








(4)
Your rating: Now say why...



| Downloads:21,793 |
| Version Downloads:653 |
| Type:Development : HTML |
| License:Demo |
| Date:10 Aug 2011 |
| Platform:Intel |
| Price: $21.00 |
Overall (Version 3.x):![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Features:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ease of Use:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Value:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Stability:![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
J_ph reviewed on 27 Apr 2012
I do use Rapidweaver for other sites, but Shutterbug works perfectly for a photogallery with really easier formatting of thumbnails and layout, and the more that I dig in the more I like it. Sure there are some things that I'd like a little better but for the cost and ease of use... it's darn good and has it's place amongst the other website applications.
+1
+47
Vinkri reviewed on 08 Nov 2011
I'm a Rapidweaver user. Never found better, even though I'd like to find a simple tool, dedicated to productivity, like a text editor that doesn't require any coding AT ALL.
So, I tried Shutterbug.
Gee! Couldn't get it.
Interface is awfully ugly and out of date, text options are... ridiculous. navigation with unnecessary clicks, use of templates is puzzling...
Pagestyles are unique (no, really. Only one kind: picture(s)+text. The legend says you can embed other medias. But really, I didn't like it enough to bother looking for this hidden gem)
Could have been great, like, 20 years ago.
+3
+3
Rt Ideas reviewed on 25 Jul 2011
From their online manual dates 2006-2009:
"Revert: The revert feature lets you revert back to one of the previous Saves you made in the event you make a mistake . . . Undo will be added to a future version of ShutterBug."
I bought two copies two years ago: one for me and one for a client for self-maintenance.
It worked okay for what I needed to do at the time, but without undo, it kills any creative flow, and it constantly put me on edge fearing that I'd screw up the layout, or worse.
+1
+264
-1
+264
+3
+29
Peter Sichel reviewed on 24 May 2010
About the only things ShutterBug doesn't handle gracefully are anchors within a web page and HTML tables, but there are work arounds for the later. When I had a question about creating generic Next and Previous page links, the developer was quick to respond.
There is a modest learning curve to using ShutterBug, but it's not much harder than iWeb. While RapidWeaver gets a lot of attention these days, it's more expensive and expects you keep buying add-on templates. ShutterBug is simpler and includes ImageWell for working with your images. For what I wanted, ShutterBug offers terrific value.
+1
+264
Drdul reviewed on 12 Nov 2009
Shutterbug gets full points for stability, speed and value. It's fairly easy to use, but there is a learning curve. After working my way through the manual and playing around with it for a couple of hours, I was able to quickly build a web site from scratch. As a testament to its ease of use, I've been able to do everything I want to do without resorting to searching the on-line support forum or contacting the developer.
It is incredibly easy to modify or add to a website once it has been created in Shutterbug. I used to delay updating my website because it was a tedious exercise, but with Shutterbug, changes take just a few minutes.
Shutterbug has almost all the features I want. The only noticeable missing feature for me is the ability to easily modify the colour of a piece of text within a larger block of text. It would also be nice to have more options for including and excluding items within navigation elements, but in the grand scheme of things that's only a minor complaint. Overall, I am one satisfied customer!
+3
-10
this app is the phenix among all available web content creators !!
5 stars for all relevant criteria (one who knows) !!!
+4
+39
memphisbird reviewed on 08 Jun 2007
I usually use Dreamweaver, but I wanted to try something new, have more options for quick and dirty sites. I've had Rapidweaver for a while and used it very little. I've spent the last three days really digging in and creating a couple of sites and trying almost every aspect of it. I tried to rebuild a site I already had created on Dreamweaver to see if I could possibly use RW in its place. Finally, yesterday afternoon, I quit RW and resorted to Dreamweaver.
This morning, I got the MacUpdate email saying Shutterbug had been updated and I dutifully downloaded it again, since it was on my Watch List and I had downloaded it a couple of months ago, played with it for about 30 minutes and that was that. This time, I put far more time into it and I am floored. I am also mad as hell at myself for not working more with it sooner -- live and learn. It is so EASY to change EVERYTHING in the themes! When I think of the time I spent changing the CSS files and the image files in RW to make the theme more like what I wanted ... please, somebody shoot me now.
ImageWell is built right into Shutterbug -- and I've been using ImageWell as a standalone -- so you can edit your images from within Shutterbug. You can add flash, Quicktime movies, extra HTML ... and it's all so easy. I applied a couple of new themes, just checking them out, making all kinds of changes, then asked it to revert. Shutterbug gave me all kinds of options! Do I want to revert to the first saved version or the autosaved version after I switched to the second theme or the autosave after I switch to the second theme ... how cool is that!
As with anything like this, there is a learning curve, but I can see myself getting done in less than a day what took me three days to do in RW.
I am so sorry that I let the name mislead me. I put off working with it because I thought I don't do that much with photo galleries. Don't make the same costly mistakes I made. Check out Shutterbug -- REALLY check it out.
-2
+31
musi reviewed on 07 Jun 2007
+1
+3
As for SJJ_PUBLIC's complaint about templates, he (or she) is looking in the wrong place to start designing a website. ShutterBug has many Themes with preview panes. Templates become useful only after selecting a Theme.
Me Mu rated on 31 Mar 2012
buddymedbery rated on 11 Aug 2011
+1
Aragorn07 rated on 12 Feb 2011