osgood_ wrote:
Herbert2001 wrote:
I agree with Nancy and Jon - you can automate it easily in Photoshop and other tools. It takes a couple of extra minutes
Only if you require no cropping of the images. I've never produced a website yet where the majority of images can be used directly without cropping areas, which makes them unique and cannot be batch processed all together.
The only time I use a batch process is if I need to convert everything from 300dpi to 72dpi or I set a max image width or height.
Photoshop is great if all the original images you need to batch process are the same dimensions and you need to use the same area, after that you need to start manually manipulating the process. Automation has it's limitations.
Herbert2001 wrote:
osgood_ wrote:
Not many practice what they preach because it creates additional work, which mostly they are not paid for. In the 'real world' it aint happening, in your world which is tutoring I believe it happens because time is NOT money. How many create 3/4 different sized images targeted at specific devices, not many. Images are getting bigger and bigger not smaller and smaller as you would expect now we are supposed to cater for this that and the other device. Preaching your philosophy is admirable but sadly misguided.
Many assumptions on your part, I dare say.
No assumptions, go to any responsive website now and you'll come across large images set at max-width; 100%; to cater for all devices.
Herbert2001 wrote:
osgood_ wrote:
Not many practice what they preach because it creates additional work, which mostly they are not paid for. In the 'real world' it aint happening, in your world which is tutoring I believe it happens because time is NOT money. How many create 3/4 different sized images targeted at specific devices, not many. Images are getting bigger and bigger not smaller and smaller as you would expect now we are supposed to cater for this that and the other device. Preaching your philosophy is admirable but sadly misguided.
Nowadays I tend to work from an efficient mobile base initially (if and when the client/project requires it, of course) - which has become the norm for me in the last two years, at least. Perhaps not for you. If I can provide a quick and efficient mobile experience alongside a good desktop/large screen version, then I will. I am not going to brute-force unnecessary bandwidth costs upon mobile users either, which you seem to advocate in your first post - and those assertions were what I thought to be rather odd and lop-sided.
Anyway, the extra work is trivial when done through simple back-end and front-end scripting and having it all done automatically for you, and then re-use for the next client. And most CMS's provide such built-in functionality as well, so it does not really take more time at all to provide a good mobile experience.
Then will will have to agree to differ. I start from desktop first then move onto mobile. If you are finding the extra work is trivial then you are short changing your clients. Personally I've found producing responsive design to increase the workload considerably, given the extra css and testing you need to carry out I would have thought that was fairly obvious, unless you're using some kind of duplicated templated system for each client, which I prefer not to.
Everything is rather odd and lop-sided isn't it? I mean the new html5 tags create <div> soup if they are used correctly - I find that rather odd and lop-sided considering for so long we were told that more marked up created greater download times and was overly complicating matters. Now its ok until in a few years time it's replaced by something else, and we'll be told that it was all a big mistake.
Herbert2001 wrote:
osgood_ wrote:
I'm not asking you, because I live in the real world whereas as you live on planet fantasy.
Good, because it was the OP that asked the question.
Then you should direct your response to the OP and not me.