P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
Sorry for updating this tread again i just wrote some misconfusing [confused]
Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
PSD Sergiy
I found this Statistic, maybe somebody will be interested:
640x480 and below 0.5%
800x600 19%
1024x768 59%
1280x1024 18%
1600x1200 and above 3.5%
I just want to see some comments about it
I found this Statistic, maybe somebody will be interested:
640x480 and below 0.5%
800x600 19%
1024x768 59%
1280x1024 18%
1600x1200 and above 3.5%
I just want to see some comments about it
P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
austizmo said:
[stuned] Oops! I`m sorry my Web Site!!! - is 1280-1024 (my background picture is 1259x1040, sorry about that)
Hmm... interesting. These are the stats I was going by:
In anycase, if you design a web page at 1280x1024 very few users are going to be able to see it. Knock the size down a little bit, if not all the way to 800x600.
Code:
From: [url]www.w3schools.com[/url]
2004 Higher 1024x768 800x600 640x480 Lower
January 10% 47% 37% 1% 5%In anycase, if you design a web page at 1280x1024 very few users are going to be able to see it. Knock the size down a little bit, if not all the way to 800x600.
P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
How about the People who are Viewing WebSite`s on 1280-1040 or even higher?
My stats for 2004 \:]
http://www.boutell.com/newfaq/creating/resolution.html
But i think that 1024x768 is most common in the present time...
theKeeper
Guru
- Messages
- 2,313
- Likes
- 63
Hi Sergiy...
Not sure what you mean by this number "1259 - 1040". There is no such resolution as that. And i hope you didn't create your Website to that number. [stuned]
In general, the majority of users will have an 800x600 pixel screen resolution. Most folks into graphics will usually have at least one step higher than that -- 1024x768 ( talking PC, not Mac. Mac is slightly smaller ).
The monitor size will make a little bit of difference as to how a Website is seen, but not a whole lot; especially if you apply some good design rules like "less is more", and keeping the text size to a legible level, but not huge. Page layout can also make a big difference in this situation Sergiy.
Bear in mind too that when i say 800x600 that doesn't mean your content can take up that much room. 760pixels is the widest you'll want to go with your table widths. This allows for the browser's borders and scrollbar.
If you need more specific info on this i suggest you search on this topic -- Website Design specifications. There are some general rules/guidelines that you need to apply. And there are some good sites around with all this info on them. Try this one: www.w3schools.com/html/.
::: EDIT :::
hahaha
geeez guys! I left for 5 minutes and everyone snuck in before me! hehe DOH! [doh]
Not sure what you mean by this number "1259 - 1040". There is no such resolution as that. And i hope you didn't create your Website to that number. [stuned]
In general, the majority of users will have an 800x600 pixel screen resolution. Most folks into graphics will usually have at least one step higher than that -- 1024x768 ( talking PC, not Mac. Mac is slightly smaller ).
The monitor size will make a little bit of difference as to how a Website is seen, but not a whole lot; especially if you apply some good design rules like "less is more", and keeping the text size to a legible level, but not huge. Page layout can also make a big difference in this situation Sergiy.
Bear in mind too that when i say 800x600 that doesn't mean your content can take up that much room. 760pixels is the widest you'll want to go with your table widths. This allows for the browser's borders and scrollbar.
If you need more specific info on this i suggest you search on this topic -- Website Design specifications. There are some general rules/guidelines that you need to apply. And there are some good sites around with all this info on them. Try this one: www.w3schools.com/html/.
::: EDIT :::
hahaha
geeez guys! I left for 5 minutes and everyone snuck in before me! hehe DOH! [doh]MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
Two words:
"Scalable content".
Build your content and layouts to scale, or make the non-scaled content stand alone on smaller resolutions, and you won't have any problem.
I'm usually on my laptop, so I rarely view at more than 1024x768, just to address the earlier question.
As always, it depends on your intended audience. If you're building a site for everyone, make sure as many people as possible can see it. If you are building a site for say, graphic artists on DSL... then by all means, build a huge site at 1600x1200!
hehe
"Scalable content".
Build your content and layouts to scale, or make the non-scaled content stand alone on smaller resolutions, and you won't have any problem.
I'm usually on my laptop, so I rarely view at more than 1024x768, just to address the earlier question.
As always, it depends on your intended audience. If you're building a site for everyone, make sure as many people as possible can see it. If you are building a site for say, graphic artists on DSL... then by all means, build a huge site at 1600x1200!
hehe
P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
MindBender said:
Hey? Isn`t it ffom some book? ... H-m-m... what was the name of it ... \:]. "Ideality or Indelity or something like that...?
This is indeed a complicated problem. If you make your pages some 700 pixels wide, then people with monitors set at 800 wide will have to scroll horizontally. Many "experts" say that this is bad. Unless you do it on purpose and make a design that is based on very wide pages.
