Your thoughts on image size?

[GroobySteven]

We're currently showing 800x600 on the web with downloadable zips of the images in 1024x768. We've a lot of mixed thought on what people would prefer as their browsable choice.
Bear in mind that these images are being seen from within the Hung Angels shell so click on the links beneath them for how they'd be seen on the websites.

I'd love some feedback - I'll pick 3 randomn answers by this time tomorrow and throw them a month on one of the sites of their choice.

Thanks
seanchai

[GroobySteven]

More... what size do you like?

[J_Rotten]

Bigger is better! As long as a larger image is actaully higher quality, which is probably the case for you since you are woking with higher res originals. For myself, I have all the bandwidth in the world and run a 1600x1200 moniter res. The view program I use resizes everything to max screensize, so a 400x300 jpg will come out the same size as a 2400x1800. Given that, a higher quality image looks so much better. I used to scan high quality ts porn into photoshop and the detail on some of those, before I reduced to them to jpg's suitable for newsgroup posting at the time, was amazing. I have seen some big mainstream porn sites offer zips of set in 2 or 3 resolutions. In that case, the highest res is the one I want.

JM

[slikrickdalicka]

WHERE CAN I CONTACT THIS BEAUTY...WOWOW SHE IS MAKING MY MOUTH WATER

[YasminLee]

thanks slik./...really sweet of u hun...as for the size..i don't think it matters much...

[BeardedOne]

thanks slik./...really sweet of u hun...as for the size..i don't think it matters much...

I was gonna say... :lol:

As for me, I like the big ones.

Oh, and the pix too. :wink:

[NickTheQuick]

1024x768 looks pretty damn good. But it's not like the smaller one would put me off. As long as you continue to use quality photographers that have good equipment I'll be satisfied. Then again Yasmin helps.

[larpe71]

:lol: I vote for the bigger size of pictures. Larger is better.

[Lobo]

I don't like the bigger pics.
The first pic you posted fits my screen perfectly (18 inch monitor). The second larger pic of the same image doesn't fit my screen all that well, by that I mean I can't see the girls face and entire cock at the same time, I have to scroll up or down to look at one or the other. That second big pic might as well be two separate pics, one of her face and one of her cock, because I can't see it all at the same time. I can see her eyes and the tip of her cock together, no more than that. That's something that upsets me if I'm paying a membership fee.
The larger pics are fine as long as the girl is lying down and the majority of the image is horizontal, but when a girl is standing up or vertical, the big pics just aren't practical and can be annoying and frustrating to view.
I know that you probably get different answers from different people all depending on personal taste.
I think maybe the best way to go about it is offer pictures that have a vertical image (girl standing up or lying down in a vertical position) is to offer those pics in two different sizes, one large and one smaller.
The only pic that bothers me is the second one, just can't fit it on my screen. Most people have monitors that are under 20 inches.
I like all the grooby sites, but I decided to become a member on a less frequent basis exactly because of this problem. Too may pictures that I have to skip over because of the size vertically, they are too big to properly view.
Most of these bigs pics may as well be close ups of a face or a cock, when you can't fit the whole picture on your screen, that's pretty much what these larger pictures are. I've got no use for them.

[Ecstatic]

Great question, seanchai. Answer: Yasmin is the perfect size for me....

oh, wait, you mean picture size. Seriously, I've thought a lot about this too. I've been trying a compromise size: 860x645. Bumps it up from 800x600 but leaves the image entirely or mostly visible on lower res monitors (to a point, of course). Here's an example.

[Quinn]

1024x768 looks pretty damn good. But it's not like the smaller one would put me off.

Nick's perspective sums up my basic view. That said, I think most people would prefer the larger ones as they tend to make a bigger impact from a sensory input point of view. Think about a painting, print, poster, or picture that you really enjoy. If it's blown up, it tends to make a bigger impact and provide more stimulus. Beauty is always about details, and if the image is pleasing, greater size tends to allow for a more thorough examination of the details. Conversely, if a closer examination of the details might be less pleasing, say a girl doesn’t have particularly good skin, the smaller pics might be better, in that specific instance.

-Quinn

[rvince]

For browsing 800x600 is optimal IMHO; but if you offer bigger format option (like 'full set zip download') bigger is better. However probably nobody really needs anything bigger than 1600x1200.

[ana]

Sorry for this kind of nerdish "first post", but regarding image sizes of downloadable files, the old rule of "the bigger, the better" is true - mostly because of people have to use external applications to view those pictures anyway (Picasa, Irfanview, you name it), which have options for full-screen viewing with picture resizing.

Now, making images larger than they should be is always bad since the program has to generate pixels out of nothing, and generally it makes things the blockier the smaller the source resolution is and the bigger the target resolution is.

Meanwhile, downsampling an image with either bicubic resize or lanczos filtering (both available in the most common programs to my experience) doesn't hurt the image quality to any noticeable degree.

So, summa summarum, raw TIFF pictures, anyone? ;)

[Tslover_fr]

I'm late, but I'd like to give my opinion.

I'm really happy with the 1024*768. (800*600 isn't enough for me).

But, I was thinking : is it possible that you choose 4 or 5 pics for each model and make it available at a really big resolution (like the original output resolution...)???


Sometimes, webmasters do some mistakes with resize :

look at these pictures.
1st one : 3072*2048
2nd : a part of the pic (440*434)
3rd : the same part of the pics, like it would render in a 1024* pics (re-enlarged to 440*434).


Perhaps it's just me, but this kind of resolution makes me horny A LOT. Everything is different, you can "feel" the model.

[LG]

I have a broadband connection, so download time is minimal and the bigger size is better for me. Any bigger though and it'll be too big to display on the screen without scrolling or changing my resolution.

And scrolling down a porn pic really takes the pleasure out of looking at it.

[thmack]

size matters the bigger the better