> Decent size.
> Not too attractive to me, as it means yet another down sample size and
> resharpening settings/masks.
Well, individuals can change the size in their own galleries, but I'm
just looking for a standard point that works best for the majority of
users. If we make the standard size too large, it slows down the
viewer's experience too much unless we force a higher compression
ratio. I'd rather not have Hostgator shut me down because I'm abusing
the network. (remember, I've got several other sites running too on my
account).
> Who's using a 1024 screen? My little 11" netbook is 1366; the new iPad is
> 2048. even the iPhone 5 is 1136.
It's not just screen width, but also download speeds. There are a LOT
of people using wireless. And more and more people are using tablets
for viewing.
> So as yet not up to the LUG implementation. It seems it gets around the
> template limits by opening a new
> browser window for the full size image.
I need specifics on this. If LUG's standard width is greater then the
question is what happens to the thumbnails to the right. I believe
that at this time we still need to support a viewing experience of
1024 width. Many of us have old, ancient steam-powered iPads. A
different theme would place the thumbnails in a different position,
but this theme is really quite preferable, I think.
> I do think KISS applies here, especially at first. Get it up, stable,
> familiar to users. Later, consider add-ons.
Thank you. My feelings, precisely.
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|