But when someone whose monitor is set at 1600 wide sees that site, and you glued it to the left-hand side, more than half of the screen is empty. Real horrorshow.
What's more: with statictics you can prove everything.
So, unless you are making a site for a local grocer etc, I suppose you will have to choose between 800 wide, and 1024 wide. At 800 you punish the people that are more "puter motivated", at 1024, the ones at 800 will have to do a bit of horizontal scrolling.
Make your choice...
But when someone whose monitor is set at 1600 wide sees that site, and you glued it to the left-hand side, more than half of the screen is empty. Real horrorshow.
What's more: with statictics you can prove everything.
So, unless you are making a site for a local grocer etc, I suppose you will have to choose between 800 wide, and 1024 wide. At 800 you punish the people that are more "puter motivated", at 1024, the ones at 800 will have to do a bit of horizontal scrolling.
Make your choice...
Yeah if you code for the width to be 760 people using 800 will not have to scroll. If you are looking to fill up some of the screen code with % such as 90% and that will satisfy all sizes. If you code at 760 then placing the site in the middle is best as Erik says if it is on the left it really looks odd on the larger resolutions.
Ideally you'd use scaleable content as suggested by MindBender. CSS makes this a snap, but graphics intensive layouts generally won't be scaleable.
For an example of scaleable content visit www.infevo.net. When you resize your window the content resizes with it. Users with ultra high resolutions still suffer a little, but all of their screen space is being utilized. And users with small screens don't have to do any sidescrolling to view the page.
For an example of scaleable content visit www.infevo.net. When you resize your window the content resizes with it. Users with ultra high resolutions still suffer a little, but all of their screen space is being utilized. And users with small screens don't have to do any sidescrolling to view the page.
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
It's just a poem, but it was used in Identity by one of the characters. I just liked the poem though... somehow it just fits me. hehe
Another possible method to consider would be to build multiple layouts. Have javascript determine the size of the user's display and present the document that you've determined for each size range. It's lot more work and more complex to build, but if you're really worried about a site that has a specific graphical look, that would give you the most control.
Personally, I'd go for scalable content. The problem with scalable is actually high resolution setups. If you aren't careful, you end up with your text as one long-ass line strung across the whole page.
No matter what you do, I would test thouroughly to make sure it's working on various displays.
MB I actually created a site like that and yes it is a ton of work! The script would determine the monitor res then send them to the correct page. Everything you did such as updates, graphics, etc you had to do 4 times!
Most sites go with % and leave it at that or set it to 760. You can't please them all. Kind of like dealing with Flash. Not everyone has high-speed internet nor do they want to install a bunch of plugins so when they hit your site it looks horrible until they work it out on their end. Just figure out the market you want to serve, research the types of visitors from that market to the site and go with that. Just test the code in several browsers to make sure it works in more than one browser. :} :B
Most sites go with % and leave it at that or set it to 760. You can't please them all. Kind of like dealing with Flash. Not everyone has high-speed internet nor do they want to install a bunch of plugins so when they hit your site it looks horrible until they work it out on their end. Just figure out the market you want to serve, research the types of visitors from that market to the site and go with that. Just test the code in several browsers to make sure it works in more than one browser. :} :B
Creating a page that would use javascript to determine the screen res wouldn't be nearly as intense with CSS. Rather than linking to an entirely different page based on the resolution, you could just change the stylesheet. Then you'd only have to update one page rather than 3 or 4.
MindBender
Guru
- Messages
- 611
- Likes
- 0
Well... only if your graphics were modular. If you're working with complex, intricate graphics, then you'd still have to rebuild.
The trick is to build your graphics so they are modular, i.e. make smaller pieces that can be rearraged or repeated to make larger interfaces. Then you just use CSS, XML, JS, PHP, etc. to build out the pages on the fly.
P
(PSD) Sergiy
Guest
(PSD) Sergiy
I couldn`t explain what i actualy needed before.
Ok here it is:
Here is my Web Site www.psddesign.land.ru ( ;\ [saywhat] sorry bad size and etc...) even if i did this one with size of 1040x768 it wouldn`t viev perfect on computers with 1280,1600 or below 800.
But if you open this page http://www.psddesign.land.ru/example.swf and try to view it in diffirent reolution, you would have same size of it.
Question: " Is it possible to make same settings for Photoshop? "
I couldn`t explain what i actualy needed before.
Ok here it is:
Here is my Web Site www.psddesign.land.ru ( ;\ [saywhat] sorry bad size and etc...) even if i did this one with size of 1040x768 it wouldn`t viev perfect on computers with 1280,1600 or below 800.
But if you open this page http://www.psddesign.land.ru/example.swf and try to view it in diffirent reolution, you would have same size of it.
Question: " Is it possible to make same settings for Photoshop? "