My wife has at least 3 different apps that let her drop text on images before posting to Instagram. But everyone uses Instagram on their phone, so a web-app doesn't really work here. And the Instagram API is read only at the moment.
What might be confusing from a UI point of view, is that the example images on the top right look like a banner you are supposed to click on to get to the main site (to me at least).
If you would have done eye-tracking on me when I was using this, I was first drawn to the face (people always look first at faces), then I went down to where it said "No images? Click on one of these.". That might be because the woman in the picture is sort of looking in this direction. After that I looked to the where the logo is "pinwords, instantly ...".
I noticed that this is a repost of a submission originally titled 'Show HN: My side project helps you add beautiful text on pinterest images '. That post garnered just five upvotes and no comments.
Clearly, you've garnered more attention with this post. What prompted you to try this particular verbiage instead? Do you think timing played a factor?
Seeing that you cannot link to a page but must hot-link to the image then I am failing to see how the source is kept.
For example, here is a regular pin for http://www.thesartorialist.com/photos/on-the-street-somewher..., http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642005/. The content is shown as coming from thesartorialist.com
Now trying with pinwords.com, I must upload the direct image (which makes sense, how else would it work to mark up the image) which results as http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642015/ The content is shown as coming from thesartorialist.com The content is shown as coming from pinwords.com. Though going into the original pin at pinwords there is no mention of thesartorialist.com in site.
I understand these are how previous bookmarklets have worked for other apps, yet I hate this so much. Not only does it make easier for users to mark up content they may or may not own, it makes it harder for Pinterest to remain mostly true about keeping content creators (the ones who actually produce the content) copyright concerns in mind.
> The page at www.pinwords.com says: Not a valid image.
Which to me, means it's either not able to scan the page for images or only accepts direct links to images.
EDIT: Sorry for editing a question into my comment after you already answered. It's a bad habit.
How did you like working with Fabric.js?
An important caveat is if you have any images in the canvas, they should be hosted on the same domain or you have to resort to CORS workarounds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-origin_resource_sharing
Would be nice to quickly see what this outputs, i.e. browse what people are doing with it. Too lazy to test myself...
Just something for you to think about, maybe your future users run into this problem also.
Overall looks very well polished, GJ and GL.
The live updating as you type is a really nice feature, one that I hadn't even considered yet.
> curl http://www.reddit.com
