For I am captured once again.
Jan. 27th, 2006 12:05 pmreddragdiva.co.uk is go! I've decided that'll be the photo gallery and davidgerard.co.uk (which at this writing is still a redirect to the old site) will be the ordinary web page. The shots from last B-Movie are the first things up (captioning today); more will follow, particularly when(ever) I get the laptop back to life. Photo policy. Note that full-size pics don't work yet.
Comments and suggestions are most welcomed — if you didn't know who I was and I took a picture of you and told you the site address, what would you think when you saw the site?
I won't be shifting things from the Fotopic site; new stuff will go up here. Coppermine appears to do what I want without pissing me off too much, though we'll see how it goes moving its MySQL tables from revenants to iio.
Tonight is Dreadnought, in a converted toilet (though not yellow). I hope to go to this if I can convince my body the tickle in my throat is tiredness and not a cold.
redcountess has photos up of her doll
Ren's new faceup. Who does she first bring to mind for you?
Update: Vain goths wanted! I want to print off cards to hand to people I don't know when I take their picture and they ask what it's for, with a small black-and-white photo from either site. Who would like to be on some? Please nominate yourself and the picture. You can nominate your favourite pictures of others if you like, but you have to convince them it's a good idea ;-)
Update 2: Dreadnought probably not a happener tonight after all. Ah well. Perhaps next month.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 12:17 pm (UTC)[By the way, I have to squint to read the "49 files, last one added on Jan 26, 2006" text -- I think a combination of the small bold font and wonderful antialiasing has fuzzed it up a bit. Everything else is readable enough, allowing for the dark scheme; perhaps make that font match that of the filenames / "x views"?]
(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 12:18 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 12:34 pm (UTC)Just gave it a quick look on IE, and I see what you mean -- the
font-size: 85%;seems to be the culprit, which makes it look intentional. My old CSS reference notes that IE's support for thefont-sizeattribute is "partial / quirky" so perhaps it's ignoring it completely or mucking up inheritance, while Firefox is showing it as the designer intended? Bleh.(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 07:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 08:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 12:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 01:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 01:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 01:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 01:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 03:18 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-27 05:34 pm (UTC)Someday I'll send you a picture of me in my Kipchak garb. :)