Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Image not resized to browser window

Reply
Thread Tools

Image not resized to browser window

 
 
mbstevens
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
Spartanicus wrote:

> Any other "modern doctypes" you want me to demonstrate?
>


OK! That's good enough for me.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
In article
<(E-Mail Removed) et>,
patrick j <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 03:06:17 +0100, Don wrote
> (in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):
>
> > It works! You are golden, many thanks!!

>
> dorayme might welll frame your posting and hang it on his wall.


I dunno Patrick... do I seem so desperate?



--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
patrick j
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:58:59 +0100, dorayme wrote
(in article
<(E-Mail Removed)>):

> In article
> <(E-Mail Removed) et>,
> patrick j <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 03:06:17 +0100, Don wrote
>> (in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):
>>
>>> It works! You are golden, many thanks!!

>>
>> dorayme might welll frame your posting and hang it on his wall.

>
> I dunno Patrick... do I seem so desperate?


No, I don't think so at all.

I do think being described as "golden" is particularly flattering.


--
Patrick
Brighton, UK

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>

 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
In article
<(E-Mail Removed) et>,
patrick j <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:58:59 +0100, dorayme wrote
> (in article
> <(E-Mail Removed)>):
>
> > In article
> > <(E-Mail Removed) et>,
> > patrick j <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 03:06:17 +0100, Don wrote
> >> (in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):
> >>
> >>> It works! You are golden, many thanks!!
> >>
> >> dorayme might welll frame your posting and hang it on his wall.

> >
> > I dunno Patrick... do I seem so desperate?

>
> No, I don't think so at all.
>
> I do think being described as "golden" is particularly flattering.


yes, ok... I give in, I am printing and dusting off a frame
already...



--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-22-2006

Don wrote:
> ALSO, the images will appear full-screen (IE maximized) for
> whatever display resolution they have.


Why are you assuming that your viewers will be using IE instead of a
decent browser like Mozilla?

--
Dan

 
Reply With Quote
 
patrick j
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-22-2006
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:37:20 +0100, dorayme wrote
(in article
<(E-Mail Removed)>):

> yes, ok... I give in, I am printing and dusting off a frame
> already...


You can't use a silver frame. There is no greater clash than silver and
gold.



--
Patrick
Brighton, UK

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Don
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2006
Dan wrote:
>
> Don wrote:
> > ALSO, the images will appear full-screen (IE maximized) for
> > whatever display resolution they have.

>
> Why are you assuming that your viewers will be using IE instead of a
> decent browser like Mozilla?
>
> --
> Dan


I didn't; I tested in both (or actually Netscape 7).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Don
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2006
mbstevens wrote:
>
> Don wrote:
>
> >
> > And the drawbacks are...? Why do you say this? Here's my motivation:
> > I made a 'home' page with links to pages containing the images. Each of
> > the image pages contain 'next', 'previous' buttons so it can function as
> > a slide show, which is why I can't make the home page link directly to
> > the pictures. I want to put all this on a CD to give to friends,

>
> If it will never appear on the net, letting
> the browser resize is not quite so bad, but I
> still would not do it unless you are also
> sure that everyone you distribute the CDs to
> also have a browser that resizes images in a
> way that looks good and that maintains the
> aspect ratio.
>
> > but I
> > want to include the FULL resolution images in case they want to make
> > large prints, which is why I don't want to set any particular image
> > size.

>
> I would make a set of images reduced to the
> same width and have a printing link to the
> full sized image. Your pages will fail
> validation without a width and height set.
>
> > ALSO, the images will appear full-screen (IE maximized) for
> > whatever display resolution they have.

>
> Not unless they allow their browser windows
> to be maximized. Are you playing around with
> jscript to maximize their windows without
> their permission? That would be a bad idea.
> They might have different ideas about how
> large their browser windows should be.
> Better to make reduced images that are small
> enough to display in even a reasonably small
> browser window.


I am not maximizing it for them, I just meant that they can make it as
large as they want, and they'll be getting as much resolution as they
wish (& can handle).


> --
> mbstevens
> http://www.mbstevens.com/howtothumb

 
Reply With Quote
 
Don
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2006
dorayme wrote:
>
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Don <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > And the drawbacks are...?

>
> Another drawback, if you put up big photos then you disadvantage
> people who either have very small screens, low bandwidth or who
> are happy to see them a reasonable small size. It works like
> this: you can put up a massive pic and it will resize by the
> browser either with the style I gave you or in other ways (there
> are situations when you can base the width and height on ems
> according to the px proportions of the native size) not to badly
> if it is viewed with less pixels than native. But the big file
> still has to be downloaded to the punters machine, the poor
> fellow on dialup or small screen is getting more than he wants
> for hs purpose.


Agreed, but as I said, this is on a CD. I did make a version for the
web but for that I downsized to 1024X768.

>
> You can easily solve the problem of giving everyone what they
> want by ensuring you offer different sizes and making this plain.
> For big files, best to make it clear they can download it for
> printing (don't lay it into the page, except for a link to it).
> Thumbnails and moderate sizes for enlargements for the average
> we\bsite, say 100px square and 500px square as a rough guide.
> Anything much bigger, I would take heed of what mb says.
>
> --
> dorayme

 
Reply With Quote
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-27-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Don <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> >
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > Don <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > And the drawbacks are...?

> >
> > Another drawback, if you put up big photos then you disadvantage
> > people who either have very small screens, low bandwidth or who
> > are happy to see them a reasonable small size. It works like
> > this: you can put up a massive pic and it will resize by the
> > browser either with the style I gave you or in other ways (there
> > are situations when you can base the width and height on ems
> > according to the px proportions of the native size) not to badly
> > if it is viewed with less pixels than native. But the big file
> > still has to be downloaded to the punters machine, the poor
> > fellow on dialup or small screen is getting more than he wants
> > for hs purpose.

>
> Agreed, but as I said, this is on a CD. I did make a version for the
> web but for that I downsized to 1024X768.
>
> >


I have forgotten all details of the thread but many people cannot
spare 1024 x 768 and so this sounds too big to me.

> > You can easily solve the problem of giving everyone what they
> > want by ensuring you offer different sizes and making this plain.
> > For big files, best to make it clear they can download it for
> > printing (don't lay it into the page, except for a link to it).
> > Thumbnails and moderate sizes for enlargements for the average
> > we\bsite, say 100px square and 500px square as a rough guide.
> > Anything much bigger, I would take heed of what mb says.
> >


I still think this last bit of advice is worth noting. (In fact,
when I re-read it, a little tear came into my eye at its succinct
beauty and sense)

--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nwebie : Getting the value of a resized browser window andy.jones@fdtassociates.com Javascript 2 09-11-2006 07:20 AM
Custom control should resize when the browser is resized santel_helvis@sify.com ASP .Net Building Controls 0 11-12-2005 07:30 AM
Drop down menu repositions when I resized browser Despoina Javascript 2 03-25-2005 09:43 PM
Rebinding page after image is resized on server not showing new sized image Earl Teigrob ASP .Net 2 02-20-2004 09:44 PM
Re: resized image in table extends table width to original image width Sean Jorden HTML 1 08-19-2003 08:59 AM



Advertisments