Forum Moderators: not2easy
I've read about the screen resolution issue (that 800x600 and 1024x768 are now the most common) and fluid Web site layouts (which I have always used--though sometimes getting a table to behave is tricky). This has been VERY helpful and many thanks to all who commented.
But what about images? While a lot of people are going to cable and DSL, many are still on the 56k modem (I know quite a few businesses that are even!). The rule I always understood about images was: keep the file size low. (50k max)
As you know, this can be done by using fewer colors and detail, using a small image size, or compressing. Each has disadvantages.
What has been your experience with image sizes for the Web (and or multimedia projects) given that screens are now using the higher resolution?
Thanks for your thoughts!
I still follow the general rule of keeping images under 50k, I actually shoot for 40k just to be safe. I use Imageready, and am able to see just how far I can lower image quality until the degradation becomes noticible. Nobody on a 56k modem is going to wait for a 100k image to load, they will just leave.
As far as screens being higher res, it amazes me just how many people never bother changing their screen resolution and surf at 800x600. So, I still design with that in mind.
Thanks for your input. I use ImageReady too, but also find Photoshop (which has more flexibility in many areas) can show me compression and optimization if I choose "Save for Web" and try different options. Both are great programs and make a good set for image generation. I can't imagine computer life without them!
it's also quite useful at segregating the crap traffic from those actually interested in what your site has to offer
