Portfolio 52 Disappointment
Moderator: Playing Card DB Mod
- tonyricciardi
- Member
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:22 am
- Collector: Yes
- Decks Owned: 1200
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Portfolio 52 Disappointment
As an avid user of Portfolio 52, I have to admit I am very disappointed in the current state of the site. I find the new UI very clunky and not intuitive. The icons are far to large and the organization is worse than the previous version. The lack of community and being able to contact users about decks in their trade list is also disappointing.
I used the previous version almost daily and I'm now finding myself using the site less and less. I've actually stopped adding decks to it.
Unfortunate, but I'm not sure what Alex's long term plans are for the site.
Hopefully things improve and he returns to making the site the invaluable resource it used to be.
I used the previous version almost daily and I'm now finding myself using the site less and less. I've actually stopped adding decks to it.
Unfortunate, but I'm not sure what Alex's long term plans are for the site.
Hopefully things improve and he returns to making the site the invaluable resource it used to be.
- wingedpotato
- Member
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:45 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- White Whale: Cardistry-Con Tally Ho 2018
- Decks Owned: 600
- Has thanked: 784 times
- Been thanked: 384 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
I admit I am still in the "honeymoon phase" as I finish adding my collection to the site, and I never experienced the old site's functionality, but I agree that social functionality needs to expand if it will ever become a true community of collectors. I also hope we'll see some momentum in that arena.
- IAmTheChin
- ✔ VERIFIED Designer
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:58 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- Magician: Yes
- Decks Owned: 300
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 496 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
Hey Tony,
I understand your concerns about progression. I have them as well. There were some clearly laid plans but developing the site costs a lot. I maxed out my personal budget on the site to getting it to what it is now and had to stop short. I'm hoping to start up the new build list in the next two weeks.
Regarding your thoughts on the intuitive UI could you tell me more? I made the new site based on actual feedback from people before so to me I thought it was going to be more intuitive. Easier to view numbers at a glance and handle multiples as well with notes. Regarding the messaging that was a privacy issue. We have that in the next build list along with notifications which will hopefully help with the trading.
Regarding community, what did you specifically find from the previous version that you don't find on the new one? Was there something besides the messaging? Let me know and I'll try to have that in the build list as well. Hopefully this next month will get you back and engaged again.
-Alex
I understand your concerns about progression. I have them as well. There were some clearly laid plans but developing the site costs a lot. I maxed out my personal budget on the site to getting it to what it is now and had to stop short. I'm hoping to start up the new build list in the next two weeks.
Regarding your thoughts on the intuitive UI could you tell me more? I made the new site based on actual feedback from people before so to me I thought it was going to be more intuitive. Easier to view numbers at a glance and handle multiples as well with notes. Regarding the messaging that was a privacy issue. We have that in the next build list along with notifications which will hopefully help with the trading.
Regarding community, what did you specifically find from the previous version that you don't find on the new one? Was there something besides the messaging? Let me know and I'll try to have that in the build list as well. Hopefully this next month will get you back and engaged again.
-Alex
Manage Your Collections with
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
- ecNate
- Member
- Posts: 2099
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:46 am
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- Decks Owned: 400
- Location: Wisconsin
- Has thanked: 420 times
- Been thanked: 440 times
- Contact:
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
Alex, see Tony's prior posting on this here - viewtopic.php?f=58&t=9662
I also am not a fan of the huge header and the larger images and how the margins on a large screen don't properly use the full width of my wide monitor. The giant font size doesn't help either. I have an older 27" wide screen monitor which even now is still pretty big and higher resolution, but I can only fit 8 decks on a screen at a time (plus 4 partials) even though there is enough empty space on the sides to support another 3 more columns (total of 14). If the sizes were also reduced a little even more could fit. The details/alternate view helps a little, but then just does one per row and a total of just 10. Personally it's not a big deal for me, but for somebody who wants to browse or see a full collection it's a ton of scrolling. On the plus side, at least it will auto load decks as it scrolls compared to prior versions where you had to click a button.
It really comes down to how the margins for the site are implemented/enforced. However, to be fair here, MOST sites now take this approach and have pre-set size that doesn't change no matter how much space is actually available (see Facebook) . I believe this is to better account for multiple screen sizes, resolutions, including mobile. Vs trying to dynamically determine the size of font, images and layout depending on size which would be more involved. As an example, trying zooming browser in/out (ctrl+mouse wheel) or just resize browser window and see how this site and others respond. Some will adjust content to fill the space, others just add more 'white space'.
I'm attaching some examples from the full collection view, the first is zoomed out to show all the extra white space, the second is the giant header that you have to scroll past each time, the third is the most decks I can fit on a page without resizing and notice still the extra white space. Again, I personally don't see this as a huge issue, just a little annoying and the way of life in today's websites, but there might be some things that could be done and it might be possible to find workaround solutions or minor changes once you understand the specific concerns. For example, a trade off would be seeing if you can find a way to have a 'my collection at a glance' view added, even if implemented more like a report structure and static table dynamically generated to show more at once with smaller images and wider width? That way you don't have to try and solve the dynamic screen size problem and still provide an option for those that want a full listing.
I also am not a fan of the huge header and the larger images and how the margins on a large screen don't properly use the full width of my wide monitor. The giant font size doesn't help either. I have an older 27" wide screen monitor which even now is still pretty big and higher resolution, but I can only fit 8 decks on a screen at a time (plus 4 partials) even though there is enough empty space on the sides to support another 3 more columns (total of 14). If the sizes were also reduced a little even more could fit. The details/alternate view helps a little, but then just does one per row and a total of just 10. Personally it's not a big deal for me, but for somebody who wants to browse or see a full collection it's a ton of scrolling. On the plus side, at least it will auto load decks as it scrolls compared to prior versions where you had to click a button.
It really comes down to how the margins for the site are implemented/enforced. However, to be fair here, MOST sites now take this approach and have pre-set size that doesn't change no matter how much space is actually available (see Facebook) . I believe this is to better account for multiple screen sizes, resolutions, including mobile. Vs trying to dynamically determine the size of font, images and layout depending on size which would be more involved. As an example, trying zooming browser in/out (ctrl+mouse wheel) or just resize browser window and see how this site and others respond. Some will adjust content to fill the space, others just add more 'white space'.
I'm attaching some examples from the full collection view, the first is zoomed out to show all the extra white space, the second is the giant header that you have to scroll past each time, the third is the most decks I can fit on a page without resizing and notice still the extra white space. Again, I personally don't see this as a huge issue, just a little annoying and the way of life in today's websites, but there might be some things that could be done and it might be possible to find workaround solutions or minor changes once you understand the specific concerns. For example, a trade off would be seeing if you can find a way to have a 'my collection at a glance' view added, even if implemented more like a report structure and static table dynamically generated to show more at once with smaller images and wider width? That way you don't have to try and solve the dynamic screen size problem and still provide an option for those that want a full listing.
My card collection ('in hand' only) on Portfolio52 (the playing card database)
My wishlist, contact me if you have one to sell, let's chat! (My marketplace review thread)
My card collection thread here at UC
♠️ ♦️ My currently featured deck from my collection at Portfolio 52: Vanity Fair No 41 ♥️ ♣️
As a UC member you are encouraged to contribute/join Portfolio52, the greatest card collection site (FacebookPage)!
My wishlist, contact me if you have one to sell, let's chat! (My marketplace review thread)
My card collection thread here at UC
♠️ ♦️ My currently featured deck from my collection at Portfolio 52: Vanity Fair No 41 ♥️ ♣️
As a UC member you are encouraged to contribute/join Portfolio52, the greatest card collection site (FacebookPage)!
- tonyricciardi
- Member
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:22 am
- Collector: Yes
- Decks Owned: 1200
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
- IAmTheChin
- ✔ VERIFIED Designer
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:58 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- Magician: Yes
- Decks Owned: 300
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 496 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
ecNate wrote: It really comes down to how the margins for the site are implemented/enforced. However, to be fair here, MOST sites now take this approach and have pre-set size that doesn't change no matter how much space is actually available (see Facebook) . I believe this is to better account for multiple screen sizes, resolutions, including mobile. Vs trying to dynamically determine the size of font, images and layout depending on size which would be more involved. As an example, trying zooming browser in/out (ctrl+mouse wheel) or just resize browser window and see how this site and others respond. Some will adjust content to fill the space, others just add more 'white space'.
For example, a trade off would be seeing if you can find a way to have a 'my collection at a glance' view added, even if implemented more like a report structure and static table dynamically generated to show more at once with smaller images and wider width? That way you don't have to try and solve the dynamic screen size problem and still provide an option for those that want a full listing.
