On Mar 7, 2007, at 12:13 PM, Bob W wrote: >>> http://www.web-options.com/Phone/content/IMAGE_00026_large.html >> >> Since you started to use Lightroom to make your web pages, >> your site has become remarkably slow. The background loads >> immediately but >> the thumbs and pictures take ages. > > Is anybody else finding my site slow? Are you finding other peoples' > Lightroom sites slow? > > I know Lightroom uses Javascript or something, maybe that has > something to do with it. I'll dig around in the settings and see if > there's anything I can do about it. > > Maybe I've overloaded my web site in some way - I'll try and figure > something out. .... > what's it like if you try to download the file directly, bypassing all > the html and javascript? > > <http://www.web-options.com/Phone/content/bin/images/large/ > IMAGE_00026.jpg>
Your pages and the direct download seem to be about equally fast to my system. I did a test of my own as well. I had Lightroom make a simple gallery of 9 exposures. Yes, it uses javascript for some functions. I've loaded that gallery onto my website and compared it against a plain HTML gallery with a similar number of photos in it. Also compared it against my PAW 2006 index page. Download speed and display speed is very close, I can't tell who wins. LR's gallery uses somewhat larger files and more of them ... the total file space is about twice the size of my "Winter, Trees" gallery, and three times the size of my "PAW 2006" index page when all thumbnails are considered, but it doesn't bring all of that down at once. You can play with these and see if you can see much difference. I'd be interested to hear what you find. http://www.gdgphoto.com/simple-LR-test/ http://www.gdgphoto.com/wintertrees/ http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW6/ Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
