Guest guest Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Just Hampton Bill alone (which is the only pic I checked) is 980 kbs. There's your problem right there: images too large. Web pics, especially if you have more than one per page should be less than 30 kb at least. Even then it's hard on dial-up. Actually, the rule of thumb is to keep whole pages under 80 kbs if you don't want to irritate dial-up users. I have an iMac but I'm unfamiliar with PictureProject. I use Photoshop (with it's " save for web " feature), or Goldberg, a freebie by Opus software. Quality for web is usually around 50%. a > If anyone has time to do a little trouble-shooting.... > > I made a new bear page: http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html > > It seems to be slower than the others. For the first time, I used my > digital camera for the pictures and moved them from the camera to > PictureProject (the photo program that came with the iBook) in order > to save them as jpg's for web purposes. > > Am I doing something wrong? I don't want the page to be a source of > frustration/irritation due to slow loading. > > Thanks. > > Jane > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 a wrote: >I have an iMac but I'm unfamiliar with PictureProject. I use Photoshop >(with it's " save for web " feature), or Goldberg, a freebie by Opus >software. Quality for web is usually around 50%. Thanks, a. I'd love to use Photoshop, but it's too expensive for my budget. What does " Quality for web is usually around 50% " mean? Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 I made the picture files as small as I could figure out how to using PictureProject. Can't find any way to achieve the 30 kb size a recommends. Does the page load better now? http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 They loaded easier for me and I think the smaller pictures are easier to view. I use a 2yr-old iMac. ~Bonnie - - - > I made the picture files as small as I could figure > out how to using > PictureProject. Can't find any way to achieve the 30 > kb size a > recommends. Does the page load better now? > > http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 It's definitely an improvement - I have DSL high speed. Goldberg image software is freeware that you can edit down pics for the web (pdfs as well). When you save a file ( " save as " , not just " save " , at least not with my version, and I see there's been updates since), you can choose what level of quality you want of which 50% or less is typical for the web. You can resize, add some effects...quite a few features in a little package. Goldberg: http://mypage.bluewin.ch/opus/freeware/g2/osx.html Another thing I've noticed though: Using Hamilton Bill as an example again, this picture's actual size is 741x600 px and is 76 kbs. But within your html, it shows that the image has been reduced to a width of 500 px for display on the webpage. To help with faster loading just resize the picture(s) to the actual size that you've provided for them on the html page. When reducing the dimensions of a photo within html (<img src= " HamptonBill1jpg.JPG " width= " 500 " >), you're not changing anything about the picture's broadband load. Only resizing the picture in an image editor will truly reduce its size - i.e, take Hamilton Bill and resize it down to 500 px wide in the picture editor, which is the dimensions you want for your web page anyway. The broadband load will be reduced significantly just doing this alone. Sorry if I'm telling you things you might already know, I'm just trying to cover the " unknowns " from my end. a > I made the picture files as small as I could figure out how to using > PictureProject. Can't find any way to achieve the 30 kb size a > recommends. Does the page load better now? > > http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html > > Jane > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 please remove me from the mail list I will log in and check your group when i have time kind regards Eugene eugeneoz@... > >Reply-To: AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse >To: AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse >Subject: Re: web reaction, please >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 02:59:32 -0300 > >It's definitely an improvement - I have DSL high speed. Goldberg image >software is freeware that you can edit down pics for the web (pdfs as >well). When you save a file ( " save as " , not just " save " , at least not >with my version, and I see there's been updates since), you can choose >what level of quality you want of which 50% or less is typical for the >web. You can resize, add some effects...quite a few features in a >little package. > >Goldberg: http://mypage.bluewin.ch/opus/freeware/g2/osx.html > >Another thing I've noticed though: Using Hamilton Bill as an example >again, this picture's actual size is 741x600 px and is 76 kbs. But >within your html, it shows that the image has been reduced to a width >of 500 px for display on the webpage. To help with faster loading just >resize the picture(s) to the actual size that you've provided for them >on the html page. When reducing the dimensions of a photo within html >(<img src= " HamptonBill1jpg.JPG " width= " 500 " >), you're not changing >anything about the picture's broadband load. Only resizing the picture >in an image editor will truly reduce its size - i.e, take Hamilton Bill >and resize it down to 500 px wide in the picture editor, which is the >dimensions you want for your web page anyway. The broadband load will >be reduced significantly just doing this alone. > >Sorry if I'm telling you things you might already know, I'm just trying >to cover the " unknowns " from my end. > >a > > > > I made the picture files as small as I could figure out how to using > > PictureProject. Can't find any way to achieve the 30 kb size a > > recommends. Does the page load better now? > > > > http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html > > > > Jane > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 a wrote: >Sorry if I'm telling you things you might already know, I'm just trying >to cover the " unknowns " from my end. I suspect you could talk for a year without stumbling over something I already know. :-) Thanks for the (new) info. I'll have to print out your post so I can study it -- and have it handy for reference when I work myself up to doing something about it. Much appreciated. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 > a wrote: > >Sorry if I'm telling you things you might already know, I'm just > trying > >to cover the " unknowns " from my end. > > I suspect you could talk for a year without stumbling over something > I already know. :-) Thanks for the (new) info. I'll have to print > out your post so I can study it -- and have it handy for reference > when I work myself up to doing something about it. > > Much appreciated. > > Jane No problem. If you need to know anything else, I'm here. If there's one thing I do know well it's websites, glad to be of help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 It was 18 Jun 2006, when Jane Meyerding commented: > If anyone has time to do a little trouble-shooting.... > > I made a new bear page: http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html > > It seems to be slower than the others. For the first time, I used my > digital camera for the pictures and moved them from the camera to > PictureProject (the photo program that came with the iBook) in order > to save them as jpg's for web purposes. > > Am I doing something wrong? I don't want the page to be a source of > frustration/irritation due to slow loading. I just glanced at the page, and didn't see anything particularly slow about it. Only thing comes to mind, if you saved the files at a higher resolution than you usually use, the files would be larger and take longer to load. But I didn't look at the other pages, I'm not that interested in bears. Nice pictures, though. Oil paintings or acrylics? -- B. , another satisfied user of Pegasus Mail Client and Mercury MTA <http://www.pmail.com> <ftp://ftp.usm.maine.edu/pegasus/winpmail/w32-431.exe> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 wrote: >Nice pictures, though. Oil paintings or acrylics? Just checking: That's a joke, right? Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 It was 30 Jun 2006, when Jane Meyerding commented: > wrote: > >Nice pictures, though. Oil paintings or acrylics? > > Just checking: That's a joke, right? Nope, they look like paintings to me. They aren't paintings? Maybe it's just my monitor on my laptop makes them look that way? Now I'm embarrassed, and I'm not sure why.... -- B. , another satisfied user of Pegasus Mail Client and Mercury MTA <http://www.pmail.com> <ftp://ftp.usm.maine.edu/pegasus/winpmail/w32-431.exe> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 I wrote: > > Just checking: That's a joke, right? and responded: >Nope, they look like paintings to me. They aren't paintings? Maybe it's >just my monitor on my laptop makes them look that way? > >Now I'm embarrassed, and I'm not sure why.... No need to be embarrassed. If the pictures were paintings, I'd be embarrassed about not doing better backgrounds. (Actually, I couldn't paint a decent bear picture to save my life.) The bears are very much 3D, with mohair " fur, " jointed at shoulders, hips, and neck. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2006 Report Share Posted July 1, 2006 a wrote: >Another thing I've noticed though: Using Hamilton Bill as an example >again, this picture's actual size is 741x600 px and is 76 kbs. But >within your html, it shows that the image has been reduced to a width >of 500 px for display on the webpage. To help with faster loading just >resize the picture(s) to the actual size that you've provided for them >on the html page. I decided to try doing that today. But PictureProject (which is there the photos are in the iBook) does not seem to have any option for re-sizing. And I have lost track of which easy-to-use software that might allow resizing is Mac-usable. :-( Having a porous brain is a problem sometimes. Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 a wrote: >Here you go....mac-usable, free and easy... > ><http://mypage.bluewin.ch/opus/freeware/g2/osx.html> Thanks! Can you tell whether I succeeded in resizing HamiltonBill (first photo)? http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 Yes I can, and yes it is a > a wrote: > >Here you go....mac-usable, free and easy... > > > ><http://mypage.bluewin.ch/opus/freeware/g2/osx.html> > > Thanks! Can you tell whether I succeeded in resizing HamiltonBill > (first photo)? > http://mjane.zolaweb.com/bears28.html > > Jane > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2006 Report Share Posted July 3, 2006 I wrote: > > Thanks! Can you tell whether I succeeded in resizing HamiltonBill > > (first photo)? and a responded: >Yes I can, and yes it is :-) indeed! Thanks. Now all I have to do is repeat the process again and again and again and again and again..... Jane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.