i have this bug on my site, dont know what could I do to change it so it will be displayed correctly.
My problem is the filmstrip on my site kecy.sk a.k.a gallery... when I refresh, there are elements appearing and then dissapearing and work properly... But that first look is ugly... It is supose to be displayed in one row as it is. but when I do refresh the page, I see those pictures in filmstrip stack for a little while in multiple rows and then it goes to normal one row.
P.S. Dont mind that big big pictures... it's gonna be smaller sizes...
Thank you
You are serving scaled images thus your website speed is very slow
Dont scale image using HTML or CSS. Try to create a php function for resize them.
You have to specify cache validator.
The following resources have identical contents, but are served from different URLs. Serve these resources from a consistent URL to save 9 request(s) and 1.7KiB.
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/vt?pb=!1m5!1m4!1i7!2i69!3i44!4i256!2m3!1e0!2sm!3i373056598!3m14!2sen-US!3sUS!5e18!12m1!1e47!12m3!1e37!2m1!1ssmartmaps!12m4!1e26!2m2!1sstyles!2zcy50OjZ8cy5lOmd8cC52Om9mZixzLnQ6NXxwLnY6b2ZmLHMudDozfHAudjpvZmYscy50OjF8cC52Om9mZixzLnQ6MnxwLnY6b2ZmLHMudDoxfHAudjpvZmYscy5lOmx8cC52Om9mZg!4e0&token=48356
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/vt?pb=!1m5!1m4!1i7!2i69!3i43!4i256!2m3!1e0!2sm!3i373056598!3m14!2sen-US!3sUS!5e18!12m1!1e47!12m3!1e37!2m1!1ssmartmaps!12m4!1e26!2m2!1sstyles!2zcy50OjZ8cy5lOmd8cC52Om9mZixzLnQ6NXxwLnY6b2ZmLHMudDozfHAudjpvZmYscy50OjF8cC52Om9mZixzLnQ6MnxwLnY6b2ZmLHMudDoxfHAudjpvZmYscy5lOmx8cC52Om9mZg!4e0&token=78498
Related
I currently have a page with about 20 or images with source data pulled from a database.
I display them at width of 100px and I have a hover function that appends an element with the full size image with a width of 250px.
I decided to use the full size version for the original image and just scale it down to 100px instead of using a thumbnail version. My thinking on this was that on this page it is very likely that the user will hover over most of the images so the page would end up having to load the full size version for most of the images anyway so why make them download the thumbnail AND full size version for each element. Also scaling from 250px to 100px didn't seem to display much if any distortion in the smaller element.
Now I am running my page through Google page speed analyzer and it really does not like me using larger than necessary images for the smaller elements. Of course it is ignoring the fact that those larger images are being used for the dynamically created popups.
In order to make my page play nice with Google's page speed tester I am giving in and using thumbnails for the smaller elements but I also want to prefetch the larger image to avoid an annoying delay when the user hovers over the element. This means I am essentially loading 2 versions of the same image just to make Google speed test not yell at me.
This seems ridiculous to me so I wanted to ask if this is really the best way to do this or is there another way to make my page play nice with Google speed test.
Thanks,
Adam
If you know what you're doing, there's no need to be a slave to the PageSpeed score.
Loading two copies of the images could make actual page speed slower. However, it depends on what you are trying to optimize for. Loading thumbnails first and then large versions could be better if you want time to full render to be fast (so the users can see the page) and then load the big images in the background to add interactivity later.
Or is it better to have fast time to interactivity, and time to full render doesn't matter that much. Then maybe having one copy of each image is better.
First time overflowing the stack.
I'm making a website with several html pages that are identical except for the fact that they contain different images that are more or less identical in size - and thats how they are named, by the jpg that they feature.
The pictures look great with the website, but I have a 300 pixel header that pushes them downward > forcing you to scroll down to see the full image. This is built into the shared CSS for all these gallery pages.
I have simple text links below the images that are hard coded to point to the next image in the gallery. (I have a list of the 20 images im displaying). When someone clicks the image, it goes to that page and resets the scroll to the top, which makes the header push the image area down.
Can anyone tell me how to prevent the scroll reset behavior of the new link?
Without using something like jQuery, you could link the pages such that you have an anchor tag like <a name="gallery"></a> above the images on each page and when giving the link to the various pages, append a #gallery to the url such as Next Image. This is duplicated on each page however, and will not produce a robust webpage. You'll want to change things in the future and this will cause problems and further work, so I would consider a dynamic alternative.
Note this won't look as seamless as with jQuery and using AJAX to load in the images when needed. Or better yet, as most JS galleries work, load the images into the page invisible at first and then with JS have them show up on the link click. The benefit of this would be that you could generate the links in JS using the provided images. If the images are large enough that they may cause considerable lag on page load, consider making placeholder images of some sort. In any case, take a look at lightbox 2.
