Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Doug Herr writes: > Anthony, if I may make a suggestion, consider > reducing the size of the image files on your > website. Done. However, the sizes only seemed to diminsh by about 25%. The downloads are large because the images themselves are fairly large (compared to the tiny postage-stamp images that most online galleries seem to have). I compressed them again as much as I could without losing detail. The detail is intact now for the most part but there is a very tiny reduction in contrast, and some loss of smoothness. It didn't seem too bad for a 25% reduction in size, but I wouldn't want to go beyond that. Ideally I'd like to put everything out there at 1600x1200 pixels at least, but most visitors these days are running with 800x600, so that's my target (1024x768 comes in second place, and hardly anyone is running with any other settings nowadays). > I enjoy looking at them but the time to download > the files is exhorbitant for those of us with > slower modems and I run out of patience. I sympathize. At the same time, though, one of the things that bothers me the most about many online galleries I've visited is that the images are so tiny, and so compressed, that it's hard to even see what they contain. It's really difficult to do most photos any justice in 300x200 pixels, and I think a lot of people go to far in reducing their images. Sure, it downloads fast, but you can't even see what you downloaded once it's there. I might be too far over at the other extreme, however, so I have reduced the file sizes a bit (but not the image dimensions) in response to your suggestion.