|
|
Posted by Vince Morgan on 12/17/06 23:17
"Ivan Bϊtora" <ivanbuto2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166363527.582077.21340@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Vince Morgan wrote:
> > On opening it I see what BootNic observed, the file contains a lot of
xml.
> > That is the problem.
> > The one that Dorayme re-exported has a new header without the extraneous
> > xml, so it works fine.
>
> Thanks to all for figuring this out!
>
> Interesting to notice that IE will display the original picture fine
> when viewing locally, but not when viewing on the internet.
>
> One more quick question, when I resave the file in .jpeg, if I choose
> the highest quality, the file size of the full picture will grow from
> 1.25 MB to 3.42 MB - any way to cut down on the size? I don't have any
> professional image software, I'm limited to the freeware IrfanView or
> XnView, which, so far, have satisfied my needs just fine. However, I
> had to first save as .bmp and then again as .jpeg to get rid of the xml
> headers.
>
The quality of the site you are working on seems very good. There is
considerable image content on a couple of pages and with that in mind I
would like to make a suggestion.
PNG images have been around for a long time now and are well supported.
They offer good, truely lossless compression. Even master images can be
compressed without affecting the quality in any way.
They can also have an alpha channel, though there is little support for this
feature in browsers yet. In most cases they even compress better than a JPG
I realize that your resources are limited, but I would try very hard to find
a freeware image editor, that can save an image as a PNG, with as much
control over the compression as possible. Agonising over the degree of loss
you are prepared to accept to allow lower bandwith users reasonable access
is a thing of the past with PNG, IMHO.
All the best Ivan,
Vince Morgan
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|