maintain the size of an image file (jpeg)

[J]

I am a newbie to this so let me know if I need to post this somewhere else,
otherwise your help would be greatly appreciated.

I have taken my first stab at a website and i have scanned in some images to
the site and have some hyperlinks to the images, but the images come up at a
different size other than the scanned size, and they look pixelized. If I
view the images on my PC using Windows Picture and Fax Viewer they look
perfect...just like the source. How can I make sure that the picture size
is not changed by IE when the hyperlink is clicked on (I want the images to
look just a sharp as when I use Windows Picture and Fax Viewer)?

J

 

[John Cello]

J:

If available to you, it's always a good idea to optimize a picture,
especially a scanned image, in a graphics editing package. This way you can
crop it to only have the content you want, select the appropriate level of
compression, size it, etc.

Also, rather than having a link to the image, try placing it on a page by
doing an Insert...Picture...From File. This will enable you to place and size
the graphic in an aesthetically pleasing manner.

That said, at the very least, right click on the picture in design view, and
from the Picture Properties dialog, select the height & width in pixels you
want the picture displayed in.

If you have several images, explore the options of the photo gallery in FP.

Hope this helps.

John Cello
www.johncelloconsulting.com

 

[Johnny Bravo]

You can reach me here:

Todd Ullum
5963 Whitefield Street
Dearborn Heights, Michigan
48127
The diesel mechanic money is absolutely insane!!

 

[Murray]

See my reply to your other curious post.

 

[J]

Anyone?

J

 

[Murray]

How large is the image after you have scanned it (I mean dimensionally how
large is it)?

How large is the image on the web page (dimensionally)?

What kind of image is it - photo or line art?

 

[J]

scanned photo images from a standard sized catalog (8.5x11). I am trying to
make the size of the image the same size of the actual catalog (8.5x11). I
was hoping to be able to make the images viewable with the windows picture
and fax viewer. It seems that program can resize the image and it it
legible (since there is text on the scanned images as well) no matter what
the size is scaled down or up to. I am basically trying to put this catalog
up on the web.

J

 

[Murray]

OK - so let's go with that. What format are the images saved in? I will
assume JPG for purposes of argument.

On a 1024x768 screen, and assuming 96ppi (pixels per inch), an 8.5x11 image
is 8.5*96 pixels wide by 11*96 pixels wide. Altogether that would be
816pixels X 1056 pixels or 861,700 pixels square roughly. That's pretty big
assuming 1 byte per pixel. The JPG compression is not too bad - let's
assume 90% of the image can be compressed. Even so, each image is 86K.
That's big. In addition it's bigger than some screens you are likely to
have visiting your site, which is awkward.

Here's what I think you ought to do. Open each image in a graphics editing
program and resize it to - say - 600 wide by whatever height. That should
be your largest image. When you put it on the web page, make sure that you
leave it at that size - in other words, do not resize the image in the
browser.

Does that make sense?

 

[Tom J]

OK - so let's go with that. What format are the images saved in? I
will assume JPG for purposes of argument.

On a 1024x768 screen, and assuming 96ppi (pixels per inch), an
8.5x11 image is 8.5*96 pixels wide by 11*96 pixels wide. Altogether
that would be 816pixels X 1056 pixels or 861,700 pixels square
roughly. That's pretty big assuming 1 byte per pixel. The JPG
compression is not too bad - let's assume 90% of the image can be
compressed. Even so, each image is 86K. That's big. In addition
it's bigger than some screens you are likely to have visiting your
site, which is awkward.

Here's what I think you ought to do. Open each image in a graphics
editing program and resize it to - say - 600 wide by whatever
height. That should be your largest image. When you put it on the
web page, make sure that you leave it at that size - in other words,
do not resize the image in the browser.

Does that make sense?

Just to add to what you just said, after resizing, load the image into
Paint and save. That will reduce the weight of it by about 1/2. Just
finished doing a bunch.

Tom J

 

[Murray]

Hmm - *saving* an image, in and of itself, does nothing to reduce the weight
of it. Adjusting the parameters with which it is saved (like the quality in
a JPG, or the number of colors in a GIF) are what affect the final weight of
the image, since you are removing pixels (effectively) when you do that. I
assumed that after the resize, you would have then exported/saved the image
at the MINIMUM acceptible quality already. In this case, opening and saving
again would not be expected to have any beneficial effect, and may in fact
degrade things beyond that minimum acceptability level.

One of the worst things you can do to a JPG image, by the way, is to JPG it
again, so to speak.

 

[Tom J]

Hmm - *saving* an image, in and of itself, does nothing to reduce
the weight of it. Adjusting the parameters with which it is saved
(like the quality in a JPG, or the number of colors in a GIF) are
what affect the final weight of the image, since you are removing
pixels (effectively) when you do that. I assumed that after the
resize, you would have then exported/saved the image at the MINIMUM
acceptible quality already. In this case, opening and saving again
would not be expected to have any beneficial effect, and may in fact
degrade things beyond that minimum acceptability level.

One of the worst things you can do to a JPG image, by the way, is to
JPG it again, so to speak.

In my case, I started with digital photos that were shot at 2048 and
use my photo editor to reduce them to 640. The resulting photos were
taking about 120 seconds to load with a computer on a 28 modem. After
loading those same 640 photos into Paint and saving from Paint, the
load time dropped to around 65 seconds. The drop in quality was not
noticeable on screen. I don't put photos online to be copied and used
as prints!

Tom J