Is it just eye candy for search?

A colleague sent me a link to the beta version of Searchme's visual search site. I'm pretty impressed (and admittedly it's initially because of the iTunes-style eye candy). It definitely slows down your ability to rifle through search results, but we've learned to specify our search terms by now, right? From what I've gathered through the usability grapevine, users don't go beyond the first page of results.



Upon further use, I've noticed the results which come back aren't as wide as Google's and the keyword filtering seems a little too accurate. For example, using natural language and typing in "how to use a lucky lura at balboa pier" returns no results, but typing in "lucky lura balboa pier" is fine. I think most people probably make use of the latter, but even typing in "lucky lura at balboa pier" doesn't return any results and the only difference is the addition of the word "at". (Maybe I'm using terms which are too obscure, but isn't that what search is for? Ideally you'd want to find exactly what you're looking for, but that's not here yet--for now you just need that scent trail.)

I'd also like to see the results summary for each specific page up front without having to hover over the title at the bottom.

The navigation is simple (click on a site on either side of the main result) or use the slider at the bottom. At the top are filters to narrow your search, a little switch at the bottom allows you to view text and visual results simultaneously, and your keywords are highlighted within the site thumbnail. Dynamic results are also great (why aren't more companies doing this with their data?? Don't force me to go through page reloads!)

Visual search isn't entirely new, but this is the first I've seen that actually communicates results to me in a way that I can understand. Gotta watch this one...