images larger than 2400px?
- Started
- Last post
- 6 Responses
- Continuity0
I do for my own portfolio. TBH, I don't think it matters with modern internet connections, anywmore.
After all, your target audience isn't granny running a 486, 800x600 on 14.4 dial-up.
- Hell, even 4G/LTE is faster than some connections I've been on in recent years.Continuity
- *non-mobile connections, I mean.Continuity
- Haha agreed. How high do you go for your portfolio?mtgentry
- If it's landscape and 16:9, then it's 3840, optimised as much as possible.Continuity
- Well, not optimised to the point the artwork is chunky.Continuity
- nocomply1
I generally cap the image dimensions at 1920px on the sites that I build.
On rare occasions I work with a photographer who is really particular about image quality then maybe I'll bump it up a little more.
- utopian1
2560px width for all full-screen images. Then use https://tinypng.com to compress all of your JPGs and PNGs.
- dpi0
Sometimes for extra crispy look. Mostly when responsive images are user or there is some kind of front-end solution to optimise and create smaller versions for users who don´t need large versions.
- formed0
1920px on client sites, generally. I have 2560px images as the larger loading images on my site.
- kingsteven0
last site i made used 1440p for backgrounds (2560 x 1440)
does safari/ ios still have a limitation of 2^24 pixels per image (effectively limited < 5k)? i've run in to that a few times over the years.