Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/06/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] critique
From: Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 06:21:21 +0200
References: <EC1D893EF5042348ADC8A79B742E9EFB6D8FD5@GCI-MOCEX01.us.ad.gannett.com> <002301c217dd$efab7e00$6501a8c0@winona1.mn.home.com>

Hi Tom,

I run at 1024x768 which I believe is at the lower end of the readership here. So
assuming that my own setup is the lowest common denominator, I always size my
pictures so that they are 750 pixels across for horizontal shots (the height
then falls somewhere around 500), or 600 pixels tall for vertical shots
(resulting in a width of about 400). This leaves just sufficient space for the
browser menus at the top and on the left and does not force the viewer to scroll
around the image.

Nathan

Tom Smart wrote:

> What are we thinking is a better size for critique?  I was thinking 384
> pixels on the vertical dimensions fits it onto screens with 640x480
> resolution, but larger than that makes some people scroll to see the full
> size.  My own monitor is 1280x1024, but what is standard these days.  Thanks
> to all for the comments.
>
> Tom

- --
Nathan Wajsman
Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland

e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch
mobile: +41 78 732 1430

Photo-A-Week: http://www.wajsman.com/indexpaw2002.htm
General photo site: http://www.wajsman.com/index.htm


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Jim Hemenway <jim@hemenway.com> (Re: [Leica] critique)
In reply to: Message from "Zeissler, Mitch" <mzeissle@gannett.com> (RE: [Leica] critique)
Message from "Tom Smart" <tom@sleepytom.com> (Re: [Leica] critique)