Hi, I just reopened CityPics.org and would now certainly like to promote it as best as possible. I already tried (un)targetted visitors campaigns, link exchanges, signature links and press releases but could not gain the necessary user base. I sincerely hope that someone can give me some good advices and suggestions for a proper promotion. Thanks.
None of those tactics really strike me as good "user-generating" marketing methods. Perhaps something like a contest open only to members would help. But honestly, with sites giving away huge amounts of space, 10mb isn't going to attract many people for photo hosting. You may need to reevaluate the service if you really want to increase registered users.
Thanks, what kind of contest would you imagine in this context? I see what you mean but I am not sure whether this would be the primary reason. 10 MB provides space for ~130 pictures, which should be sufficient - at least for the beginning.
How does 10Mb = 130 pictures? My pictures are ~3Mb each, and I don't like to lose quality. If I were to do some "decent" compression I'd be looking at 300Kb-ish, and that still doesn't support close to 130 pictures
I suppose you are storing in RAW format or have a higher resolution. At CityPics pictures are automatically converted to JPEG 800x600.
"At CityPics pictures are automatically converted to JPEG 800x600." There goes your serious photography clients. Invest in a decent designer to revamp your site. A search function would be nice. Users need to be able to see the site and enjoy it - if it's worth their time and effort, they're more likely to sign up and come back.
Its not the intent of the site to be platform for high detailled photographs in RAW format or 34 billions of pixels. Could you mention whats wrong with the current design? Thats definitely something to consider. I know, but thats the question, what am I missing so far to get every visitor to sign up.
A search function is utterly compulsory. Without it, your site is severely difficult to use. The only way to find photos is to browse until you stumble across them? What's wrong with the current design? I'll be honest - it doesn't look like it was designed. It looks like someone picked some colours they vaguely liked and wallpapered the site. There is no design.. search for "photo sharing" and compare the homepages of the top 10 to yours (flickr, smugmugs, webshots etc). What I meant by the last bit is that you have to create a user experience that draws them into the site. The experience consists of a compelling and eye catching, visually impressive design coupled with a tour like navigation through the basic features of the site that encourages interaction between the site and user. And while it's not the intention of the site to store RAW formats, automatically resizing and resampling people's photos will alienate a slice of your potential market (as will only offering 10MB of space).
Designed as with Photoshop? No, but to be honest I do not believe in this. I agree that as search feature should be implemented, but I dont consider the overall design as that bad. Although I might be certainly biased I'd like to hear what you do not like in detail. Certainly, if you expect the classical overhyped web2.0 site with a million ajax functions CityPics will disappoint you. Well, as I said the site's intention is to be a platform for city specific pictures but not for high detail artwork (while photo quality is certainly somewhat important, its not the most important issue) and if you take the success of YouTube which actually does the same with videos, I wouldnt assume this is to be a reason for anything.
I'm not a designer, but from a user perspective on the design: 1. The content area is much too narrow. 2. For a site that's centered around photography on any level, it's not visually appealing at all. Just very very plain. 3. You don't give much info at all on the actual purpose of the site. You need to give people some kind of "tour"... not just expect them to register. 4. It looks a bit unprofessional content-wise... like using emoticons on your About Us page. 5. If people are curious, right now they'd probably look at members to get a feel for how big the site is. None were registered this year, and the vast majority don't have any stats... as a user that tells me the site's not worth it, and I wouldn't sign up. You said here that it was "reopened". But you don't say that on the site that I can see, so it just looks like the site's a dud to people who are curious. Why not mention it, and promote that it's been re-launched. Why was it ever "closed" in the first place? Was it actually down, or you just didn't promote it for a while, and no one bothered signing up? I'd definitely re-evaluate the design completely as well as the service. 10mb is simply too small imo to reach a large group. Sure... not everyone needs a large storage space. But think about email competition. How many people honestly needed all of the space Gmail offered early on? Not likely very many. But they offered the most, so they were appealing. Simple marketing. In your case, not only are there enormously more options offering huge amounts of space (like several gigabytes) for free, but people also can share their travel photos in their own blogs for free these days. What's the benefit in your site over others or a blog? I don't see one right now. And if you can't answer that, you're not going to reach your market. Also on the file size issue, keep in mind you're targeting a niche... basically travellers who want to share photos of various cities it would seem. People like that tend to take a lot of photos while travelling, and there's not a lot of space for them to share them. I know you said 130 pictures, but that's not realistic, since you're also claiming these are "high resolution" photos being displayed. You're not going to get it both ways. I'm not saying anything to try to attack your site... just to try to help you see where you need to improve if you want it to succeed. And others here had good advice already that you should listen to.
