Love it. I'm sure lots of people will like it too. Very polished. I like it that you provide dummy images so impatient people like me don't have to upload an image to test it out.
Not a question about Pinwords (good job, BTW), but...<p>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.<p>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?
Could someone explain how the original content source is kept?<p>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.<p>For example, here is a regular pin for <a href="http://www.thesartorialist.com/photos/on-the-street-somewhere-in-the-rive-gauche-paris/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thesartorialist.com/photos/on-the-street-somewher...</a>, <a href="http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642005/" rel="nofollow">http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642005/</a>. The content is shown as coming from thesartorialist.com<p>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 <a href="http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642015/" rel="nofollow">http://pinterest.com/pin/189151253069642015/</a> 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.<p>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.
Do you have more examples than the ones in the page header?<p>Would be nice to quickly see what this outputs, i.e. browse what people are doing with it. Too lazy to test myself...
Spent a couple of embarrassing seconds clicking on the text on one of the sample windows until I noticed that I had to push the "Next" button to get to that stage…
Uploaded a small picture to test it (the first one I found, about 200x200), the text was so small so I didn't even understand I can re-size it. The words would fit on the image if every word or two goes on each line.<p>Just something for you to think about, maybe your future users run into this problem also.
After you choose a template and press the continue button. There should be a back button if you change your mind. I realize that you can go back clicking on the tip of the template on the top. Which is cool, but not the most intuitive thing in the world.<p>Overall looks very well polished, GJ and GL.
Is that bootstrap.js? Looks great! Barley looks like bootstrap, but after I worked with it on a project, I recognize some characteristic elements. How much work was it to make it look like this?<p>EDIT: Sorry for editing a question into my comment after you already answered. It's a bad habit.
This is really nice. I've been working on a very similar project in fabric.js this past week (captioning a picture, dragging text around on it and posting to facebook and pinterest).<p>The live updating as you type is a really nice feature, one that I hadn't even considered yet.
Interesting but I had a few issues (in Firefox). Using the default text resulted in an image with no text and trying to go back and use a different text caused the Continue button to lock.
Meme generation you say? Well there just might be a simpler way...<p>> curl <a href="http://www.reddit.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com</a>