Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

image load times and height/width specified in HTML

Expand Messages
  • Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
    Greetings, Does the specified size of an image reflect it s load time? In other words would this image:
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Greetings,
      Does the specified size of an image reflect it's load time?

      In other words would this image: <img src="013.jpg" width="515"
      height="343" title="" alt="" /> which we will say has a file size of 50k,
      load any faster if the image size was changed to: width="415" height="243"
      but the file size remains the same?

      Thanks,
      -Mike



      ----------
      Check it out:
      www.EpicRoadTrips.us

      ~~~



      ~~~





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jeff Scism
      Logic tells me that files size is what dictates its loading time, and displaying a file at a different size than stored at probably adds time to the
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Logic tells me that files' size is what dictates its loading time, and
        displaying a file at a different size than stored at probably adds time
        to the loading, (loading vs. (loading + resize for display) The
        difference may be very small, but a initially stored smaller file will
        load faster than a larger file.

        That is the reason people create thumbnail images that link to the
        larger resolution files.

        Small loads faster, shows a sample and if the party wants the big one
        (for detail) they can go to it.


        Jeff


        Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Greetings,
        > Does the specified size of an image reflect it's load time?
        >
        > In other words would this image: <img src="013.jpg" width="515"
        > height="343" title="" alt="" /> which we will say has a file size of 50k,
        > load any faster if the image size was changed to: width="415"
        > height="243"
        > but the file size remains the same?
        >
        > Thanks,
        > -Mike
        >
      • Greg Chapman
        Hi Mike,On 20 Feb 07 14:02 Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV said: Does the specified size of an image reflect it s load time?No.All
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Mike,

          On 20 Feb 07 14:02 Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV <mike@...>
          said:
          > Does the specified size of an image reflect it's load time?

          No.

          All that matters is the size of the file.

          The slowest part of process from clicking a link to view a page and
          its eventual display on your machine is the transmission of the
          request and delivery of the page and associated files. The larger the
          files to be received the longer it takes. The processing time to
          re-size an image once it has been received is negligible.

          To test this just point your browser at a large image file, perhaps a
          photograph from a digital camera uploaded to your web space. Modern
          browsers normally re-size the image so it fits the browser window.
          Once its arrived use the appropriate method to view it full size and
          toggle back again... It's instantaneous, isn't it?

          Obviously, with a file as small as 50k the delays may not be
          noticable, especially on a broadband connection, but re-sizing by the
          browser takes only microseconds, its the transmission that takes tens
          of seconds.

          Greg


          ___________________________________________________________
          Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/trueswitch2.html
        • Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
          ... Thanks, Jeff. Changing the width/height dimensions was just a quick and dirty/lazy way for me to get smaller images. I suspected smaller files would be the
          Message 4 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            At 09:43 AM 2/20/2007 , you wrote:
            >Logic tells me that files' size is what dictates its loading time, and
            >displaying a file at a different size than stored at probably adds time
            >to the loading, (loading vs. (loading + resize for display) The
            >difference may be very small, but a initially stored smaller file will
            >load faster than a larger file.
            >
            >That is the reason people create thumbnail images that link to the
            >larger resolution files.
            >
            >Small loads faster, shows a sample and if the party wants the big one
            >(for detail) they can go to it. Jeff

            Thanks, Jeff.
            Changing the width/height dimensions was just a quick and dirty/lazy way
            for me to get smaller images.
            I suspected smaller files would be the only way to accomplish faster
            loading but I decided to get a second opinion by posting to ntb-htm.

            -Mike


            ----------
            Check it out:
            www.EpicRoadTrips.us

            ~~~



            ~~~





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Jeff Scism
            Go with EzThumbs, it does a wonderful job of creating thumbnails and is free from the fine folks at Fookes Software... Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV wrote:
            Message 5 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Go with EzThumbs, it does a wonderful job of creating thumbnails and is
              free from the fine folks at Fookes Software...

              Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV wrote: Thanks, Jeff.

