I have a fairly large screen at work (crt 21" I think) and I only saw the large pics one at a time. I didn't see anything either side until I got to the vertical one. Starting it was a bit odd too. I first got a black screen with SimpleViewer requires Macromedia Flash. Get Macromedia Flash. If you have Flash installed, click to view gallery across the top of the page "Macromedia Flash" and "click to view gallery" were dark blue on black so I couldn't read the words. Anyway, I clicked to view gallery (as I have flash installed) and off it went.
I liked the series of photos but didn't like this gallery presentation much wendy On 1/23/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There area a couple of problems with that, Adam. > > - Even though the display space is 750 pixels tall, when you account > for menu bars, window structure etc, the image size is too large. > Better to err on the safe side and make the display images a bit > smaller, around 550 to 600 pixels tall at max looks better on a > 1280x800 or particularly a 1024x768 display in a typical browser > window IMO. Despite that I like the larger view on the 23" screen, > there are still a lot of people out there with 1024x768 displays. > > - It is much more timing consuming to start up with such large image > files to download, even with broadband. Your set of 6 images takes at > least 3x as long to load and start compared to the set of 12 I put up > on the same broadband connection with the same computer and browser. > My image sizing is approximately 534 pixels tall at maximum. > > There's also the dynamics of the presentation to consider. One of the > things I like about this presentation is that you can see what's > coming and what's just been on the screen, in part and dimmed, to > give a sense of the sequence. With the larger images, you lose that > effect unless you have a very big display. > > Godfrey > > > On Jan 23, 2007, at 5:03 AM, Adam Maas wrote: > > > Well, it's an excellent piece of software and I certainly don't > > mind the > > small amount of manual editing necessary to set it up. > > > > I optimised the image sizes to just fit the common 1280x800 widescreen > > displays (they're 750px tall) as those have the least vertical > > resolution of the common displays in use today. Hopefully it will look > > equally good on larger displays. > > > > -Adam > > > > > > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> Credit where it's due: Juan found it first. > >> > >> It's a darn nice flash viewer utility. Simple to set up, quick to > >> load. I like how you have set relatively large image sizes and it > >> auto-scales properly to the size of the browser window too. > >> > >> Amusing pictures too ... ;-) > >> > >> G > >> > >> On Jan 22, 2007, at 6:28 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > >> > >>> http://www.mawz.ca/sets/deadheads/index.html > >>> > >>> Trying out the Autoviewer software that Godfrey used for his recent > >>> GESO, and quite liking it. > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
