I know the best thing to do is use thumbs, but sometimes a 'lead' picture gives a post some visual 'pop'. Question is- how big is too big?
In respect to those with limited bandwidth, I've tried to restrain any direct pics to 600 pixels wide and/or 400 high, and compress the image to <50Kb. I'm hoping this doesn't cause scrolling for most member's monitor settings, as it bugs me no end.
Correct me if I'm wrong here.... Does this seem reasonable? Too big?
I know the best thing to do is use thumbs, but sometimes a 'lead' picture gives a post some visual 'pop'. Question is- how big is too big?
In respect to those with limited bandwidth, I've tried to restrain any direct pics to 600 pixels wide and/or 400 high, and compress the image to <50Kb. I'm hoping this doesn't cause scrolling for most member's monitor settings, as it bugs me no end.
Correct me if I'm wrong here.... Does this seem reasonable? Too big?
600x400 doesn't seem bad, as I don't think anyone is using less than a 800x600 resolution.
600 pixels wide seems very reasonable. If things start to look too crappy when compressing down to <50K, maybe add a link to a high-res, high-bandwidth image?
I used to struggle with this when posting images for eBay auctions. First it was 600 pixels wide, then 800, then 1000 and I believe I'm now up to 1200 pixels wide.
600 pixels wide seems very reasonable. If things start to look too crappy when compressing down to <50K, maybe add a link to a high-res, high-bandwidth image?
I can certainly do that (my cam images are ~6x imageshack's limit) but I can manipulate them in PhotoShop to usually get a decent image at reasonable size. The large Chiptalk button slab pic- for instance, was compressed over 70%, and that was after downsizing.
Linear Mode