Too narrow for what exactly? The site elements fit into the site and there isnt too much blank space (as I already was told). What are you missing? I agree that the site is rather plain or simple, but thats up to everyone's personal taste just as "visually not appealing". Sure if you expect an overstyled, Flash driven, photoshopped site with Ajax support to the maximum you will be disappointed by CityPics, but I wouldnt say that only such sites have the possibility to remain today, correct me if you think I am wrong. Well, to be honest I have a hard time to imagine how such a tour could look like. I would expect someone who visits the site and stays more than 5 seconds to see what the site is about it. Its written on the main page, on the about page and browsing a bit should resolve every remaining doubt. Again, I am sorry, but I cant imagine which information such a tour should deliver - how a picture of a town looks like in an id***-proof way and how a file upload works? You think a single emoticon on one page makes the entire site "unprofessional"? I dont know. Exactly, thats my reason why I closed it down and posted this message here. If people do not register because no one is registered it becomes a bit difficult . It was actually down. It even ran under another top-level domain previously. Sure there are other ways to store and publish such pictures (there always are), but CityPics.org is to my knowledge one of the few (if not only) site specifically dedicated for this type, with features specifically for such photographs. As I said these 10 MB are initially enough for ~130 pictures, but not even this offer was taken up. Why should then someone register if 50 MB, 100 MB, 500 MB or 1 GB are offered? Besides that I might run into problems if someone actually utilises this offer (classical overselling) and should I then delete pictures and downsize the account I will be driving off the users. Sure I could offer paid premium accounts, but I would wonder why someone should pay if not even the free accounts are used. The site doesnt target travellers in particular, but rather everyone with pictures of cities and interest in those - be it travellers or also people who have pictures of their home town. What exactly isnt realistic about 130 pictures? I do not consider your comments in any way as "attack". I appreciate them and thank you for them. However I have to say that the advices so far - while I know they are well-intentioned - havent helped me much. Again, thanks for your comments.
You clearly do not want advice or constructive criticism. You have been given some excellent advice, by some knowledgeable people, and you are basically arguing that the advice is wrong? You are obviously having trouble with the site in it's current form, but you don't want to change it. We're not miracle workers... but I will try one more time. Apologies if this is blunt, but it's my opinion. 1. Redesign. Not "over design", no need for AJAX or the typical Web 2.0 styling, but make it look nicer than a bowl of cat food. "Everyone's personal taste" is what you're aiming for, and you need to hit the masses. The site is too dark, bland and seriously lacks any form of branding. I understand your viewpoint about functionality over flashiness, but you have to think about your target market and not your personal preferences. The "random picture" on the homepage is the size of my thumbnail. Look at Flickr's homepage - that *screams* photography! Yours.. mutters something about a photos.. 2. Tours. Some people are stupid. Or, they just want somewhere to stick their photos. They *don't* want to spend ages surfing around your site, trying to find in the smallprint what you're offering. Research has shown that you have an average of 3 seconds to catch the average surfer's attention. Your site doesn't do this - make it clear on the front page. Huge text should do the trick. 3. 10MB is not enough space. You are severely restricting your userbase (from anyone who has photos they want storing) to only those people who have a few small photos and don't mind them being resized. Even 130 pictures will only cover 1 holiday. 4. I've only just noticed that I can't view photos without creating an account first. How do you expect people to sign up without giving them a decent example of the photo and hosting quality they can expect? Please, please start listening and accepting the advice and criticisms you've been given.