Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos Presentation & Building Galleries 
Thread started 18 Nov 2014 (Tuesday) 10:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Image size for web site

 
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 18, 2014 10:52 |  #1

The tech guy who's helping me build a website want to know what size images I should send him so he can create a thumbnail that will enlarge to page size on the site when someone clicks on it.

Can anyone give me the specs for the right size image? Size or length / width ... I'm not very "tech smart" so want to give him the best size to see a good image when it's open, but not so large it takes forever opening it.

I know there is a fine line there, and I have no idea what that is ... thanks BD




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
kjonnnn
Goldmember
1,203 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Nov 18, 2014 11:23 |  #2

There is no standard size. Some people like small ones, some like large ones. How many thumbnails do you want seen at one time? 150 x 150, 200 x 200, etc? Its all personal tastes and practicality.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 18, 2014 11:38 |  #3

kjonnnn wrote in post #17279492 (external link)
There is no standard size. Some people like small ones, some like large ones. How many thumbnails do you want seen at one time? 150 x 150, 200 x 200, etc? Its all personal tastes and practicality.

IT's not the thumbnails, it's the "open images" what size do I send him so when a visitor clicks on the TN, the image fills the page with a photo? I know, some guys put huge photos in there, and it takes FOREVER to open one, so usually people go away instead of waiting ...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 63
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Nov 18, 2014 12:46 |  #4

monkey44 wrote in post #17279512 (external link)
IT's not the thumbnails, it's the "open images" what size do I send him so when a visitor clicks on the TN, the image fills the page with a photo? I know, some guys put huge photos in there, and it takes FOREVER to open one, so usually people go away instead of waiting ...

Most sites I have seen open a medium sized image (1024 ish?) with a further option to view larger underneath. Or they use some kind of scaling query to see what resolution the browser is currently displaying and chooses a medium sized resolution based on that.

Again - usually with options underneath that picture to allow you to see it in a larger/higher resolution if you prefer (or if the photographer even wants to allow access to the higher res)


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 18, 2014 12:52 |  #5

werds wrote in post #17279640 (external link)
Most sites I have seen open a medium sized image (1024 ish?) with a further option to view larger underneath. Or they use some kind of scaling query to see what resolution the browser is currently displaying and chooses a medium sized resolution based on that.

Again - usually with options underneath that picture to allow you to see it in a larger/higher resolution if you prefer (or if the photographer even wants to allow access to the higher res)

I'm not displaying "full size / max resolution", but only a nice viewable image. We are protecting the pages from copy too, so most honest browsers will not steal it ... the "thief folks" are gonna get it no matter what we do ... but we do the best we can.

Protecting our property is always a hassle too -- I've found numerous copies of my sports and some wildlife images used with out permission ... it's a struggle for all of us. Too many people out there think "web is public" -- so we have to cure that ignorance as well. Thanks for the help here -- will try the 1024 and see what that gives me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 63
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Nov 18, 2014 13:07 |  #6

monkey44 wrote in post #17279649 (external link)
I'm not displaying "full size / max resolution", but only a nice viewable image. We are protecting the pages from copy too, so most honest browsers will not steal it ... the "thief folks" are gonna get it no matter what we do ... but we do the best we can.

Protecting our property is always a hassle too -- I've found numerous copies of my sports and some wildlife images used with out permission ... it's a struggle for all of us. Too many people out there think "web is public" -- so we have to cure that ignorance as well. Thanks for the help here -- will try the 1024 and see what that gives me.

Yep. In case it helps make a decision btw http://www.w3schools.c​om/browsers/browsers_d​isplay.asp (external link)

1024 IMO is a nice sweet spot as it is not too big for jpeg but still shows large enough on the majority of screens.


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hikin ­ Mike
Walkin' Like a Penguin Now!
Avatar
6,349 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Likes: 335
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Atwater, CA
     
Nov 18, 2014 13:23 |  #7

I use 800px on the long end.


