Re: Amazing Background

>Jeff Kane wrote:
>> Small images are tiles by the browser, while large images are not.
>
>Really? Then please explain why the image in question tiles in my browsers
>(IE5 and NS4.5) when I view it at 1024x768 or higher. Where did you
>learn this particular gem? At what precise size does an image become
>a "large image" and the browser then knows to stop tiling it?
>
>Martin


Martin--

You are correct. The browser does tile images, large and small. The tiling
of larger images may not be apparent if the image is large enough and/or
the monitor resolution is low enough.

	The background image in this discussion will reveal tiling, as you
point out, at resolutions of 1024 x 768 and higher. Like many areas of web
design, there are compromises and trade-offs. Do we optimize the view for a
15-inch monitor, or 17-, or 19- or 21-, or...?  Similarly, for what
resolution and for what color depth?

	I suppose that if someone wanted to use a graphic of that size and
didn't want tiling to show at the more common higher resolutions, the image
could be placed on a larger canvas in a graphics program, like Photoshop,
and the outlying areas could be filled with some matching color. Then when
the tiling occurs, it might be less obtrusive. This would increase the file
size of the resulting jpeg, but my guess is that it wouldn't be much if a
uniform color is used.

	A similar consideration comes into play with certain backgrounds
even when tiling on screen is planned, such as with a left-to-right color
gradient. The vertical dimension of the tile could be 10 pixels, but how
wide should it be?

--Jeff

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA