Need help with image resizing (re: slow site)

[NoahsDad]

I'm trying to figure out why I'm having speed issues with my site, and using google speed test to help me knock out some of the issues.

One of issues deals with image resizing. I have a responsive design and so even though on the home page the normal width is 580 of the blog area, the full post can go up to 1170. So I size all of my images to 1170 wide and let CSS resize them depending on the size of the browser. (The images on the most recent post are a little bigger than this because I was testing something.)

I was wondering what the best practice was in regard to what I'm trying to do.

Also feel free to check out my site and let me know of any other feedback / advice you have. Thanks !:)

[clotairedamy]

Thanks a lot Keri,

These days with the online competition being so strong we should pay more attention to the website architecture, usability, visual impact, speed and technical problems. SEO it's so complex that you'll find yourself overwhelmed by the number of critical issues that needs to be addressed and fixed. Don't focus just on the content try to enhance every aspect of your page from to . Optimizing pictures takes only a few moments and you can use automated functions in Photoshop.

[steve4yyz]

Another area to help with the images is to host them on a content distribution network.

Amazon is not the cheapest, but its the easiest for low volume.

A few stats:

I host about 4000 images on Amazon S3.

My bill is about 4 bucks a month.

You can put your images in a few areas (west coast vs east coast etc)....

This will help get your images closer to your audience, but it will not help you with the "last mile"

I had a customer uploading 7 MB images in Wisconsin using dial up....

can't help them...

I'm alos moving to Cloud Front, amazon Content Distribution Network...

Also, you use chrome to determine what's causing the delay.. many times, images are just part of a larger problem...

[KeriMorgret]

Hi Rick,

To the best of my knowledge, smushit compresses what it can while keeping the quality exactly the same. Saving for the web will lower the quality to "looking good on screen" from "good enough to print and hang on your wall".  I also looked at the most recent post about Noah standing, and saw that the original size was 1900 pixels wide -- you certainly want to resize that to the 1170 wide before uploading it.

Being a photographer with a portfolio, Coltaire can give you a lot more details than I can, and help guide you with settings to use in Photoshop to get pictures that still look great on the web but aren't bigger than they need to be.

[NoahsDad]

Thanks for the kind words. As I mentioned sometimes I like to do full width posts which are 1170 wide so if I use 800x600 the images won't show up correctly on full screen.

[clotairedamy]

Rick, you have a wonderful son and the story of your website left me without words and I don't know if I can give you a good response at this moment... Try resizing them to 800x600, the size accommodates a lot of user screens / mobile traffic.

Have a wonderful day

[NoahsDad]

Yes, i use catching. But like I said, saving it for 640 wouldn't work for me since I want image to show up bigger than that if the screen is 1170. I'm assuming the images wouldn't be able to be resized any bigger than 640 without looking stretched.

[clotairedamy]

I never used that tool and I think it's ok to use it in some situations but you have a lot more control of the file saving for web in PS, lot more options and the quality loss is insignifiant.

Take a look at my Portfolio page. All of my files are 640x480px/72dpi/50-60quality/jpegs.

Also are you using any caching / minifing plugins?

[NoahsDad]

I'm using smushit to make the file size smaller, but I need to be able to at least have 1170 for full width posts (like this one.)  I don't think I need to use save for web if I'm using smush it do I?

Does having css resize the images cause a site to slow down a lot?

[clotairedamy]

I think that your images are very big and are slowing down your page speed and affect your  rankings. Why don't you try to scale  and reduce the quality using the "Save for web" feature in PS, it's fast and you have the option to compare with the original file when saving? 800x600 , 640x480 px are large enough to be properly visualized, Think about the different screen resolutions your visitors have. I avoid using pictures larger than 100kb and my average picture quality when saved for web  is 60%. Hope it helps.