Comments interspersed...
>-----Original Message-----
>Hi Jim, and thanks for the quick reply! As a total
>newbie to this, I am grateful to find help from those
> who know.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>Your "thumbnails" are, in fact, full-sized pictures
>>that you're transmitting to the browser, and then
>>forcing the browser to shrink. The time required to
>>transmit these fill-sized files may be resulting in
>> some timeouts.
>
>That would happen just in Netscape? Altho, they aren't
>too speedy in IE either.
Maybe. Timeouts are spooky.
>>For best results, use your favorite picture-editing
>>program to create some true thumbnails that are
>>physically the size you want, and use these for
>>hyperlinking to the full-sized picture.
>
>So are you saying use TWO pictures for each?
>Ah, that's what I'd used that before and the whole site
>seemed to take too long to download, so it was suggested
>I change to this. So much to learn, all under time
>pressure.
Well, the first picture on your home page is /images/natl-
armoire-copy-bestLarge.jpg. That file is 75,559 bytes in
size, and its physical dimensions are 375 x 498 pixels.
Right now, you're transmitting all 75,559 bytes to teh
browsers, and then you're asking the browser to resize
the picture down to 200 x 264 pixels.
Just for kicks, I loaded this file into PaintShop Pro
(which is old but I'm used to it), resized it to 200 x
265, and saved it with 10% compression (which is on the
high quality end of the scale). The resulting picture
file was only 15,707 bytes in size. That's a savings of
59852 bytes, or about 80%, which means there's a fivefold
improvement in download time.
Your home page has five of these pictures. Some of the
other pages have a dozen or more.
Hmmm...
>Sadly the owner likes the larger size of
>these'thumbnails'...how large can I get away with as a
>thumnail (in pixels?)and see a positive difference in
>loading?
Use your favorite image editing program to make the
thumbnails as large or as small as you like.
>I did use a photoshop program and wonder if you find
>much difference between optimizing "high" or "medium"?
>Would it speed it up to change to medium? Would I lose
>any of the important detail of the image?
>
>Stacy
This is a judgement call on your part. You would have to
try various settings and see how they affect the results.
FWIW, the biggest jump is usually from 0% compression to
10%, and you can barely see the difference.
Jim Buyens
Microsoft FrontPage MVP
http://www.interlacken.com
Author of:
*----------------------------------------------------
|\---------------------------------------------------
|| Microsoft Office FrontPage 2003 Inside Out
||---------------------------------------------------
|| Web Database Development Step by Step .NET Edition
|| Microsoft FrontPage Version 2002 Inside Out
|| Faster Smarter Beginning Programming
|| (All from Microsoft Press)
|/---------------------------------------------------
*----------------------------------------------------
>>FrontPage also has an AutoThumbnail feature you can use.
>>
>>A third possibility is first, for each
>>existing "thumbnail", select it and then click the
>>Resample button on the Pictures toolbar. Then, when you
>>save the page and the Save Embedded Pictures dialog box
>>appears, be sure to save the new pictures and not
>>overwrite the existing files.
>>
>>Note, however, that in FP2000, both the AutoThumbnail
>>feature and the Resample button are only 256-color
tools.
>>That's why using a true picture editor produces better
>>results.
>>
>>>and it displays the table's lines that I've
>>>blanked out.
>>
>>Specify a border width of 0.
>
>>>I've devoured all the written info I can find and
>>>picked the brains of my 'knowledgeable' friends, and
>>>still can't fix it. I know it loads slowly in both
>>>too. I welcome any suggestions with thanks.
>>>
>>>Stacy
>>
>>Jim Buyens
>>Microsoft FrontPage MVP
>>http://www.interlacken.com
>>Author of:
>>*----------------------------------------------------
>>|\---------------------------------------------------
>>|| Microsoft Office FrontPage 2003 Inside Out
>>||---------------------------------------------------
>>|| Web Database Development Step by Step .NET Edition
>>|| Microsoft FrontPage Version 2002 Inside Out
>>|| Faster Smarter Beginning Programming
>>|| (All from Microsoft Press)
>>|/---------------------------------------------------
>>*----------------------------------------------------
>>
>>.
>>
>.
>