<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Things that make you look like an amateur on the web, part 1: images</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sillybean.net/2005/05/things-that-make-you-look-like-an-amateur-on-the-web-part-1-images/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sillybean.net/2005/05/things-that-make-you-look-like-an-amateur-on-the-web-part-1-images/</link>
	<description>reading, writing, web design, and the intersections thereof</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:13:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrea</title>
		<link>http://www.sillybean.net/2005/05/things-that-make-you-look-like-an-amateur-on-the-web-part-1-images/comment-page-1/#comment-264</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2005 18:17:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sillybean.net/archives/649/#comment-264</guid>
		<description>STeph, you are right on the money with this. There are so many web sites that do stuff like this it led me to my golden web rule: just because you can doesn't mean you should (hey, George Lucas and other CGI people, I'm looking at you too). 

Oh, amen on the glamour shots! They really look ridiculous and feed that stereotypical image of romance, which adds to the hurdles of the genre being taken somewhat seriously. So 80s. A Stacy-and-Clinton style makeover is a much better idea and would certainly be more professional. Down with glamour shots! ;)
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>STeph, you are right on the money with this. There are so many web sites that do stuff like this it led me to my golden web rule: just because you can doesn&#8217;t mean you should (hey, George Lucas and other <span class="caps">CGI </span>people, I&#8217;m looking at you too). </p>
<p>Oh, amen on the glamour shots! They really look ridiculous and feed that stereotypical image of romance, which adds to the hurdles of the genre being taken somewhat seriously. So 80s. A Stacy-and-Clinton style makeover is a much better idea and would certainly be more professional. Down with glamour shots! ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
