Thanks

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Paul Furman, Feb 23, 2004.

  1. Paul Furman

    Paul Furman Guest

    Thanks for all the advice, I've done a lot to upgrade my pages though
    I'm sure you can find plenty messed up it's a huge improvement from a
    few weeks ago! Don't try validating yet, that's another nightmare I'm
    avoiding.

    Still, I've got:

    Most layout now specified in the CSS file. This includes fixed
    attachment background which now works in Mozilla. I only had a few CSS
    prpoerties set in the head and inline before.

    Min-max width that allows some degree of fluid layout with minimal use
    of tables. Though Mozilla won't shrink my min-max textbox inside the
    overall min-max table, it'll shrink pages without that.

    Inline unordered list nav bar that wraps if need be, centered and evenly
    spaced (that took 4 CSS styles to accomplish).

    Gallery with javascript to jump to first link so you just hit enter to
    advance (I'll add a way to turn this on optionally when I get time but I
    love it!) No tabindex fiddling.

    Gallery thumbnails with styles for selected-thumb (wide border) and
    regular-thumb with subtle hover color cue (I couldn't get transparent
    with hover only but matched background is not bad). No more ugly default
    blue!

    Control over excessive top & bottom spacing from default <h1> etc, added
    padding where needed for extra space.

    Form button style that looks like a regular link (evil me, but it looks
    better).

    The whole thing indexed and assembled with php instead of hand coded
    pages. This includes a mail form instead of the despised mailto link.

    Index:
    http://hills.ccsf.edu/~pfurma02/index.php

    Gallery:
    http://hills.ccsf.edu/~pfurma02/index.php?SCREEN=ecard

    Mail (with stealth OK button):
    http://hills.ccsf.edu/~pfurma02/index.php?SCREEN=settings.php&PICS=6

    Not bad for a part time coder in a few weeks.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Furman

    Steve R. Guest

    Steve R., Feb 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Furman

    Paul Furman Guest

    Steve R. wrote:
    >
    > Ouch !! ... 16K for those thumnails, such as ...
    > http://hills.ccsf.edu/~pfurma02/grasses/thumbs/04-P1011085-cnga_.jpg
    > Should be around 2k for that size. No wonder it took so long to download on
    > a dial-up line.



    Wow, thanks I hadn't noticed. Ah ha, It's the EXIF camera data I started
    saving recently that's bloating them. I had no idea that could be 14k!
    Those 16k thumbs were all saved at 50% jpeg quality. If I let Irfan
    strip out that camera info stuff it works fine.


    >
    > and 60K for this ... (it could easily be 35K or less)
    > http://hills.ccsf.edu/~pfurma02/grasses/04-P1011085-cnga_.jpg


    How about 45k. I don't like to go below 50% quality, I used to set it at
    60 or 70%.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 23, 2004
    #3
  4. Paul Furman

    Steve R. Guest

    Paul Furman wrote in message ...
    > Those 16k thumbs were all saved at 50% jpeg quality. If I let Irfan
    > strip out that camera info stuff it works fine.


    Thumbnails are fine now.

    > How about 45k. I don't like to go below 50% quality, I used to set it at
    > 60 or 70%.


    Try some at 20, 30 and 40 and see if you can *really* see the difference on
    a good quality monitor, when compared side by side, especially if you add a
    little unsharp mask before saving to web.

    Having nicely optimised images certainly makes browsing much more enjoyable
    for dial-uppers :~)
     
    Steve R., Feb 23, 2004
    #4
    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. Lee
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    863
    Jim Lewis
    May 5, 2004
  2. Lee
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,277
    Charles Bailey
    May 9, 2004
  3. Lee
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    3,122
    Wendell Petersen
    May 11, 2004
  4. Lee
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,781
  5. sidel

    thanks

    sidel, Dec 23, 2003, in forum: Perl
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    661
    sidel
    Dec 23, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page