Posted by John Robinson on April 21, 2011 at 4:59 AM
Wouldn't it be simpler for posters and more economical for the site to just have the larger pic on the UKNP forum ? Why have the two ?
JohnR
Posted by Mike Smith on April 21, 2011 at 10:05 AM
May be my screen resolution - 1024 x 768, but I cannot view the larger images as a single image, I have to page right or up/down which is annoying so I rarely look at the linked bigger images, they lose impact rather than gain impact on my set up
The site layout in the web browser is designed for smaller screen/pics, and to keep bandwidth reduced for those on slower speed links (yes, there are still some with snail-band and carrier pigeon). If you want to make use of the bigger pics, then they're an option - not a requirement.
Posted by John Robinson on April 21, 2011 at 6:10 PM
Surely theres not that much difference in dowload between 300kb and 500 kb ?
JohnR
Maybe not on an odd image or two, but when viewing a lot, there is to some people John. Remember that the site copes with a worldwide audience - not just those who have wonderful fast broadband.
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 23, 2011 at 4:28 AM
Jumping from 300 to 500Kb would mean a 2/3rds increase in bandwidth consumption John - that's 66% increased strain on the server, and 66% increased bandwidth charges at the end of every month.
On a site the size and bandwidth loading of NPN you could measure those extra charges in units of $1k+ without too much difficulty.
And increasing the bandwidth load by 66% would mean increasing image load times on your screen.
Posted by John Robinson on April 23, 2011 at 2:01 PM
Andy
I don't understand'
I suggested originally that why not just have the larger one and not both. If the site has to have the smaller one by design then that the only answer I needed
If you post a large one as well as a smaller one then surely thats a bigger strain on the server than us just posting the one large one. It is by my maths anyway
JR
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 23, 2011 at 3:19 PM
Everyone views thumbnails, from the thumbnails they like they choose to view the smaller jpeg, If they like the smaller jpeg then they might choose to view the larger one, or they may not.
I don't know what the NPN ratios are but for similar formats of image gallery I can tell you that "MEDIUM" views outweigh "LARGE" views by 7.5:1 on average John.
Posted by John Robinson on April 23, 2011 at 3:32 PM
I give up
JohnR
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 23, 2011 at 3:34 PM
Discussion
9 repliesJohnR
The site layout in the web browser is designed for smaller screen/pics, and to keep bandwidth reduced for those on slower speed links (yes, there are still some with snail-band and carrier pigeon). If you want to make use of the bigger pics, then they're an option - not a requirement.
JohnR
On a site the size and bandwidth loading of NPN you could measure those extra charges in units of $1k+ without too much difficulty.
And increasing the bandwidth load by 66% would mean increasing image load times on your screen.
I don't understand'
I suggested originally that why not just have the larger one and not both. If the site has to have the smaller one by design then that the only answer I needed
If you post a large one as well as a smaller one then surely thats a bigger strain on the server than us just posting the one large one. It is by my maths anyway
JR
I don't know what the NPN ratios are but for similar formats of image gallery I can tell you that "MEDIUM" views outweigh "LARGE" views by 7.5:1 on average John.
JohnR