeping it this way
/Johan

[Mario]

However, First time I get to the page I can see everything down to the bottom of the slide.

You man the page ends with the slide image?
Maybe a browser cache issue? What happens when you press <F5>?

[HansEverts]

Interesting. Which five slides would you suggest?

The "user model" for IMatch (the 3 types of users I envision for IMatch) are not 'SOHO', 'beginner' or 'casual' users. Such users don't have a demand for a system like IMatch.

That is exactly what I mean, so you do not have to aim your message at them.

Remain the professional and serious hobbyist. At this point your slides are good, but they are flat in the sense that there is no hierarchy or prioritization. I am not a professional photographer, but I do know something about communication and training. You need an eye catcher that represents the specific requirement of the targeted audience and only when you get their attention, you can present them the 30 slides.

I would split the slides into 5 groups, each of which should be exclusive and a prime interest for a professional photographer. Sort of he/she opens a webpage and sees the following:
1) an application that is fully customizable in its layout.
2) an application that gives full control over metadata.
3) an application that allows for maximum tractability of your photos
4) an application that manages your photos from editing to output (I am sure there is a better way to put this, but I hope it is clear)
5) miscellaneous

Perhaps there are more key areas, but when you get many more, you loose the attention of the public.

Each topic could initially be illustrated by one slide, which by clicking on it, would reveal a series of slides related to the same topic and eventually to the help file.

If you think this is a useful approach, I am happy to have another look at the slides and see which ones to chose per topic.

[Mario]

@Hans

I wanted make it simple and keep everything on one page. I keep an eye on click trends and user habit analysis data gathered by the major sites. In principle: user's want it quick, they don't want to search the site, navigate or read too much text

This is why I came up with the idea of a slide show. You can click through the images very fast, or "flick" if you use a touch screen or smart phone. 10 seconds perhaps so see everything.  If a slide image looks interesting, you can read the longer text explanation below the image. Or you just flick through and then decide whether to download the trial version or not.

For early IMatch 3 versions I had very detailed info on-line, with sections, headlines, a sidebar navigation. Nobody ever used it. Maybe it was bad. Or just too many details. Most users visited the site, clicked on IMatch Overview page (one of about 20 topics!) and then either left my site or went to the download page. I can see that in the log files and the tracking data.

Since the relaunch last year, I have reduced the number of IMatch 3 info pages to maybe four. Still, most visitors either hit my site directly on the download page (coming from a search engine or other web site) or click only the Overview page. About 70% of the users don't even scroll down that page entirely. Either they go to the Download page or the Shop page or they leave the site.

I think this means that users don't want too much info or are even bothered by it. Or if they just want it concentrated in one spot. Which is why I made it a slide show this time. Many images, free and fast navigation. Similar to news sites or popular blogs.

Either I get them with the first couple of slides or not. That somebody comes to my site by accident and has to make up his mind about if he needs a software like IMatch is rather rare. They usually come because they have read about IMatch on another site or in a magazine or have been directed to my web site by friends or co-workers.  They flick through the slide show, think "Looks good" and download the trial version. They may even read some of the text, when an image grabs their attention of the headline matches one of their areas of expertise or workflow problem zones. But reading long texts while deciding to download a trial version, I don't know...I will put up the IMatch help for downloads so they can access very detailed information if they want.

As usual, I may be wrong.

[Sorted]

I'm reluctant to say this because I can imagine how much effort has gone into your IMatch 5 presentation but, returning to your site several times, I have formed the opinion that it has not delivered the impact which this program deserves.

The slide show is good but images really need to be bigger and the dots along the bottom need to be replaced with numbers so that it is possible to return to a particular feature. However, I believe that much greater impact would be delivered if the slide show was demoted to a place further down the page. Immediately under the top 'banner' I would place a series of large and very eye-catching screen shots of some of the most innovative features with large and simple captions (perhaps graphics as well, i.e. overlaid text). Large and not necessarily the whole interface view but portions of the screen - perhaps even with the screen seen from an angle with a portion of the monitor visible. Under these introductory shots I would introduce the slide show below by saying that all this and much more can be seen in the slide show. In other words aim to do what advertisers do firstly: grab the attention of the potential customer and then go into the details.

That the software is aimed at a more 'technical' and specialised areas of the DAM market should not distract you from thinking of this as a marketing exercise (I'm sure you do see it thus). Photography is the central core of IMatch's applicabilty and I reckon that stunning images of the interface should come first. What say thou oh master?

Hope this is of some help.

[Mario]

I can imagine how much effort has gone into your IMatch 5 presentation

Quite some, but it's all provisional and nothings fixed.  I can redo screen shots or reword stuff, no problem.
I'll plan to work on it when I have some spare minutes (does not look like right now).

Many of the screen shots in the slides are 100% crops already. So which crops do you mean, exactly?
Which slides should be bigger? I've also already tried to make IMatch 5 look as good as possible, what would you do different to make it even more better?
I'm nor sure about he "at an angle part"...?


The site layout is fixed with a content area of 640 pixel, with an overall 960 grid. I don't really want to break my site layout for "always" larger slides - it would cause a lot of effort (including writing a new template for Wordpress which I never did before).

To show the images larger I would use a popup (I'm sure I can link this with the external library I use for the slide show somehow). I had a similar thing before for another site. But there, only 10% of all visitors clicked to the slides to enlarge them (it was clear that they could). And only 2% clicked on more than one slide. A lot of effort was wasted at that time. Not sure if it would be different for this slide show...

[HansEverts]

@Hans

I think this means that users don't want too much info or are even bothered by it. Or if they just want it concentrated in one spot. Which is why I made it a slide show this time. Many images, free and fast navigation. Similar to news sites or popular blogs.

Either I get them with the first couple of slides or not.

The funny thing is is that you are not putting the underlines sentence into practice.  "Either I get them with the first couple of slides or not" to me translates into "I better be sure those first few slides grab the attention".  I am not promoting more information, but less, or more important, only for those who took the first hurdle. Ask yourself which key functions would draw your attention. I am certain it would be quite close to the 4 criteria I mentioned: customizable, flexible and transparent metadata management, tractability and completeness. And I added a miscellaneous for functions that fall under none of these, but are worth mentioning. Five characteristics is not too much to put on a single webpage. On basis of that, people can download or go deeper with the full slide show. Making the full show the first contact with IM5 is according to me counter productive and seems at odds with your own observations.