Images in the Backcountry (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Google+ (external link) | Twitter (external link)
SEO for the Photographer (external link) | Creating HDRs Using Layer Masks (external link)
Canon 5D 17-40 Ճ/4L 300 Ճ/4L IS 70-200 Ճ/4L 50 Ճ/1.8 1.4x TC Օ Kenko Ext. Tubes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1000arms
Senior Member
862 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: USA
     
Nov 18, 2014 13:35 |  #8

monkey44 wrote in post #17279649 (external link)
Protecting our property is always a hassle too -- I've found numerous copies of my sports and some wildlife images used with out permission ... it's a struggle for all of us. Too many people out there think "web is public" -- so we have to cure that ignorance as well. Thanks for the help here -- will try the 1024 and see what that gives me.

I suggest people look at http://www.photoattorn​ey.com …otect-your-online-images/ (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kjonnnn
Goldmember
1,203 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Nov 18, 2014 15:39 |  #9

monkey44 wrote in post #17279512 (external link)
IT's not the thumbnails, it's the "open images" what size do I send him so when a visitor clicks on the TN, the image fills the page with a photo? I know, some guys put huge photos in there, and it takes FOREVER to open one, so usually people go away instead of waiting ...

ohhhh ok




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,915 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1578
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Nov 19, 2014 08:17 |  #10

I think 1024 on the long edge is a reasonably nice size. It will still just fit on a 1080 display vertically and is a little wider than 50% horizontally. Although it is quite useable digitally at least its not going to make a huge print.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2n10
Cream of the Crop
17,043 posts
Gallery: 75 photos
Likes: 1077
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Sparks, Nevada, USA
     
Nov 19, 2014 08:22 |  #11

Do you plan on showing them at low res also? That might take a few more pirates out.


John
Equipment
My Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 19, 2014 09:02 |  #12

2n10 wrote in post #17281110 (external link)
Do you plan on showing them at low res also? That might take a few more pirates out.

Not sure exactly what "pirates" refer to -- but will show low-res thumbnails (?) and then pop up larger images for viewing ... but haven't done this in the past, so am exploring the options.

In the past, I've not had a website of my own that displayed images - generally, the clients had a site (newspaper, magazine, sports venue) so we always had a tech person I sent the images, the tech person did the web work - so I never had any experience with the web side of images.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hillbille
Senior Member
Avatar
528 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Nov 2010
Location: California
     
Nov 19, 2014 10:31 as a reply to  @ monkey44's post |  #13

1024 is a good size and I think what people mean when they ask about "res" is the color depth. When I "post" images I reduce the color depth to a maximum of 32k and lower for some images. This does several things as it reduces download time (display on slower internet connections) and as stated also reduces the "printability" of the image.

People didn't use to take photos from the internet to print because of the low resolution of the final product in actual "print", but with social media today demanding low res photos, the aspect of pirated photographs is a plague.

Hillbille


Rebel T2i, XS, Rebel T3; EF-S 70 - 300mm non L; EF-S 55 - 250mm; 50mm 1.8; 18 - 55 kit; YN-560; YN-468 - Pure Fun and Raw excitement.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
724 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 19, 2014 10:42 |  #14

HA -- yes, pirates, of course -- my brain was in "data" mode, not "thief" mode, so missed the pirates reference. My tech dumb brain immediately thought "pirate" similar to "pixel" or some other data bit. <laughing at myself>

In fact, on several occasions, I had to demand some of my sports images be removed from websites. People think just because an image appears on the web that somehow it's public. Wrong - but it's very tough educating the public about it - the ones that care don't do it, and the ones that do it don't care.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hillbille
Senior Member
Avatar
528 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Nov 2010
Location: California
     
Nov 19, 2014 14:56 as a reply to  @ monkey44's post |  #15

It's the deception everyone has that anything posted on the internet becomes "public domain" and is fair game for use as they please. It's what got so many music lovers in trouble! LOL!! You would think as widely publicized as that was people would learn, but sadly... not.

Hillbille


Rebel T2i, XS, Rebel T3; EF-S 70 - 300mm non L; EF-S 55 - 250mm; 50mm 1.8; 18 - 55 kit; YN-560; YN-468 - Pure Fun and Raw excitement.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,587 views & 0 likes for this thread
Image size for web site
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos Presentation & Building Galleries 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is matrix23225
772 guests, 395 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.