It is a responsive inflow gallery site all done with Backdraft. Images were all input one-at-a-time with pass thru and optimized to only 500k or less (no " bulk gallery" import used)
Other than setting the correct items in the Output module from my provider, can I just use all the default settings for Documents, Upload, Text, Graphics, and Mobile?
Any other suggestions or am I good to go!
Thanks, Barry
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
You worked locally for longer time now and happy with what you previewed? Fine - cause this will be your live expectations as well (outermost).
Most options depend on the individual project and expectations we can’t guess. Simple examples are Doctype (me HTML5) and IE compatibility (me normal) or even using internal styles or external style-sheets (I do the latter).
One thing to double check is the initial-scale for SmartPhones to be 100% if it is a responsive project.
You know what? Fire it on host and see what happens. If you think there is something wrong or unexpected, share a link with us.
As a side note:
500k is huge - especially in a gallery where I expect having images let’s say in a 4 column structure. The width of those images shouldn’t exceed 500px (original) and 500x500px images can be forced down to be let’s say 99k (or less).
But as said - share a link if you’re still concerned.
Cheers
Thomas
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
Thanks Thomas, your thoughts are very helpful and another piece of the puzzle has dropped into place.
Surprised that 500k is considered big too! But knowing that gives me a heads up if things get slow etc. Actually on closer look the finished images seem to range between 170 and 350k so that’s a little better.
Under the Documents Setup… Document, there is something called a pastboard width that is set to 500px. Will that have an influence on my image based web site?
No guts / no glory! I’ll fire it up Monday morning when I know my ISP folks are available.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
I’m actually a visual artist (acrylic painter) and print my own giclees. Most of my images on my Macbook Pro range between 42 megs at the small end and 1.2 gigs for the larger ones.
When I shrink these down to only 370k at 72dpi for the internet, they already seem rough with poor resolution, especially on a retina display.
But I will check out your suggestion. Thanks!
My old and moldy table based web site is www.barrytate.com if you are interested.
cheers Barry
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
What’s also nice about AI is that it can be configured to serve scaled Retina and non-Retina images as necessary, depending on the device. It’s as close to a hands-off solution as I’ve found, so far.
I like giclee prints. A friend once did a giclee of one of my photorealistic drawings. It looked amazing. Though I never considered posting images of the print. You’re dealing with crazy-huge file sizes!
If you make that large a reduction in one whack, I am surprised they look like much at all! I have learned over the years to either scale down in steps from a large original (50% at a time, say) or re-scan at a more reasonable original resolution.
The reason why you need to do this has to do with how a computer “resizes” an image. Basically, it takes the detail from that huge scan, and approximates what each much larger (relatively speaking) pixel needs to be in terms of value using mathematical averaging.
Fine details disappear in the cracks during this process, so if you start with a really huge original portrait of a woman, her hair will look like cotton candy when it shrinks down. Ironically, a low-res original will still look like hair. It won’t actually have more detail than the shrunk version, but it will have a better illusion of detail. Sharpening can help a little, but it brings its own artifacts to the party.
How are you having your work scanned/photographed? There may be a way to sort this out at the source.
Walter
On Sep 11, 2015, at 1:21 PM, Barry T email@hidden wrote:
Thanks Todd,
I’ll check that out too.
I’m actually a visual artist (acrylic painter) and print my own giclees. Most of my images on my Macbook Pro range between 42 megs at the small end and 1.2 gigs for the larger ones.
When I shrink these down to only 370k at 72dpi for the internet, they already seem rough with poor resolution, especially on a retina display.
But I will check out your suggestion. Thanks!
My old and moldy table based web site is www.barrytate.com if you are interested.
cheers Barry
Thanks Walter,
My canvases are typically 30x40". I invested in a 25 mpix camera a few years back to deal with that and it is like holding a hand-held scanner! You can actually see individual hair!
Anyway, all but my latest 8 or so paintings are sold so there is no option to reshoot, but you’ve got me thinking…
I do have most of the original un-photoshopped 25 meg raw files.
Come Monday, I will try to get my site up and see how to looks. Maybe I’ll be happy enough with it as is and if not I now have some good ideas where to tweak things.
cheers Barry
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at: