Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    I looked at a website where there was a JPEG picture (defined in the HTML as size 300 x 190) which downloaded very slowly.
    I did Save Picture As, and found it was about <big>1.8 MB</big> in file size, and about 3000 x 1900!!
    Presumably once this 1.8 MB got downloaded, it was then rendered as 300 x 190, and 99% of the information was binned.

    So, if I'm going to use PSP to resize the graphic, what size should I make it?
    Exactly the same size as the definition in the HTML (viz. 300 x 190)? This would give minimum file size/download size.
    Or a multiple of this (say 600 x 380)?
    Or some other size which has a matching horizontal to vertical ratio?

    All reasoned arguments encouraged!

    Thanks

    John
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  2. #2
    Silver Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,862
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    As a rule of thumb, I always size an image to the smallest possible dimensions. Including the size tags in the HTML is optional, but can help format a page while images are still downloading. So that makes it a good practice.

    I get VERY upset when I see web pages that have VERY large images resized to a small pixel dimension (such as the one you mentioned). That indicates that the author did not resize/resample the image to make it web optimized. I've seen pages that should have been less than 30KB end up over 1.5MB due to oversized pictures. In modem-speed download time that translates to 10 seconds vs. about 8 minutes!!

    Unfortunately, this is typically done by authors who know very little (if anything) about HTML. This is rampant among novice users of FrontPage (no offense to anyone reading this). I haven't checked in the latest versions of FP, but I would hope that Microsoft has automated the image resizing process for those who forget to do it manually. Another thing that I've noticed is that the wide proliferation of broadband users has let many web authors get away with grossly oversized pages (images, flash content, music, etc) because the large size doesn't take as long to download. (I have no problem with high-bandwidth web pages, just ones that are poorly optimized.)

    In addition to the obvious waste of bandwidth and download time, another reason for resizing is that an image will not look as sharp when resized by the browser. The quality of the small image will appear MUCH cleaner when done properly with a graphics application.

    I can think of no good reason to resize a large image using HTML. All reasons I can think of point to always resampling it to the native size prior to displaying.

    Hope this helps!

  3. #3
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    12,560
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    For a quicker way of resizing I use the "Image Resizer" form MS Powertools for XP. It will let you select the desired screen size including a pocket PC. It is very FAST and works.

    Now running HP Pavilion a6528p, with Win7 64 Bit OS.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator jscher2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, USA
    Posts
    23,112
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 93 Times in 89 Posts

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    Your choice of size depends on its purpose. As eye candy on the browser only, go for 96ppi to fill the desired space. For printing, 180ppi will yield acceptable quality in most cases.

  5. #5
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    Mark: some very good points in your reply, thanks! I conclude that I should make the JPEG image resolution to be the same size as I wish to display it at (sorry about the mangled sentence!)

    Dave: yes, I've used the XP Image Resizer PowerToy on all my OzPics, to create directories containing the JPEGs at three different resolutions (Small, Medium and UsesFarTooMuchDiskSpace, since you ask!). I will see how its Advanced Mode operates. (Incidentally, do you have any idea what the "[/i]Make pictures smaller but not larger[/i]" option actually means?!)

    Jefferson: it really is someone's website, so I simply want the picture to be screen-displayable in the HTML-hard-coded size, without having to download huge amounts of surplus data.

    John
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  6. #6
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    12,560
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    "Make pictures smaller but not larger"
    You can NOT make a small image into a large image if this is checked, but with NO check you can. The results will be what one would expect, a bad image.

    Now running HP Pavilion a6528p, with Win7 64 Bit OS.

  7. #7
    Platinum Lounger
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Quedgeley, Gloucester, England
    Posts
    5,333
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    Dave

    Oh, it's that boring is it? I was expecting some fine interplay about larger resolution but smaller filesize (or vice versa)!

    John
    <font face="Script MT Bold"><font color=blue><big><big>John</big></big></font color=blue></font face=script>

    Ita, esto, quidcumque...

  8. #8
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    12,560
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Re: Correct website sloth diagnosis?

    It is almost useless, but if it is checked, and you select a long list of images and some are very small, you will NOT get a new one(s) that is messed up.

    Now running HP Pavilion a6528p, with Win7 64 Bit OS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •