That's interesting, the gallery should autoload rather than requiring you to click on it.
-Adam wendy beard wrote: > 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
