A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT - Internet question, part II



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 11th 04, 03:18 AM
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT - Internet question, part II

Okay, here's the newly refurb'd site:

www.AlexisParkInn.com

I haven't had time to do all the text editor clean-up, but:

a) The counter is gone.
b) The main picture is smaller on the flash page.
c) I've eliminated a bunch of superfluous pictures on the second page (which
used to be the home page...)

It appears to be loading MUCH faster now, but the second page is still going
to choke most dial-up connections, I fear...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


  #2  
Old December 11th 04, 04:53 AM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Jay Honeck wrote:

It appears to be loading MUCH faster now, but the second page is still going
to choke most dial-up connections, I fear...


I think you've got it pretty well. It took about 2 seconds on my DSL to load
completely, and things were appearing immediately (no wondering if something was
happening). When I hit the second page, the important stuff (the text) loaded
immediately, with the photos and menu items showing up one at a time. Back when
I used dialup for access, I would be reading the text while waiting on other
stuff to load, and probably would be picking one of the menu items as soon as it
appeared.

With that in mind, you might give some thought to the order in which the menu
items appear. Put the ones that most potential customers would want to select
high in the list. To me, the first ones would be rates, floor plans, directions
to the inn, floor plans, and the theme suites. I would redo the "cool stuff"
page somehow. There are things in there (like the mention of high speed internet
access and a courtesy car) that really should be mentioned elsewhere, mixed up
with stuff that only interests pilots and other things that really don't belong
on a business web site.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.
  #3  
Old December 11th 04, 07:21 AM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

a) The counter is gone.

Yay!

b) The main picture is smaller on the flash page.


Not smaller enough. It still demands half of a twenty one inch
monitor set for 1600 bits of width. I would smallify (I like the word
too!) it more, and center it, which means getting rid of the
navigation bar and other stuff to the left, and putting it on top or
on the bottom, so that the full width of the browser can be used for
the smaller picture.

c) I've eliminated a bunch of superfluous pictures on the second page (which
used to be the home page...)


I don't notice the difference. What will make a difference here is
supercompressing the little pictures.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #4  
Old December 11th 04, 01:40 PM
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I don't notice the difference. What will make a difference here is
supercompressing the little pictures.


I've tried that, and lost too much resolution.

What's the trick to compressing pix without losing clarity?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


  #5  
Old December 11th 04, 03:02 PM
Ash Wyllie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jay Honeck opined

I don't notice the difference. What will make a difference here is
supercompressing the little pictures.


I've tried that, and lost too much resolution.


What's the trick to compressing pix without losing clarity?


I took your floor plan Suite%20102.jpg, 135453 bytes in size, and converted it
to a single bit (two color) gif of 13787 bytes. If I had used the original
drawing the file would be smaller still, as the jpg artifacts would be
missing.



-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

  #6  
Old December 11th 04, 06:52 PM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've tried that, and lost too much resolution.

What's the trick to compressing pix without losing clarity?


How much is "too much"? Send me a sample of what you consider "too
much loss". (for Email, use teacher, follow it with jh, the snail,
and the domain of that place in Vienna VA.)

Yes, you lose some, but in the context of that particular page, it
doesn't really matter. You can have a prettier picture on the page
the thumbnail links to, and I think people would rather have the page
load fast than load pretty.

I compressed it to 2K and it looked fine (though not quite as good as
the one that takes up five times as many bytes).

The "trick" might be different software. Some does a better job. I
use iphoto+ 4.0, which came with my (cheap) scanner and it works fine.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #7  
Old December 11th 04, 08:19 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Jay Honeck wrote:
Okay, here's the newly refurb'd site:

www.AlexisParkInn.com

I haven't had time to do all the text editor clean-up, but:

a) The counter is gone.
b) The main picture is smaller on the flash page.
c) I've eliminated a bunch of superfluous pictures on the second page

(which
used to be the home page...)

It appears to be loading MUCH faster now, but the second page is

still going
to choke most dial-up connections, I fear...

It looks good from here and loaded okay .
I'm on dailup and the loading speed was as well as can be expected...

  #8  
Old December 11th 04, 08:49 PM
Blanche
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Doesn't matter what quality the image was scanned at, monitors do not
display well. For web stuff, I don't scan at anything higher than
150 dpi since most monitors only display 72 dpi.

Now, if you're going to need the high quality for other things, go
ahead and use the disk space....
  #9  
Old December 11th 04, 11:52 PM
Jay Masino
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jay Honeck wrote:
Okay, here's the newly refurb'd site:
www.AlexisParkInn.com

SNIP
It appears to be loading MUCH faster now, but the second page is still going
to choke most dial-up connections, I fear...


I think it's loading pretty good. I tried it at our place at the beach
(dialup, slow windows98 laptop, Netscape) and it loading as quickly as
can be expected for dialup. The "welcome" page is obviously slower than
the first page, but there are more images to load. I don't think it's a
big deal. One thing that might be considered unneccesary is the little
"bracket" shaped thing that shows up when you pass your mouse over the
left hand buttons... it's probably not worth removing/changing.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com
  #10  
Old December 11th 04, 11:56 PM
Jay Masino
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jay Honeck wrote:
I don't notice the difference. What will make a difference here is
supercompressing the little pictures.

I've tried that, and lost too much resolution.
What's the trick to compressing pix without losing clarity?


It's always a trade off. On my Mac, I have a utility that allows you to
change the exact percentage of compression/loss in a jpeg. It shows you a
before and after sample of the image, so you can see how bad the image
gets while adjusting the percentage.


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Part 135 Question - Weather Reporting requirement G Farris Instrument Flight Rules 5 October 21st 04 11:05 PM
VOR/DME Approach Question Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 47 August 29th 04 05:03 AM
Stiffness of finished Carbon Fiber part RKT Home Built 3 April 8th 04 02:00 PM
FWD: Look at this internet patch for Microsoft Internet Explorer Charles S Home Built 15 October 2nd 03 08:08 PM
Millionaire at 31... on the Internet. Listen to how he's doing it. ower Home Built 0 August 2nd 03 10:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.