Screen too large - Larry Berlin's responce

[P3D RJ Thorpe <thorpe@xxxxxxxx>]

I fiddled around writing this over the last few days so there have been
several replies before mine, but I couldn't let Larry have the last word
on this because I think he is off base.

We were talking about setting image widths to 100%

From: P3D P3D I wrote: <>
>
>If you code the entries for the images on your pages like the example
>below, your visitors need not have the problems described in this 
>thread over the last few days.
>
>     <img src="3Dshot.gif" width=100%>


To which, Larry responded:
> I can't recommend this procedure, though it may work in some cases. 

It works in every case!

> For one thing it would ruin any layout scheme you may be trying to
> accomplish. 

As a web page designer you have absolutely no control over how the
layout of your page is seen by the viewer. They set up their viewing
to their own preferences. This includes screen resolution, browser
width, monitor size, everything. The only thing that approaches a 
standard is to design your window for a 14" monitor with 640x480 
resolution and hope the viewer has Netscape set to full width of the
screen.

> For another it asks the viewer to make changes of the browser window 
> which is something most viewers won't do very often. 

I can't speak for the average Joe on the net, but I do it all the time.
If I go into a site and they say, "I have spent a lot of time 
formatting this page just right. Please adjust your screen width to
match the reference (box, ruler, line) below.", I do it because I
know that my web experience will be the better for it. If you put a
note at the top of your section of parallel views that says, "Please
adjust the width of your browser so that the images on this page are
7" wide (or whatever), you will be able to freeview them more easily
that way." I doubt that most people would have a problem with that.

> Using the built in scaling routines can also ruin detail in the 
> images. 

Technically, this is true, but practically, it usually doesn't mean 
much. The resolution on ANY video display is a poor substitute for the 
original slide or print. When you scan or otherwise digitize an original
image, you make an arbitrary (or deliberate) decision about the 
resolution. That in itself is a degradation. Everything done to the
image after that further degrades it; conversion to GIF or JPEG, sizing,
color depth, all of it. These things are done by algorithms in the 
computer, algorithms not substantially different than the one that
sizes the image to fit the page width. There is always a tradeoff.
Even scanning images at high resolution but displaying them at a smaller
size doesn't help. They are still altered for final display just like
if you changed the browser width. A pixel is a pixel. The only usually 
noticable problem is if the image is smaller and is displayed larger.

> It also means that on a large monitor such as that which was first 
> mentioned in this thread, you would HAVE to reduce the browser window 
> whether you wanted to or not.

This is true but if you have a large monitor and you are viewing it at 
full screen, regular page layout would look strange anyway. I run at
1150x900 resolution so my browser is always set for about 2/3 the width
of my monitor. To grab the right edge and move it in an inch or so is 
no problem.

> You would be better off using a larger image format and specifying 
> a smaller display size which scales the image smaller on the screen.
> I would rather d/l the images and scale them in a graphics viewer 
> for greater flexibility than adjust the browser window while I'm 
> viewing web information.

Larger image format is controlled by the web page author, the visitor
has no choice. Smaller display size is controlled by the visitor. If
you think visitors are reluctant to simply move their right margin in
an inch, they sure as hell are not going to bail out of your page, set
their screen to a higher resolution, reboot their machine, relog onto
the internet and go back to your page. Only some machines can change
resolution on the fly. My pentium and Matrox card can't even do this.
Besides, downloading to a graphics viewer and scaling a digitized 
image is no different functionally than moving your browser border in.

-- 
RJ Thorpe
Cedar Rapids, IA
mailto:thorpe@xxxxxxxx
http://www.skep.com


------------------------------