Photo Gallery Forums

Please do visit this page:
http://www.haider.se/#/3D/Architecture/Affisch P1 Slutgenomg_ng-02.jpg

The image dimensions are; 1920x2399. From what I understand, there is a flash limit, but that is 2800 or about that number.
Am I doing anything wrong?

In case I need to rescale the images; is there a way to do it without re-uploading?

Thanks.

Yes there is a flash limit, simply make images smaller. What is the point of uploading them this big anyway?

Well, sometimes bigger can be better.

So the limitation isn't 2800px?
Do you have am exact number?

Looking at the specific image in mention, I don't see it being cropped in any way on your website:


Big is better, but not if they are scaled down to at least half size even on large screens, and the visitor must wait 4x as long to have the image load. I would suggest 1600px, which is considered BIG in terms of web images.

mjau-mjau wrote:Looking at the specific image in mention, I don't see it being cropped in any way on your website:

Thank you for replying.
True, it is not cropped now that I looked again. The problem before could have been a cache issue. Sorry for that I've learned something for next time. Refresh/restart browser before posting


As for the size, I must think about it. You are of course right regarding to loading time etc. On the other hand, depending on the business and field of usage, one might need to show material in the best quality possible even the Web. For me, I might work with max 1920 width, because I myself have a 1920 screen. That gives me a possibility to zoom in to the max and see an untouched quality in full zoom.


There is however another thing I noticed. If you zoom in to the max, you will see the part at the bottom get hidden underneath the image thumbnails. Is there a setting already where you can make the image end above the thumbnail-strip?

Haider of Sweden wrote:True, it is not cropped now that I looked again. The problem before could have been a cache issue. Sorry for that I've learned something for next time. Refresh/restart browser before posting

I believe the exact limitation is in fact 2880 x 2880 px for images.

Haider of Sweden wrote:As for the size, I must think about it. You are of course right regarding to loading time etc. On the other hand, depending on the business and field of usage, one might need to show material in the best quality possible even the Web. For me, I might work with max 1920 width, because I myself have a 1920 screen. That gives me a possibility to zoom in to the max and see an untouched quality in full zoom.

Then why not use perhaps 1920 for max length (height or width, depending)? File sizes are exponentially higher by just being slightly larger. Example:

1600*1280 = 2048000
2400*1920 = 4608000 (2-3 times larger file)

Sure, if you need zoom-in with good detail (although not many people really use this feature), the bigger the better but I think you need a balance.

Haider of Sweden wrote:There is however another thing I noticed. If you zoom in to the max, you will see the part at the bottom get hidden underneath the image thumbnails. Is there a setting already where you can make the image end above the thumbnail-strip?

Unfortunately no, because don't want to cover the interface with an image so it can't be accessed. This is however we by default have set the thumbnails to "autohide", which you have disabled I assume ... By autohiding the thumbnails, they will not cover the image when the visitor has the mouse idle.

mjau-mjau wrote:Sure, if you need zoom-in with good detail (although not many people really use this feature), the bigger the better but I think you need a balance.

Very good point. In fact, if the visitor really needs to see more, he/she is welcome to take contact with me. Thanks for the suggestion.

mjau-mjau wrote: Unfortunately no, because don't want to cover the interface with an image so it can't be accessed. This is however we by default have set the thumbnails to "autohide", which you have disabled I assume ... By autohiding the thumbnails, they will not cover the image when the visitor has the mouse idle.

In fact, I wasn't thinking about hiding the interface, but rather let the image end just above the thumbs. Right now, it ends where the screen ends at the bottom.

However, I will meanwhile check out the autohide function. But my guess is that once the pointer is at the bottom, the user will not be able to hide the interface unless he/she stays idle. Why don't you consider the option to make the image end just above the thumbnails, and I will check out this feature and consider it.
Thanks!

Hello again,

The auto-hide function was really good. 99% close to what I needed. The last 1% is that some users might have to fiddle with it before understanding it. But please, do consider the idea of having the image end up X amount of pixel above the bottom edge, where X pixels is the height of the thumbnails. That function could maybe be activated only when not in auto-hide because else you would have a black gap.


Thanks for great support!