I have a site with thumnails of pictures. When the user clicks on one, it opens full size in a new window using javascript.
I was wondering if its quicker to load the page, if the thumbnails are smaller versions of the picture that i've resized in photoshop, or if i use the fully sized picture, and make the thumbnail using the standard HTML way of resizing them.
So does it take longer to load a big image, and resize it into a small one, than it does to load a small graphic, then load another, fully sized one?
mmmmmmm i'd best shut up now cos i'm going round the houses.
Look at it this way. If the people browsing your site will open every single image, it's faster for them to download all of them once. If they may only look at a couple of them, it's faster for them to download a thumbnail.
If i read your post correctly!!
dave
In a world without walls and fences - who needs Windows and Gates?! - Unknown Author
"And there's Bill Gates, the...most...famous...man in the...ah...Microsoft." -- A TV commentator for the 2000 Olympics.
Originally posted by moondance So does it take longer to load a big image, and resize it into a small one, than it does to load a small graphic, then load another, fully sized one?
Yes, because the bigger image is going to be more kb than a photoshop resized thumbnail. So, it is best to make your thumbnails in photoshop, and not use your larger pictures as thumbnails...
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks