 | | Picture file sizes
|
|
If I want to publish a picture on the web, what file size should I be shooting for. Can anyone give me some guide lines of what is excessive size, what is good? Thanks LINC (26 years ago, 16-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) I try to keep file sizes at less than 50k - preferably in the range of 10K to 30K. Typically, you should be able to get a picture that is around 600x400 or less in size down to less than 40K and still end up with a good JPG image. Do your best (...) (26 years ago, 16-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) Unless of course you have a thumbnailed image you click on to get to that. (26 years ago, 16-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) Nah, not even then. If the picture is something you want people to see, you should not subject them to a huge file. It's just not necessary to have really large jpg file sizes. Show me a 640x480 200K jpg file, and I bet you it could be reduced (...) (26 years ago, 17-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) Yup. Keep in mind that there is a strong contingent in your readership that doesn't really care for thumbnails. I want to see your page, laid out and designed to present the information to me in a coherent story, not just a grid of thumbnails (...) (26 years ago, 17-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) I did that (one big page) on my SpiderWalker page but the images were pretty small there (320x240). I think what Terry did is a good compromise between "one big page" and "not too small per page," seeing as some people on the net still run (...) (26 years ago, 17-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) It's not a matter of "subjecting to", it's a matter of "offering the option of". (...) In a lot of cases, probably. But I think you're over-generalizing -- consider for example the images at (URL), which are designed for transfer to another (...) (26 years ago, 17-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) True enough. Options are good. (...) Sure, exceptions do exist. For instance, I've been considering adding optional PNG format files in addition to the JPG files for some of the renderings I publish. Why? Because that way the viewer can view (...) (26 years ago, 18-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
(...) I gnawed on that question for a while. Finally I opted for fewer pictures per page just to keep it cleaner, with less scrolling required. I also attempted to balance the image loading times with the average time taken to read the descriptive (...) (26 years ago, 18-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
How about file sizes for animations? What's the best file type to use which will balance quality and size? Is animation even worth adding? I've been playing around with animation of pov scenes, but the files get large pretty quick. -John Van Linc (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Picture file sizes
|
|
> How about file sizes for animations? What's the best file type > to use which will balance quality and size? Just as a rule of thumb, you should allow 1 second of download time for every 1K on your page (including the HTML file itself). A 56K (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-98, to lugnet.publish)
|
