On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 08:55:26AM +0100, Bob W wrote: > > > All of that being said, is there a consensus on "the > > optimal size" for > > > displaying photos. On my little monitors, it looks like > > 900 vertical > > > pixels is about the best for a big picture. > > > > > > > > Consensus? > > > > Sure. It's just that everybody's is different.... > > > > For what it's worth, the Pentax Photo gallery uses 600 pixels for the > > vertical size. I think that's a bit small, so for my PESOs I > > use 700. > > That fits in a standard Firefox browser window with a bit of space to > > spare (on my 1440 x 900 display). > > > > This may be excessively precise, but if you use 700 pixels on the long edge > for a photo whose dimensions are 2:3, resizing it must do something a bit > funny to the dimensions, since 700 is not divisible by 2/3 without a > remainder.
That's why I use 720 x 480 on my Picture-a-Week gallery. It's also easy to crop down to 4:3 and get a 640 x 480 image, which happens to be what is needed for the electronic picture frame I gave to my mother. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
