Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
let me know if the ones i just posted are slow like sleepy hollow...they are around 800x600 they are under 300k... i wonder if compression is a factor and not just size?
just wondering if we are talking delays loading on dial up connections? i know even full size the photos load at my office in 5-10 seconds on a cable modem and about the same on dsl from our pocono house. so im assuming its dial up load times yes?
I'm on a wireless connection (radio tower), which is about the same speed as the typical DSL. Your pictures made it slow to scroll, but they weren't too bad.
Yes, compression is a huge factor in the size. It's file size we're concerned with, so a fair amount of compression makes a big difference in speed of loading, as well as storage space.
I size mine in Photoshop. In it the compression scale runs from 1 to 12 with 12 being the least amount of compression and 1 being the most. I usually use 5 for web photos. As long as you only save it once at that amount of compression, it'll look pretty good. The size difference between 5 and 10 is huge, but more than 5 or 6 doesn't cut the file size too much.
I used to always try to get my images down to 50K, but with the larger screens and faster connections that are now common, I've boosted that up to about 100K as my target size.
One mistake some people make is setting the size in the html code. This will reduce the size of the image displayed, but it does nothing to the size that must load. Please, always resize your image to the correct size before including it in a web page.
the smallest i can get them on smugmug in 800x600 is 200-400k.....
i think if i stick to just 2 or 3 the loading should be fine....
because the origionals have to be maintained in high resolution for sale the links are a little larger than id like in file size. no more than 200k would be perfect.
I agree... too many pictures make blurring and tiring effect on me, while 1-3 even 5 or 10 are perfectly fine to absorb and enjoy. It is like with family albums… we look at the first few pages with interest, then start to flip the pages much faster switching from enjoying the details to merely scanning the pictures. Mathjak: new threads about particular topic, with many pictures are fine – there are always people interested to see just that, and they will enjoy every single picture of it
I've never had any complaints in any thread about pic size. I expect to be some delay in a photography themed forum. Maybe I'm confused as to what is being referred to, missed that thread?
Actually, you are right. I don't remember seeing on this forum pictures that were real big. I think that here might be a problem with posts that contain, lets say 10+ pictures that the thread loads really slow. I cannot judge it because I use real fast Internet connection at work.
I've never had any complaints in any thread about pic size. I expect to be some delay in a photography themed forum. Maybe I'm confused as to what is being referred to, missed that thread?
Just keep on looking at the photos, and sooner or later you will come upon one where the OP has posted eight or more photos at once, and you will understand
Just keep on looking at the photos, and sooner or later you will come upon one where the OP has posted eight or more photos at once, and you will understand
So that is not about the size of individual photo, but rather the combined size of multiple photos posted in one reply. I agree with that!
to bad in this forum they dont allow just posting links to our websites.... they really should make an exception to their rules just for the reasons above.
i know when someone has really great photos seeing 1 or 2 is just a tease,i want to see more. i get sooooo many ideas and thoughts that spur my own creativity from seeing what others do..
yep i admit it, ken rockwell and his photos and articles have influenced me the most... i look at his photos of nothingness and go wow how nice. i never thought of doing this or that.
i find i can spend lots of time looking at others work seeking new ideas and perspectives on the same old stuff.
some like to look at the work of others and critique it ,good or bad...i find i study it as to what did they do that i wouldnt have thought of taking a similiar shot.
by the way if anyone would like to rumage thru our galleries feel free to d/m me for the link, and yes id be honored if you stole some of my ideas which i probley got from someone elses photo's lol
Last edited by mathjak107; 06-16-2010 at 03:00 AM..
to bad in this forum they dont allow just posting links to our websites.... they really should make an exception to their rules just for the reasons above.
I'm not the regular mod in the room, but will try to address this: There's far too many issues with people who try to advertise when folks do this, and it's too much to keep up with.
While many people just have a simple photo page with albums they could link to, unfortunately, there are those who have sites that also do thinks like sell the photos and/or have sponsor or contest links on them, etc. A few times there have been issues in other rooms where links to photo pages where given and it goes to a page that automatically downloads spyware onto someone's computer. So it's really just best if you pick a small sample of your BEST shots for the given topic of a thread, and post those pics in the post.
As other comments have already said, yes, please try to compress your file sizes as best as you can figure out and resize them to a good screen viewable level. I find that 800 pixels in width is the max for a good shot that will fit on smaller monitors and still show up well enough on larger monitors as well. Obviously there's leway for that and not specific set pixel size "rule", but do keep in mind as others have again said, that the guests here all have different speeds of internet connections including (yes - gasp) DIALUP.
It should also be noted that if you ever decide to post a photo that you do not want the general public to possibly use in whatever way they want, you should include a watermark on the pic that slightly marks over the photo without destroying it, so it's not desirable to "steal" - this does happen frequently here and on all sites, where people will snag a photo thinking it's ok to reuse them however they like, and it's not. So if you don't care, post as-is, but if you don't want folks reusing them without your permission, watermark a copy of them before posting them here (saving your original untouched)
Googling is also your friend, and if you spend some time searching on youtube, you can find free tutorial videos for all types of software programs on how to do these things, too.
I see a lot of posts here with huge images, probably at 300dpi. The best thing you can do is not just re-size your image to 600x600, you need to reduce file size to 72dpi, your photos will take less space and load faster. 72dpi is the best and most common thing for online sharing, not to mention if someone takes it, they wont be able to blow it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