Yeah the margins were based on dynamic sizing for different devices. I'll look into seeing if we can make it fill out the margins for scaling up with larger screens but at the time I was prioritizing getting it to scale down properly for devices.
Regarding the 'collection at a glance', could you elaborate a bit more? If I'm understanding correctly you just want to see more decks filling the maximum screen size to get the most information possible at a single view? Originally this was the intention where you could set preferences for thumbnail size and amount of rows but getting it to work dynamically was hard. My confusion in the suggestion is how we would be implementing this without having the responsive screen problem? Would people just be scrolling with horizontal and vertical bars if I'm understanding correctly?
To make an easier polling question:
A) Would you rather have modifiable thumbnail sizes with the same size margins on each side? So you could view 4, 6, or 8 columns with smaller thumbnails but have the same white space on the sides. The smaller thumbnails would also mean more rows per screen as well.
B) Would you rather have the same thumbnail sizes but have the decks fill out the margins? This would be more responsive to larger screens.
Ideally we'd do both but had trouble combining the two in the backend last time. If we could prioritize one that we preferred for now that would be a big first step.
Manage Your Collections with
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
- tonyricciardi
- Member
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:22 am
- Collector: Yes
- Decks Owned: 1200
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 17 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
Alex,
If I had to put a list together, I suppose it would be this.
1.) The icon size is difficult to deal with. In the previous version, I thought the deck icon size was very good. I would have liked it to have been even a little smaller, but it was good. My rationale is that the collection view is meant to be seen as a whole. Having 4 gigantic icons doesnt serve that purpose. It requires those with large collections to scroll endlessly to look through the collection. If we want to see a larger view of the deck, perhaps have a hover that zooms in, or simply click the icon and go to the info page which has a large icon, front and back. In my opinion the collection view is for reference, info page is for details.
2.) The head is far too large and not useful in any way. It doesnt really serve any purpose other than to personalize the page. It's a nice idea, but only adds to the increased size of everything which doesnt really add anything.
3.) In the list view, I think it would be far more useful to have the manufacturer and release date info rather than a rating. I don't completely understand the concept of the rating. What exactly are we rating? The design? The usability? The creativity? The quality of the stock? The price? There are so many variables in "rating" something, I don't know how useful it is. Personally, I've never rated a deck nor have I looked at the ratings. If you do stick with ratings, then you may want to consider having that as a sort option.
4.) Info Page - Maybe it was just me, but in the new version, I had no idea how to add new cards to the collection. It's a cute idea to have the P52 logo as the add button, but it's completely not intuitive. I would have a simple +/- button as youd find on any similar website. I would also add arrow buttons to scroll through the gallery images of the deck rather than scroll down the page.
5.) Community - This was the most shocking revelation. I was attempting to reach out to another member who had a deck I was interested in. I then realized that component was removed. I understand it is being re-added which is wonderful news. If needed, you could include in the TOS the verbiage associated with the community and the possibility of being contacted by other members. The trading aspect was such a big part of the site previously, it is a glaring omission to not have it there now.
That's about it for now. If I could remember exactly how the old site operated, I might have some more useful comments, but I honestly don't recall all of it.
I hope this helps in some way.
Thank you for creating this and for your dedication to this wonderful project. I would also consider a kickstarter or gofundme campaign for it. I would gladly contribute. Perhaps you could offer some Seasons decks or other items as incentives. It would give you some funding to help keep this project alive.
As always, Thank you Alex.
If I had to put a list together, I suppose it would be this.
1.) The icon size is difficult to deal with. In the previous version, I thought the deck icon size was very good. I would have liked it to have been even a little smaller, but it was good. My rationale is that the collection view is meant to be seen as a whole. Having 4 gigantic icons doesnt serve that purpose. It requires those with large collections to scroll endlessly to look through the collection. If we want to see a larger view of the deck, perhaps have a hover that zooms in, or simply click the icon and go to the info page which has a large icon, front and back. In my opinion the collection view is for reference, info page is for details.
2.) The head is far too large and not useful in any way. It doesnt really serve any purpose other than to personalize the page. It's a nice idea, but only adds to the increased size of everything which doesnt really add anything.
3.) In the list view, I think it would be far more useful to have the manufacturer and release date info rather than a rating. I don't completely understand the concept of the rating. What exactly are we rating? The design? The usability? The creativity? The quality of the stock? The price? There are so many variables in "rating" something, I don't know how useful it is. Personally, I've never rated a deck nor have I looked at the ratings. If you do stick with ratings, then you may want to consider having that as a sort option.