              > Changing the width/height dimensions was just a quick and dirty/lazy way
              > for me to get smaller images.
              > I suspected smaller files would be the only way to accomplish faster
              > loading but I decided to get a second opinion by posting to ntb-htm.
              >
              > -Mike
              >
            • GilaMountainDulcimers.com
              File size is file size. Changing the dimensions doesn t change the file size and load times are based on file size. You will find that if you reduce the
              Message 6 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                File size is file size. Changing the dimensions doesn't change the file size and load times are based on file size. You will find that if you reduce the width and height of the picture and then resample it to reduce the file size, you will not loose picture quality on the web. However, if you wanted to print the picture later on, the printing quality might be lessened depending on how small you resample it. If you are only going to use the picture on your website, then you can reduce the file size considerably without losing quality.
                If I want to preserve a picture, I usually resize and resample it, but save it under a different name, say 012_sm.jpg and 012_lg.jpg so that I still have the lg original to work with later if I should change my mind about how I was using it.

                Hugs,
                Kerry Coates in New Mexico
                Visit all my websites!
                http://www.GilaMountainDulcimers.com
                http://www.Amazing-Health-Products.com
                http://www.GamblingStrategyCards.com
                http://www.CharroCoats.com
                http://www.PaulCoatesGuitar.com


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
                To: ntb-html@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:02 AM
                Subject: [NH] image load times and height/width specified in HTML




                Greetings,
                Does the specified size of an image reflect it's load time?

                In other words would this image: <img src="013.jpg" width="515"
                height="343" title="" alt="" /> which we will say has a file size of 50k,
                load any faster if the image size was changed to: width="415" height="243"
                but the file size remains the same?

                Thanks,
                -Mike

                ----------
                Check it out:
                www.EpicRoadTrips.us

                ~~~

                ~~~

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Don - HtmlFixIt.com
                ... totally agree - EZ Thumbnails is a great little program people are correct -- resizing does take time for the processor, but such an insignificant amount
                Message 7 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Jeff Scism wrote:
                  > Go with EzThumbs, it does a wonderful job of creating thumbnails and is
                  > free from the fine folks at Fookes Software...
                  >

                  totally agree - EZ Thumbnails is a great little program

                  people are correct -- resizing does take time for the processor, but
                  such an insignificant amount that it isn't of any concern -- it can also
                  affect quality, but again insignificantly in most cases

                  the only advantage of giving them the whole 50K file when they could be
                  using a much smaller file sized thumbnail is that it is then essentially
                  preloaded ... but if you are doing that for five images and they aren't
                  necessarily going to look at all of them ... you are wasting bandwidth
                  which means time for them and expense for you or your isp and that
                  eventually drives the cost up. Wasted bandwidth is a bad thing -- even
                  if the rest of the world doesn't understand that.
                • sisterscape
                  ... I also put a vote in for EZ Thumbnails. Absolutely LOVE it. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!
                  Message 8 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- "Don - HtmlFixIt.com" <don@...> wrote:

                    > Jeff Scism wrote:
                    >
                    > totally agree - EZ Thumbnails is a great little program
                    >
                    >

                    I also put a vote in for EZ Thumbnails. Absolutely LOVE it.



                    ____________________________________________________________________________________
                    Yahoo! Music Unlimited
                    Access over 1 million songs.
                    http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
                  • Mike Breiding - Morgantown WV
                    ... Thanks to everyone for their input. I use FastStone Image Viewer to generate thumbnails and resize my pics. I
                    Message 9 of 9 , Feb 20, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      At 12:13 PM 2/20/2007 , you wrote:
                      >--- "Don - HtmlFixIt.com" <don@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > > Jeff Scism wrote:>
                      > > totally agree - EZ Thumbnails is a great little program.
                      >
                      >I also put a vote in for EZ Thumbnails. Absolutely LOVE it.

                      Thanks to everyone for their input.

                      I use <http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm>FastStone Image Viewer
                      to generate thumbnails and resize my pics.
                      I have found it to be more robust and flexible than most thumbnail generators.
                      And, it does, much, much more - all for the low, low price of freeware.

                      -Mike


                      ----------
                      Check it out:
                      www.EpicRoadTrips.us

                      ~~~



                      ~~~





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.