| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Michael

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 10431
|
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:49 pm Post subject: Question: What's the highest resolution you've seen? |
|
|
| Although it's generally not-done I'd like to use a huge image as a background for a website I'm designing, the idea is that you usually only see the center but then if you make the window bigger you see the rest of the image. The problem with this is that (unless you can shop some nice repetitive bit) at some point you'll run out of image. Luckily I have a rather large one I'd like to use, but just in case: what's the highest resolution you've encountered/know of on any screen used for browsing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mantismag

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 81
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| if you make it really big it will take a really long time to load. do you really want your background to load long after the rest of your page? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dogen

Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 9297 Location: Bellingham, WA
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
My 19" runs at 1280x1024, but that's not touching the top-end. You can easily find monitors up to 1920x1200. That's widescreen, though. In a 4:3 format you'd probably be safe with 1600x1200. _________________ "Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. I’ll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Michael

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 10431
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mantismag wrote: | | if you make it really big it will take a really long time to load. do you really want your background to load long after the rest of your page? |
well lowering the jpg quality can get that down & there's ways to preload stuff no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eWoud

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 27 Location: beyond the yellow brick road...
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
2560 x 1600 - the current 30" generation. My guess is that visitors will close the site before it's loaded half way.
<- 1400x1050 and it's getting crowded. _________________ tea is overrated
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dro

Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 3830
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Monitors will be getting bigger and bigger.
use this to take your own background image.
Last edited by Dro on Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John Mytton

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 607
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's funny-Popular Science said it was a gigapixel.
Either way, it's awesome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Michael

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 10431
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dro wrote: | Monitors will be getting bigger and bigger.
use this to take your own background image. |
:p
It's big enough as it is but thanks
As for monitors getting bigger, at some stage you're not gonna maximise the windows or double the pixels to be able to actually load any webpage no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Marik

Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 1233
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:42 pm Post subject: claustroscreenophobia |
|
|
Mine goes up to 2560x1600.
I always have it at 1600x1200 and everyone else who uses it is all like
WEH I CAN'T READ
... But seriously, if I have it at any single smaller resolution, I feel like I have no graphical operating space whatsoever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flion

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 589 Location: Don't look up! (Damn pigeons...)
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My laptop is at 1920x1200 and it's still not enough real estate for me. *Drools over Marik's screen* I usually end up bumping up the font for people with less than perfect vision (I'm 20/10 both eyes). As for load times, I took a screenshot and loaded it on my webspace and then downloaded it using Firefox. It is a 300k JPEG and took less than a second to download and display. Hey, if you're not on broadband, move over to the slow lane of the internet highway... IE and Firefox reduce images to fit (unless the HTML specifically prevents it), so the image should fit any resolution but that means you need to choose and format the image carefully to avoid resizing artifacts. _________________
| Halen wrote: | | The reason that "people actually see the points people make" = "people agree with me" is because I. Am. Right! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Drui

Joined: 11 Jul 2006 Posts: 541 Location: 'Jersey :}
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mine is at 1024x768, and I'm happy with that. _________________ fight |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mantismag

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 81
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael wrote: | | mantismag wrote: | | if you make it really big it will take a really long time to load. do you really want your background to load long after the rest of your page? |
well lowering the jpg quality can get that down & there's ways to preload stuff no? |
lower the jpg quality enough to get a reasonable load time on a large image and it will look like crap. you get all kinds of funny lines and blocks of color. and preload it how? if they're just getting to your site how would you have any control over what they did before they got there? if you mean forcing the background to load first then that just means your visitors will see absolutely nothing until they download your ginormous pic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Michael

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 10431
|
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mantismag wrote: | | Michael wrote: | | mantismag wrote: | | if you make it really big it will take a really long time to load. do you really want your background to load long after the rest of your page? |
well lowering the jpg quality can get that down & there's ways to preload stuff no? |
lower the jpg quality enough to get a reasonable load time on a large image and it will look like crap. you get all kinds of funny lines and blocks of color. and preload it how? if they're just getting to your site how would you have any control over what they did before they got there? if you mean forcing the background to load first then that just means your visitors will see absolutely nothing until they download your ginormous pic. |
1. | Flion wrote: | | As for load times, I took a screenshot and loaded it on my webspace and then downloaded it using Firefox. It is a 300k JPEG and took less than a second to download and display. | It took me about four. Anyway, I can easily get it to 350k without it looking crap, it's a photograph (mostly of the sea) not some shiny 3D graphic so jpeg handles that great.
2. It's not a new google I'm designing here I just want several glossy fronts for my new site so load times aren't an issue.
3. Lots of sites have a little (flash) loadbar up front.
4. I've designed a few sites & I know most of the problems with this approach but I still want to do this. I appreciate what you're telling me here but it's not what I'm after. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mantismag

Joined: 09 Jul 2006 Posts: 81
|
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
1. not everyone has broadband and remember that's time just for your background image. what about the rest of your site?
2. if you want people who aren't your friends to look at your site it's an issue
3. and people hate them
4. ok if you really don't care then this'll be my last post on the subject. i just figured since i've actually taken classes for this and spend a large portion of my time reading books and articles about it as well as of course actually creating a website or two that i ought to chime in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Black Kitty

Joined: 11 Jul 2006 Posts: 704 Location: Under your bed.
|
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm running 1600x1200. _________________ Live to laugh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|