Thanks Russell! Given the feedback I've gotten, if you want most folks to see photos presented without the necessity of scrolling, about 590 pixels seems to be practical limit on the vertical dimension. Horizontal dimension is looser: up to about 800 seems to be fine for most systems these days. I think I'll do 590V x 790H as maximum dimensions on the web pages now.
Godfrey On Feb 27, 2007, at 12:55 PM, Russell Kerstetter wrote: > nice sparse composition, and nice green too! I have to scroll just a > little to see the whole thing. I have been trying something similar > because I recently realized that I am probably not the only one who > gets irritated with scrolling, I have been trying 600 tall > > http://www.avocadohead.com/piclinks/spare.html > > on my computar here at work it is just a couple pixels too tall, but > at home in safari it just fits. > > On 2/26/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Another photo from a recent walk around the neighborhood, when the >> light was very flat and soft in the nascent moments of oncoming rain: >> >> http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/09.htm >> >> Comments, critique and tossed salad all welcome. >> >> BTW, I'm moving to larger standard display sizes. This one is square >> at 624x624 pixels ... I'd like to know if anyone has difficulty with >> this size photo, particularly in the vertical dimension. Can you see >> it without scrolling? Is the annotation below it visible or do you >> need to scroll to see it? etc. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
