Need help with image resizing (re: slow site)
-
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 !:)
-
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.
-
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...
-
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.
-
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. -
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
-
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.
-
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?
-
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?
-
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.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Is The HREF Link "Title" Tag Needed on Mobile Websites?
Hello To Those Who Are Wiser Than I, I am wondering if the href link "title" tag is needed, or serves any purpose, on mobile websites? Also, does it effect SEO in any way? I ask because generally the href link title tag provides more information to the user when they scroll their mouse over the link - but this action does not happen on mobile! Users have no mouse and thus no extra information would be displayed. I'm really wondering if it still matters for SEO purposes on mobile though. -The UnEnlightened
Web Design | | Stew2220 -
Curious why site isn't ranking, rather seems like being penalized for duplicate content but no issues via Google Webmaster...
So we have a site ThePowerBoard.com and it has some pretty impressive links pointing back to it. It is obviously optimized for the keyword "Powerboard", but in no way is it even in the top 10 pages of Google ranking. If you site:thepowerboard.com the site, and/or Google just the URL thepowerboard.com you will see that it populates in the search results. However if you quote search just the title of the home page, you will see oddly that the domain doesn't show up rather at the bottom of the results you will see where Google places "In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 7 already displayed". If you click on the link below that, then the site shows up toward the bottom of those results. Is this the case of duplicate content? Also from the developer that built the site said the following: "The domain name is www.thepowerboard.com and it is on a shared server in a folder named thehoverboard.com. This has caused issues trying to ssh into the server which forces us to ssh into it via it’s ip address rather than by domain name. So I think it may also be causing your search bot indexing problem. Again, I am only speculating at this point. The folder name difference is the only thing different between this site and any other site that we have set up." (Would this be the culprit? Looking for some expert advice as it makes no sense to us why this domain isn't ranking?
Web Design | | izepper0 -
A campaign ghost keeps returning to my Google Analytics - Help!
A couple of campaign tracking links were created on my homepage (leading to internal pages), these were removed a few weeks ago (100% removed from the site). I understand there is a 6 month window and as long as a user returns (no matter from which source) they will be counted as a session against that campaign. Since these campaign links were set-up in error, I hoped creating a fresh new view within Google Analytics would stop them appearing. However they are still showing as sessions even in the new view (created after removing the campaign links in question). Is there anyway to stop this happening!? I want to be able to report on sessions correctly. Thanks, Sam
Web Design | | Sam.at.Moz0 -
New Re-design will my website rankings drop?
Hi guys, I have had to re-design my site although we are only 4 months into the seo game we have seen some good progress with our rankings. My question is there anything I need to consider before implementing the new designs so it doesn't effect my current rankings or any of our SEO work. Our current designs are content thing and so we have had to create more content to better optimize our site, however if doing so will this loose our current ranking position? Apperciate any advice around this Thanks
Web Design | | edward-may0 -
Can white text over images hurt your SEO?
Hi everyone, I run a travel website that has about 30 pre-search city landing pages. In a redesign last year we added large "hero" images to the top of the page, and put our h1 headlines on top of them in white. The result is attractive, but I'm wondering if Google could be reading this page as "white text on white page", which is an obvious no-no, especially if it could seem that we're trying to hide text. Here's an example: http://www.eurocheapo.com/paris/ H1: Expert reviews of cheap hotels in Paris I should add that our SERPs for these city pages has dropped (for "Cheap hotels in X"), but it could obviously be related to other issues. Any advice would be appreciated. Many thanks! Tom
Web Design | | TomNYC0 -
Wordpress or Joomla member function - HELP!
Does anyone know of a plugin/theme/template that would allow me to create a site with the following features: 1 section of content that is public 1 section of content that is only for registered members and that is hidden until you log in. A registration page A sign up form
Web Design | | MassivePrime0 -
What Is Our Site Missing Causing Our Former Dominance To Slip?
So we have operated one of our retail sites, BonitaJ.com for many years now. Through a lot of work, link building and optimizing around 2009, we were in a prominent spot on the 1st page in google for just about every main term we were targeting. Towards the end of 2009, nearing December or so, we started slipping here and there, and began being displaced for our main terms by newer sites that according to several factors, don't have near the strength our site holds. And by strength, I simply mean, based on link volume, mozbar stats and many other factors, it seems we should rank well above most, but still find ourselves just hanging to 8-10 positions on page one, and in many cases somewhere on page two for terms it seems like we should be in the top 5 positions for. I believe some of our slippage is due to google's devaluing of many of our incoming links. We achieved our early ranking dominence off a lot of directory links and things like that over time, but ever since 2009 when links began getting devalued we immediately broke into getting quality blog links via LEGIT blog relationships where we'd offer up contests, bloggers would review our products and so on, and these relationships continue through today. We also do a lot of guest blog writing, article postings on various networks, as well as press releases, all with the goal of keeping our link profile happy and healthy. So we still have work to do there, but we're on the right track. So my thought is that to get back over the hump, we simply need to continue with the legit link building methods, but I'm also thinking that maybe we need to improve some things navigationally. Things I was hoping people would chime in on are.... 1. If we're mainly trying to target bridal/wedding related jewelry terms, should we ditch the "Jewelry Sets, Pearl Jewelry & Swarovski Crystal Jewerly" terms from our main navbar. They are featured inside each of the categories, and in the end, we don't rank or pull traffic for them anyway. Would ditching them from the main nav, help pass more juice from home page and other pages to the pages that better target our niche? 2. A while back, we ditched including actual product on each of the main category pages. I'm leaning towards breaking the main category pages up into sections, for instance once on the "Bridal Jewelry" page, it would list each of the sub-cats, with a 5-10 product sampling of the most popular items, with a link that says "view all necklaces" at the end of each sub-section. Do you think that more wise than just trying to direct them into the sub-cats with no actual product offering? 3. Anything else you see glaringly wrong with what we're trying to do? This site is just on the edge of blowing up from a ranking perspective if I can just get some confirmation on some things that I know I should do, but I'm wary due to fear of screwing things up. If I can get some solid feedback, the rest is history.
Web Design | | AarcMediaGroup0 -
Recommendation for a company to make a site more mobile friendly?
Hiya, We have a client who uses us for SEO, and a separate company for web development. They have a fairly large site on a bespoke CMS. They're happy with the site, but the user experience on mobile devices is not right. Can anybody recommend a company specializing in that area? Preferably a UK company but not essential. Thanks 🙂
Web Design | | SteveOllington1
