> Took me about 65sec to load 'Singaporean Ice Cream Vendor....
Took ~70 seconds to load "Mosque", which is 119k, so that's definitely
slower than either the link at my end or a 64k link at your end. Also, 119k
for a 430x640 image is overkill as far as quality goes -- saving at 75%
quality is indistinguishable to my eyes, and only 64k. It looks like you
saved the original at 90-95%, which is fine if you want to make prints or
are on a super-high bandwidth link, but for web pages it's not so important.
While ideally the pictures there would be perfect representations of the
original print/slide, if nobody can wait long enough to download them then
the quality's irrelevant..
As far as image size goes, I've been scaling things to 800 wide for
landscape format, or 600 high for portrait; that way in IE at 1024x768
desktop you don't have to scroll or go fullscreen to see it all.
The same applies to the thumbnails, only more so -- they're so small that
you can get away with really low quality, and on a page of thumbnails where
there's a lot of images every saving counts -- you can get away with 60%
there easily, if not lower.
-- dan
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|