Is this a standard width and length?

[bocadave]

What determines the width and height of images?


This is my dilemma.


I am building a website that I need to reduce the images both in total pixel size to make it 72 dpi, and size to Constrain Proportions.

I have to make predetermined sizes on my web site so each area with image it will handle a proper Constrain Proportion image

I need the same camera shot to fit proportionately in each area.


I need to make each area the proper size to handle a scaled down photo.


So is there a standard size a camera takes for like a point and shoot?


Or is each camera different ?



You can see this sample where I have 2 problems

1. larger image is not proportional to fit the box
2. and the thumbnail is proportional and doesnt fit the box

 

[480sparky]

What determines the width and height of images?


This is my dilemma.


I am building a website that I need to reduce the images both in total pixel size to make it 72 dpi, and size to Constrain Proportions.

I have to make predetermined sizes on my web site so each area will an image will go it will handle a proper Constrain Proportion image


View attachment 33682

DPI is used for printing. There is no 'standard' image size for websites.... you can use any size you want.

Right-click on any web image, and choose Properties or View Image Information or something similar. You will then be given the dimensions of that image (600x530, 1440x937, etc). That will tell you what pixel dimensions you need to resize your images to.

 

[bocadave]

I know all what you said already. That was not my questions at all though.

 

[480sparky]

I know all what you said already. That was not my questions at all though.

Each camera is different... depends on the sensor size and the pixel count.

 

[bocadave]

Ok. Getting better. So I would need to use the same camera for all the shots to keep my sanity in adjusting the images for the website.

Or if I have other shots-- I can simply crop it proportionately which after all my thoughts-- this is the way to do it anyway.



Would I be correct to say that if I use one Point and Shoot the

sensor size and the pixel count will be the same for every picture or can this vary on the same PS camera?​

 

[ceejtank]

Ok. Getting better. So I would need to use the same camera for all the shots to keep my sanity in adjusting the images for the website.

Or if I have other shots-- I can simply crop it proportionately which after all my thoughts-- this is the way to do it anyway.



Would I be correct to say that if I use one Point and Shoot the

sensor size and the pixel count will be the same for every picture or can this vary on the same PS camera?​

Your question was answered before - you just don't understand it. You're referring to 72 DPI - which is something used in printing, not viewing on the web. So asking us about a DPI size for the web is comparing something that's useless.

Cameras each take different sizes based on their settings. You can use a program like photoshop to adjust them all to a certain quality if you want. You can change the size of a shot (in terms of bytes) by reducing quality, or reducing size. You can also use programs like photoshop to adjust pixel size.

To answer your last question - in menus you can set the quality of the picture, and some let you adjust for the size as well. It would depend on the camera.

The easiest solution to this is use a aftermarket program (or one that comes with your camera) to re-size to what you need.

 

[ceejtank]

Also - if you're designing a website, you should use something that adjusts to the width of the monitor and resizes accordingly.. like Java for example.

 

[bocadave]

Your question was answered before - you just don't understand it. You're referring to 72 DPI - which is something used in printing, not viewing on the web. So asking us about a DPI size for the web is comparing something that's useless.

Actually I understood exactly. The question was answered also properly in 2nd post from 480sparky.

72 Dpi is not a useless fact for putting images on the web. It may have not been useful in the scope of the question, so in that you are correct!

Cameras each take different sizes based on their settings. You can use a program like photoshop to adjust them all to a certain quality if you want. You can change the size of a shot (in terms of bytes) by reducing quality, or reducing size. You can also use programs like photoshop to adjust pixel size.

Yep. Sparky cleared me on that. And photoshop is exactly what I use. But there are other ones like Resize Sense for mac that is cheap and does batch. I still will most likely have to crop each one anyway until I get to Atlantic City to take a bunch of new shots. Once that is done I wont have to crop-- just batch resize.

To answer your last question - in menus you can set the quality of the picture, and some let you adjust for the size as well. It would depend on the camera.

Thanks-- will look for that !

The easiest solution to this is use a aftermarket program (or one that comes with your camera) to re-size to what you need

Exactly!

 

[o hey tyler]

What you need to do is establish what the size of the content area is on the website in terms of pixels.

Then, establish what the aspect ratio is. If its 2:3 then you don't need to crop. But you do need to downsize the image to the proper area or else it will appear too large on the page.

Getting thumbnails to display in 2:3 is a bit trickier as you'll need to adjust portions of the coding of the website. I wouldn't be so concerned with that part.

 

[bocadave]

Also - if you're designing a website, you should use something that adjusts to the width of the monitor and resizes accordingly.. like Java for example.

Yeah. It's a bit more complicated (and costly) to do "Responsive" type CSS programming. But you are correct in that advice, although for this site I didn't do it.

 

[ceejtank]

Also - if you're designing a website, you should use something that adjusts to the width of the monitor and resizes accordingly.. like Java for example.

Yeah. It's a bit more complicated (and costly) to do "Responsive" type CSS programming. But you are correct in that advice, although for this site I didn't do it.

I'm aware. was just offering my .02.

 

[bocadave]

What you need to do is establish what the size of the content area is on the website in terms of pixels.

So do that first? B/c I was going to do that based on the camera. In other words I will establish an approximate baseline for width and height as I showed in my sample. Then I can adjust that once I have the exact size of the camera image which will have to be scaled down proportionately.

Then, establish what the aspect ratio is. If its 2:3 then you don't need to crop.

Does that mean 2 wide by 3 high or visa-versa?

But you do need to downsize the image to the proper area or else it will appear too large on the page.

But I think we are saying the same thing as I said above ?

 

[o hey tyler]

So do that first? B/c I was going to do that based on the camera. In other words I will establish an approximate baseline for width and height as I showed in my sample. Then I can adjust that once I have the exact size of the camera image which will have to be scaled down proportionately.

Does that mean 2 wide by 3 high or visa-versa?

But I think we are saying the same thing as I said above ?

You don't need to base anything on the camera. Almost all cameras use the same aspect ratio... Once you get the size of the content area, you can bring an image into photoshop or the gimp and resize it whilst keeping the proportions.

Again, let me stress, the camera DOES NOT matter. I upload photos to my website from a 12mp 5D mark I and a 5D mark II which is 21mp. I handle the files the same way by resizing them to 960px wide.

And actually I made a typo earlier, the ratio is 4:3 for straight out of camera files.

 

[The_Traveler]

Does that mean 2 wide by 3 high or visa-versa?

And actually I made a typo earlier, the ratio is 4:3 for straight out of camera files.

In most cameras the ratio is 3:2, some cameras like the m3/4 have a different native resolution so look at the specs for your camera to find out.
If the space on the web is in a 3:2 aspect ratio, it will also have a specific size in pixels, so the image must be downsized to fit - and the quality adjusted.(also known as compression)
Lower quality means smaller file size (and more file compression) but that effects the web viewing quality very little.
The difference in the file size - and load rate - is substantial.

Note the 9:1 difference in the file size for this fairly large image.

High resolution (low compression)472 kb

Medium quality (and compression) 106 kb

Low quality (and high compression) 53 kb

 

[bocadave]

Thanks, you guys.

I checked my PointShoot Canon A80 and see that it has choices for 2272X1704 etc a 4x3 aspect ratio. So now I know how to format my site. I need all the photo areas to be a 4x3 if I use this camera-- (probably time for an upgrade, but to me the novice camera guy- these pictures look good)

I wonder if a new PS camera will actually take anything better quality than the A80 ?


(I know you pros are probably laughing at my choice of cameras)