Web graphic format help!

[Algee]

Hey guys. So im building a site. I got it down. But one thing, the graphics are taking too long to load even on a cable modem. What is the best format to have the pictures in for the fastest loading time? Thanks guys!

[Boingo]

Originally posted by Algee:
Hey guys. So im building a site. I got it down. But one thing, the graphics are taking too long to load even on a cable modem. What is the best format to have the pictures in for the fastest loading time? Thanks guys!

Compressed jpeg's or gif's is the norm. I'm far from an expert, but I think I'm correct on this. What format are you using? Are you controlling the compression when you save the file? What's the typical size of the pics you are using?

[Algee]

Im using jpegs. the normal size of my pics are anywhere from 20 KB to 250 KB.

[puttenvr]

Try Jpeg wizard. It can compress jpeg files.

I think 40 kb is the max

[Algee]

im trying to get it off of kazaa. im not having any luck. is there any other way? i really dont want to buy the software for such a simple problem. can you help me out here?

[Algee]

how bout windows imaging? i saw something on there about compression? do you know how to use it?

[Boingo]

20k is closer to normal. 250K files will frustrate many a 56K or less modem user. Get too many this big and even cable will be no picnic. Those NASA large pic sites frustrate me and I also have cable.

There are plenty of programs that let you control the amount of compression when you save the file. The more compressed, the smaller the size but the artifacts (the distortion you typically get around the edges of your subject) increase quite a bit.

You could have some kind of a connection problem. Has anyone else visited your site and experienced the same thing?

[Algee]

yeah, actually. many people have noticed it. ive even checked it on different speeds. and no matter what, my pics are just too big. and they're are all pretty big. sometimes even half a meg. so what do i do? i guess i could create two versions of the site. high band width and low band width. rather, 'willing to waste your time' or 'dont give a crap'. im not sure. whatever. help me!

[Daveb]

Originally posted by Algee:
yeah, actually. many people have noticed it. ive even checked it on different speeds. and no matter what, my pics are just too big. and they're are all pretty big. sometimes even half a meg. so what do i do? i guess i could create two versions of the site. high band width and low band width. rather, 'willing to waste your time' or 'dont give a crap'. im not sure. whatever. help me!

OK couple of basic things with the graphic package you are using reduce the size of the picture to the same size you are letting people view them on the web site, most packages let you do this by % or pixels. If you don't do this people are downloading a bigger picture then having it reduced to fit their screen.

Also reduce the resolution to 90, this is OK for a screen, and you will not loose any picture clarity.

There are some good cheap or freeware graphic programmes around if you don't have one. One of the good ones is PaintShop Pro, you can get an evaluation copy from
http://www.jasc.com/products/psp/

or look at some of the shareware sites

Hope this helps


[This message has been edited by Daveb (edited April 15, 2002).]

[Boingo]

Originally posted by Algee:
how bout windows imaging? i saw something on there about compression? do you know how to use it?

I couldn't get into Imaging (I'm at work) but I tried MS Photo Editor. I think that comes with Windows. Take a large bmp file, note the original file size, open it, do save as, select jpg for file type, select more>>, select a compression. I think default on this program is 50. I'd start with 20 and see what the saved file size is.

Look at the picture for quality and size. Try other compressions until you arrive at an acceptable compromise. Don't take a compressed file and resave it, which compresses the compression. Try to keep the master available as a bmp and start over with it.

Follow Dave's advise. You should be able to find shareware and freeware if you look hard enough.

High resolution is for printing. Viewing doesn't require it so do reduce the resolution if your software lets you. I use 72 as a standard for files that won't be printed.

I use Paint Shop Pro. And, yes, I paid for it . Actually it's a good deal. Buy it just before the new version comes out (I suspect ver 8 will be released soon) and you can upgrade for practically free. Then you get the annual upgrades for ~$40.00. It has a wizard to help get the file size down. It even tells you how long the download time would be.

[animal]

Sample:



108 x 150 pixels
72 dpi (any more for a monitor is a waste)
jpg quality 60
non-progressive
8717 bytes (just under 9k)

also, make sure you are specifying the height and width of your picture in your html code:
<img src="dale.jpg" width=108 height=150 alt=Dale>

use jpg's for photos and gifs where you have large areas of one solid color. JPG compression works off of estimating gradients.




[This message has been edited by animal (edited April 16, 2002).]

[Algee]

Thanks! The MS photo editor idea worked great! the size (at 72) has been reduced by about 75%. I appreciate it guys! Thanks.

[ufotofu]

I haven't paid a dime for any of my software, and it's all completely legal.

<a href="http://debian.org">debian.org</a>

Just a short plug for my favorite OS.

[digitsone]

at least you espouse libertarianism and linux equally.