On Thursday, December 16, 2004, at 10:46 AM, Chris Kennon wrote:
Hi,
Any suggestions on bringing the file size down? I've tried interlacing
the .gif the current size is the lowest without image degradation.
CK
Thanks for the compliment on the background. Any other suggestions or
critique of the
Hi,
For this kind of images jpg works a lot better (keeping that kind of
photographic detail). I used fireworks keeping a good quality and the
file is 50kb.
I can send the file if you want.
bye
Laura
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:19:48 -0600, Charles Martin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Kennon
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:19:48 -0600, Charles Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Chris Kennon wrote:
Any suggestions on bringing the file size down? I've tried interlacing
the .gif the current size is the lowest without image degradation.
Just for comparison, I took the image into PaintShopPro (
Large images are almost always better off as jpegs. The exception being
images that use lots of flat color and/or text.
Photoshop's Save for web features easily got this image down to 37K with
similar visible quality.
But you certainly don't need Photoshop. There are many shareware/freeware
pro
You can drop the image to 23K with a decent JPEG converter. The fact that
it's a background means just that: it's subordinate to content. I have
http://www.xat.com/ in my graphics manipulation armoury. Still the best
after 3 years.
Mike Pepper
Accessible Web Developer
Internet SEO and Marketing An
Chris Kennon wrote:
Any suggestions on bringing the file size down? I've tried interlacing
the .gif the current size is the lowest without image degradation.
Just for comparison, I took the image into PaintShopPro (yes, I'm too cheap
to own Photoshop right now) and saved the image in JPEG format
Hi,
Any suggestions on bringing the file size down? I've tried interlacing
the .gif the current size is the lowest without image degradation.
CK
Thanks for the compliment on the background. Any other suggestions or
critique of the design is welcome off-list
On Thursday, December 16, 2004, at 1
Nick Verstappen wrote:
You should at least add a (white, or light grey) background color to
the body or div with the main content. If you do, users can start
reading the content even when the background isn't loaded yet (or does
nog load at all).
Excellent suggestion... I did notice that the tex
Chris,
You should at least add a (white, or light grey) background color to the
body or div with the main content. If you do, users can start reading
the content even when the background isn't loaded yet (or does nog load
at all).
Chris Kennon wrote:
Hi,
At the following url:
http://working.cki