Also, I didn't get the feeling you were using any server side scripting to create this gallery. If the js solution doesn't suit you or you find the added benefit of generating part of the website automatically based on the content need at the time, take a look at using something like PHP, Python, Ruby, etc. If it's just a simple website you're after, a great solution might be Wordpress.
You could have one page and just replace the images?
http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/fir.html
Now of course you change the function to work on a "previous/next" button system, assuming you have a photo gallery of some sort.
Please post more details.
You want your link to look something like this:
<a href="http://www.w3schools.com/html_links.htm#tips">
Visit the Useful Tips Section</a>
and you want to give your image an id="tips" in this case.
Check out this fiddle to see an example. The only difference is that your href will have the rest of the url in there like the code posted above.
http://jsfiddle.net/QgzsL/
While making a webpage I've noticed a huge decrease in performance(client side) when I've added more rows to a table. Each row in my table consists of the same 4-5 different 32x32 icons (links to actions) and about 100 characters. When there were 10 rows, the webpage run fluently - scrolling and jQuery animations were smooth. Now that my table has 100+ rows (pagination is not an option), the animations are really slow and rough.
Is there a way to optimize not the images themselves, but the code, to raise performance?
Right now I have images in tags. Will it make any difference if I will change them to with background-image? Will the browser be less loaded?
If images are the problem, it is likely because the client is trying to re-download the images for each row, which is very inefficient even though the images are small. You can test if this is true with a tool such as Fiddler by checking if you get a whole bunch of the same requests every time you reload the page.
If this is the problem, look into CSS sprites. With this method, you can deliver 1 image to the client, and this one image will be used to render all of your icons on all your rows.
Basically what I am asking is, is there a way to have say a 1000x1000 pixel image and simply have some sort of code, whether html, css, or anything else to only download a resized verison of 100x100 pixels. Is there any way to do this? I would like to know before resizing each of my pictures and uploading them and linking those photos to the original larger version. Thanks.
You can't do it with HTML/CSS but it is possible with a server side language like PHP. Here's a script that will allow you to resize images.
The catch is that resizing images can be a server intensive process. You should try to make sure that once you've created a resized version of an image, it's cached on the server for subsequent requests.
Along those lines, the flow should be:
Image request comes in.
Does the resized thumbnail exist in the server's cache? If yes, serve the thumbnail.
If no, create the thumbnail, place it in the server cache and serve it.
Note: James brought up a good point in the comments. If the images you're resizing are going to change (updated/edited), you'll need to keep track of their large image's last modified date when you create the thumbnail (as part of the filename or in a database).
That way, when you check the cache, you'll be able to tell if the thumbnail needs to be regenerated.
You can create an account on imageshack.us (create the account to make sure your images don't get deleted) and then upload the image in different sizes and link to whatever size you want. (You don't have to do the resizing yourself, you can do it on imageshack when you upload) That way you get the image in whatever size you want and without putting any load at all on your server.
That's what I do and it works wonderfully
Example:
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/1825/lakesunset.jpg
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6420/lakesunsetf.jpg
Both came directly from imageshack. Just uploaded the image twice and resized one on imageshack.
Then to display the thumbnail and link it to the larger one just use this code:
<img src="DIRECT SMALL IMAGE URL"/>
Example:
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6420/lakesunsetf.jpg
Sorry, I've never done any server side programming since I'm not a professional and I'm poor, so I can't help you if that's what you're looking for.
I know of 3 main ways to shrink images:
Using the img tag WIDTH HEIGHT
Putting all the images in a DIV and then scaling the whole div.
User zooming with ctrl + mouse wheel.
I have some pages with huge amounts of images. What I have noticed is that there is massive speed difference between the methods. Method 1 kills firefox very quickly. Method 3 seems to be the fastest on all broswers I have tried.
Does anyone know of any other methods? And is there a way through javascript/css to specify what the browser zoom level should be so I can at least use the fastest way?
The easist on the client would be scaling the images on the server and sending them to the browser, however it would take some serious CPU power on the server end (unless you cache them, and serve them up afterwards). You can achieve this with PHP quite easily. Depending on your purposes, you could simply write a script that takes all the images in a directory, resizes them and saves them to "thumbs/".
If you don't want to use anything on the server, I would either go with option 1 or question why there are so many images on one page to bein with. Try adding some pagination or something. If the browser slows down while using such a basic method of resizing images, there might be some refactoring in order.
If you're going to be resizing images why not have the images themselves be smaller. That will load the fastest out of any method you try. You can use PHP to create thumbnail sized images, and a link to the full sized image if they need to see it. Remember, even if you resize an image with the height/width the browser still loads the full image.
See http://articles.sitepoint.com/article/image-resizing-php for a tutorial on image resizing in php.