4.) Info Page - Maybe it was just me, but in the new version, I had no idea how to add new cards to the collection. It's a cute idea to have the P52 logo as the add button, but it's completely not intuitive. I would have a simple +/- button as youd find on any similar website. I would also add arrow buttons to scroll through the gallery images of the deck rather than scroll down the page.
5.) Community - This was the most shocking revelation. I was attempting to reach out to another member who had a deck I was interested in. I then realized that component was removed. I understand it is being re-added which is wonderful news. If needed, you could include in the TOS the verbiage associated with the community and the possibility of being contacted by other members. The trading aspect was such a big part of the site previously, it is a glaring omission to not have it there now.
That's about it for now. If I could remember exactly how the old site operated, I might have some more useful comments, but I honestly don't recall all of it.
I hope this helps in some way.
Thank you for creating this and for your dedication to this wonderful project. I would also consider a kickstarter or gofundme campaign for it. I would gladly contribute. Perhaps you could offer some Seasons decks or other items as incentives. It would give you some funding to help keep this project alive.
As always, Thank you Alex.
- wingedpotato
- Member
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:45 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- White Whale: Cardistry-Con Tally Ho 2018
- Decks Owned: 600
- Has thanked: 784 times
- Been thanked: 384 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
I'd prefer Option A, as I think B wouldn't solve what people are actually asking for. I know responsive web design can be super tricky depending on how a site is initially built.
- wingedpotato
- Member
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:45 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- White Whale: Cardistry-Con Tally Ho 2018
- Decks Owned: 600
- Has thanked: 784 times
- Been thanked: 384 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
I noticed on the Discover page, the decks are now slightly smaller and in rows of 5 on my computer. Looks nice! The "newest" filter doesn't seem to be working, however, as it no longer shows the most recently added decks. Also, not sure if it is intentional, but my collection still shows as the larger, 4 across configuration (unless I just need to clear my cache...).
- ecNate
- Member
- Posts: 2099
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:46 am
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- Decks Owned: 400
- Location: Wisconsin
- Has thanked: 420 times
- Been thanked: 440 times
- Contact:
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
Clearing cache (CTRL-5) did help correct a display issue for me where it was using a single column. Alex is in the middle of a few updates and fitting some things in early with others to follow this week, including PM system if all goes to plan. You will notice that the search/discover view has new selections for icon size if you hover over the grid icon. It's a little buggy still and not yet moved to individual collections, but a start!
Alex is aware of the newest not working, hopefully will be corrected with the other changes later this week.
There is also a rudimentary export option as well
Alex is aware of the newest not working, hopefully will be corrected with the other changes later this week.
My card collection ('in hand' only) on Portfolio52 (the playing card database)
My wishlist, contact me if you have one to sell, let's chat! (My marketplace review thread)
My card collection thread here at UC
♠️ ♦️ My currently featured deck from my collection at Portfolio 52: Vanity Fair No 41 ♥️ ♣️
As a UC member you are encouraged to contribute/join Portfolio52, the greatest card collection site (FacebookPage)!
My wishlist, contact me if you have one to sell, let's chat! (My marketplace review thread)
My card collection thread here at UC
♠️ ♦️ My currently featured deck from my collection at Portfolio 52: Vanity Fair No 41 ♥️ ♣️
As a UC member you are encouraged to contribute/join Portfolio52, the greatest card collection site (FacebookPage)!
- IAmTheChin
- ✔ VERIFIED Designer
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:58 pm
- Collector: Yes
- Player: Yes
- Magician: Yes
- Decks Owned: 300
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 496 times
Re: Portfolio 52 Disappointment
It's in progress that will hopefully be addressed this week along with the new messaging system. The dropdown list for filters is being updated. I realized that "newest" was showing the most recently uploaded to the site but people were also wanting to search by year and so "newest" was being confused by different people for upload time vs. production year.wingedpotato wrote:Looks nice! The "newest" filter doesn't seem to be working, however, as it no longer shows the most recently added decks.
It's being clarified with "newest" as in year of the deck and "recent" which will show the recently added decks to the site (that you see on the front page).
Manage Your Collections with
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
http://www.Portfolio52.com
Every collection starts somewhere. Start your saga. Start with Seasons.
http://www.SeasonsPlayingCards.com
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 67 guests