Re: [OT] ideal file size of a jpeg or gif image

[James Brook <ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au>]

Dave Proctor wrote:
> 
> And I think you are wrong. If it is purely an image, it should display
> *fully* in the normal screen size, i.e. 800x600 (although taking a bit off
> for browser borders, etc). Choosing to display it higher shows a degree of
> arrogance, IMNSHO.
> 

The format of a 35mm frame is different to the format of a screen. It's
like trying to display a widescreen movie on a TV. You can either
display it at its full width and leave a gap at the top and the bottom,
or you can display it at its correct height and loose a bit on the
sides. By sizing it to 900x600, it ensures that it can be used as a
background without losing detail or having a gap at the top and the
bottom. 900x600 also means that it remains in the 35mm format for other
uses.

Another advantage with the 900x600 size is that it can be displayed at a
good size on a 1024x768 or higher desktop. Clearly you are showing a
degree of ignorance if you think everyone has their desktops set at
800x600. Try running a 19in monitor in 800x600 (I have a 17in, but I
know someone with a 19in). You will find that the picture tends to have
thin black lines through it and the icons look too big. We have huge
monitors at the RMIT and they are run in 1152x1024. 900x600 looks small
on these monitors and the 400x300 video captures look like thumbnails.
  
-- 
- James Brook -

----------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail:     
mailto:ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au
Victorian Railfan Web Site:    
http://www.railpage.org.au/vr/
----------------------------------------------------------------