| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
johnnybravoh
Joined: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:12 pm Post subject: Hansa board image size |
 |
|
FWIW,
The board for Hansa is 110k. Its size can be reduced to ~50-60k by reducing the quality of the .jpg file without losing much at all in terms of board clarity. I did it in photoshop and from what I can see all of the important board elements are clear and legible. See http://www.meritnetworks.net/images/Hansa.jpg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ekted
Joined: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 55
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Doesn't your browser cache it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnybravoh
Joined: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:04 pm Post subject: size |
|
|
| ekted wrote: | | Doesn't your browser cache it? |
Of course it does. But that's not the point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaBi
Site Admin
Joined: Jan 01, 2006
Posts: 997
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't know... I had already played a bit with jpg quality. My first version was about 200K but I could reduce it to 112K almost without any loss, lower than that there was a visible degradation. Your 54K version looks uglier, but you are right that it's playable, and it's half the size. I don't know... what do other people think? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RyanMC
Joined: Feb 16, 2006
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| One cached image thats 200k isn't a big deal. I wouldn't change it. The better looks are worth the slower load time, one time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnnybravoh
Joined: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:57 am Post subject: size |
|
|
Personally, It doesn't matter much at all to me because I've got a lot of bandwidth and am not impacted by the large image size. I just noticed the pic and my curiosity led me to check the size.
I'm absolutely sure however that dial-up users will have an issue with d/l'ing an image that size.
Another approach that you can take is to slice the image up into many smaller images and keep high quality settings on the image slices that are important (like the cities) and low quality for everything else. Either way it doesn't matter to me at all. I personally don't care how high quality the map is - doesn't impact game play for me. Anyone that has played on BSW has seen the same.
It's just my $.02. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
frarobertooo
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Padova & Schio(VI), Italy
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MaBi wrote: | | what do other people think? |
At home I have a dial-up modem. It takes a few seconds to download the board, as every page/image/whatever when you are surfing the internet.
I don't care to wait, as I'll have it in cache next time.
I think it's heavier with Richelieu, where you must download every single card. In a site where you can play a Roborally-like game it was possible to download the graphic and take from the hard disk without a real client... Maybe someone here could find the adress I have lost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
