Progressive of Standard Optimization?

[palmpal]

Progressive or Standard Optimization?

Hello,

My site graphics are sliced into 16 different images that surround the outer edges of the page. The problem I have is that they are loading one at a time from the top down. The page loads "choppy" as a result and since I'm on a cable modem I figured it can't be that pleasant for my dial-up visitors. I have saved the images using the "Save for Web" option as Standard Optimized, YUV411 subsampling a5 75% quality. Would progressive be better?

Thanks!

[jo1ene]

It doesn't make that much of a difference in my experience. Are you setting the width and height attributes? Are there ways that the edge can be set as a backgound? (ex: the left-hand border has a sliver of a backgound image that's repeat-y) There would still be a bit of a lag since bg's usually display last, but it will load much faster.

[palmpal]

Hi and thanks for responding. I can't really have a background because the outer border is curved and each sliced image is part of a table. Only the 2nd and 4th columns and the 2nd and 4th rows actually expand depending upon the screen resolution of the visitor. I did save quite a bit of time rechecking some of my other graphics though and resized them to the actual size defined on the webpage. I had already had height and weight attributes but my thumbnails were much larger than they should have been.

I did discover my problem however. My IE was set to check for new pages every visit instead of automatic. Every page of my website had to reload each background graphic every time I clicked on the page. It's much smoother now! I don't remember changing that but I guess I did!

Thanks