Quality of the photos on the website

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Luigi Donatello Asero, Jan 17, 2004.

  1. Luigi Donatello Asero, Jan 17, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Luigi Donatello Asero

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:fMaOb.45033$>
    "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> said:

    > http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/muranoglasett.html


    the image is 308x480px not 193x300px you claim it is in your html.

    don't use html to resize images, browsers do a really crap job at it and
    it wastes time/bandwidth/money downloading images that are larger than
    required. with a very few exceptions images should only be displayed at
    their actual size.

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 17, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "brucie" <> skrev i meddelandet
    news:bubelq$ff7t4$-berlin.de...
    > in post: <news:fMaOb.45033$>
    > "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> said:
    >
    > > http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/muranoglasett.html

    >
    > the image is 308x480px not 193x300px you claim it is in your html.
    >
    > don't use html to resize images, browsers do a really crap job at it and
    > it wastes time/bandwidth/money downloading images that are larger than
    > required. with a very few exceptions images should only be displayed at
    > their actual size.


    Would you be so kind as to explain further?
    If I click by the mouse on the photo I see 193x300px

    --
    Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


    http://www.italymap.dk
    http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/elba.html
     
    Luigi Donatello Asero, Jan 17, 2004
    #3
  4. Luigi Donatello Asero

    brucie Guest

    in post: <news:gtbOb.78705$>
    "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> said:

    >>> http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/muranoglasett.html


    >> the image is 308x480px not 193x300px you claim it is in your html.
    >> don't use html to resize images, browsers do a really crap job at it and
    >> it wastes time/bandwidth/money downloading images that are larger than
    >> required. with a very few exceptions images should only be displayed at
    >> their actual size.


    > Would you be so kind as to explain further?
    > If I click by the mouse on the photo I see 193x300px


    your html says:

    <IMG ... bicchiereunogrande.JPG" WIDTH="193" HEIGHT="300" ...>

    which is not the case:
    http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/bilder/bicchiereunogrande.JPG

    --
    brucie - i usenet nude
     
    brucie, Jan 17, 2004
    #4
  5. Luigi Donatello Asero

    Steve Pugh Guest

    "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> wrote:
    >"brucie" <> skrev i meddelandet
    >news:bubelq$ff7t4$-berlin.de...
    >> in post: <news:fMaOb.45033$>
    >> "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> said:
    >>
    >> > http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/muranoglasett.html

    >>
    >> the image is 308x480px not 193x300px you claim it is in your html.
    >>
    >> don't use html to resize images, browsers do a really crap job at it and
    >> it wastes time/bandwidth/money downloading images that are larger than
    >> required. with a very few exceptions images should only be displayed at
    >> their actual size.

    >
    >Would you be so kind as to explain further?
    >If I click by the mouse on the photo I see 193x300px


    The image in that page is
    http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/bilder/bicchiereunogrande.JPG
    and is 308x480. That's the image that is downloaded every time someone
    views that page.

    The browser then squeezes the image down to 193x300 when it displays
    it. As browsers are not fully featured graphics programs they do not
    as good a job at preserving the quality of the image when they reduce
    the size as you could do if you did it yourself beforehand.

    By resizing the image in a graphics program to 193x300 you can make it
    smaller, thus making the page quicker to download, lowering your
    bandwidth costs, etc.

    Steve

    --
    "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
    I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

    Steve Pugh <> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
     
    Steve Pugh, Jan 17, 2004
    #5
  6. "brucie" <> skrev i meddelandet
    news:bubgeg$fhmab$-berlin.de...
    > in post: <news:gtbOb.78705$>
    > "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> said:
    > > Would you be so kind as to explain further?
    > > If I click by the mouse on the photo I see 193x300px

    >
    > your html says:
    >
    > <IMG ... bicchiereunogrande.JPG" WIDTH="193" HEIGHT="300" ...>
    >
    > which is not the case:
    > http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/bilder/bicchiereunogrande.JPG



    Thank you.
    So, this one http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/it/ceramicasvedesedue.html
    for example is correct isn´t it?




    --
    Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


    http://www.italymap.dk
    http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/elba.html
     
    Luigi Donatello Asero, Jan 17, 2004
    #6
  7. Luigi Donatello Asero

    brucie Guest

    brucie, Jan 17, 2004
    #7
  8. Luigi Donatello Asero

    Alan D-W Guest

    Alan D-W, Jan 17, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=

    Server Error in Photos Application

    =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=, Oct 28, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    349
    =?Utf-8?B?Um9zcw==?=
    Oct 29, 2004
  2. ©®
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    414
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Dec 12, 2003
  3. Kooner

    captions under photos

    Kooner, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    1,261
    Mark Parnell
    Jun 30, 2004
  4. Gilles Guérin

    to send photos

    Gilles Guérin, Jan 24, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    425
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    331
Loading...

Share This Page