Wetlook World ForumCurrent time: Thu 25/04/24 02:35:16 GMT |
Message # 28604.4 Subject: Re: Photo sites, dial-up and image size Date: Sat 21/04/07 00:08:51 GMT Name: WetlookU Email: webmaster@wetlookuniversity.com Website: http://www.wetlookuniversity.com |
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
|
Our photos will avg. 100-200kb each.. They start out between 600-800k but we use a program that reduces the physical size without reducing the resolution of the photo.. It's an extra step we have to take but it reduces load time and server space.... |
In reply to Message (28604) Photo sites, dial-up and image size
By Telcontar - mrnemesis@ntlworld.com Fri 20/04/07 10:18:33 GMT Since MG brought up the issue of dial-up, I thought I'd ask more clearly this time -- are dial-up users happy with photo sites?
The most recent Liquid Ladies photo set, for example, has photos reaching 1 MB per image, which on dial-up would be particularly painful. On average, Liquid Ladies images are about 600 kB each, which would take a little while to get through (something like two minutes!) The thumbnails are too small to substitute as full-size images for dial-up users.
I don't know how other pay sites work, but they all seem to offer large images these days and it must be pretty uncomfortable for dial-up users to get into wetlook at all.
The sites that use Gallery 2, though -- Squishy Shoes and Tub Queens for example -- have thumbnail, medium and (extra) large image sizes all automatically generated. Dial-up users can settle on medium for the most part, and open the large images for those shots that are particularly special (and since some of them are freakin' 8 MP or something -- three times the width of my monitor -- go and have a long soak in the bath in your jeans while the modem sits and thinks about downloading a copy).
Is everyone happy with sites the way they are?
|
Report Abuse or Problem to Nigel at Minxmovies
If you enjoy this forum, then please make a small donation to help with running costs:
(you can change amount)
|
[ This page took 0.014 seconds to generate ]