How can I either call a different sized background image dependant on the
user's screen size, or force my background image to move to the users screen
size ?

Any gratefully received ...

--
Rich
http://www.richdavies.com



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Rich wrote:
> How can I either call a different sized background image dependant on the
> user's screen size, or force my background image to move to the users screen
> size ?
>
It would have to be client-side scripting like Javascript. The function
would trigger on "onload".
You really intend to provide background images for viewport sizes from
600x400 to 3200x1550?

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Rich wrote:
> How can I either call a different sized background image dependant on the
> user's screen size, or force my background image to move to the users screen
> size ?

Isn't the size of his browser's viewport more relevant? Do you always
browse maximized?

More important: does everyone?


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Jim Moe wrote:
> Rich wrote:
>> How can I either call a different sized background image dependant on the
>> user's screen size, or force my background image to move to the users screen
>> size ?
>>
> It would have to be client-side scripting like Javascript. The function
> would trigger on "onload".
> You really intend to provide background images for viewport sizes from
> 600x400 to 3200x1550?

So far, he's only thinking screen size; viewport size hasn't yet
occurred to him.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

On 8 Sep., 20:12, Blinky the Shark <no.s...@box.invalid> wrote:
> Jim Moe wrote:
> > Rich wrote:
> >> How can I either call a different sized background image dependant on the
> >> user's screen size, or force my background image to move to the users screen
> >> size ?
>
> > It would have to be client-side scripting like Javascript. The function
> > would trigger on "onload".
> > You really intend to provide background images for viewport sizes from
> > 600x400 to 3200x1550?
>
> So far, he's only thinking screen size; viewport size hasn't yet
> occurred to him.
>
> --
> Blinky RLU 297263
> Killing all posts from Google Groups
> The Usenet Improvement Project:http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Blinky don't be an ass and put him down.
Rich it's definitely doable but I bit more info on the problem at hand
please. I don't want to write you a recipe unless I know for sure what
you want.

Jon wrote:

> On 8 Sep., 20:12, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> Jim Moe wrote:
>>> Rich wrote:
>>>> How can I either call a different sized background image dependant
>>>> on the user's screen size, or force my background image to move to
>>>> the users screen size ?
>>
>>> It would have to be client-side scripting like Javascript. The
>>> function would trigger on "onload".
>>> You really intend to provide background images for viewport sizes
>>> from 600x400 to 3200x1550?
>>
>> So far, he's only thinking screen size; viewport size hasn't yet
>> occurred to him.
>
> Blinky don't be an ass and put him down.

I wouldn't say Blinky was putting him down. What will I do when Rich
presents me with a graphic 1280px wide for my 750px wide browser window?

Screen size is unimportant. Browser window size *might* be important,
if you don't know how to design flexible sites.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT
Blinky the Shark <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:


|
|More important: does everyone?
|

Does "anyone?"

--
cf <cfnews@NOcharterSPAM.net>
I may be dumb, but I'm not stupid.
Terry Bradshaw

cf wrote:

> Does "anyone?"

I do. But I just bought a 24 inch wide screen monitor today. I may not
for much longer.

On 2007-09-09, cf wrote:
> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT
> Blinky the Shark <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>
>
>|
>|More important: does everyone?
>|
>
> Does "anyone?"

What are you talking about? Please include enough context so that
readers don't have to go searching.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
================================================== =================
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

cf wrote:
> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>
>
>| |More important: does everyone? |
>
> Does "anyone?"

I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just wan't
to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Scott Bryce wrote:
> cf wrote:
>
>> Does "anyone?"
>
> I do. But I just bought a 24 inch wide screen monitor today. I may not
> for much longer.

Vision impairment? Real question.

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Blinky the Shark wrote:

> Vision impairment? Real question.

I like to focus on one thing at a time. alt-tab is easier for me than
seeing portions of several open windows. I find that distracting. I also
like to see as much of what I am working on as possible. So I maximize
all windows, and use alt-tab to switch between them.

But with a wide screen monitor, doing everything maximized is not a good
use of the screen real estate.

Vision problems? I thought so, until I realized my old 19 inch CRT was
going out. I am reaching the age when carrying reading glasses is
ful. I thought the fuzzy image on my monitor was related to that.

I have only had the LCD monitor for a few hours, and I love it.

"Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
> cf wrote:
>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>
>>
>>| |More important: does everyone? |
>>
>> Does "anyone?"
>
> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just wan't
> to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>


Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I wanted
to achieve would be good...

I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone spoils
their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open, if they want
to see the full background then they'll open the window !

I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment working
on a template.

I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture of the
band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at the bottom.

This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set. I'm not
about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and I'm well
aware I might be better to simply do the design with the photo as part of
the body. But I would like to try serving up the right image size based on
user settings, even if in the end I don't use it this time.

But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of something you
don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even if you don't use it
in the end solution!

--
http://www.richdavies.com




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Scott Bryce wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> Vision impairment? Real question.
>
> I like to focus on one thing at a time. alt-tab is easier for me than
> seeing portions of several open windows. I find that distracting. I also
> like to see as much of what I am working on as possible. So I maximize
> all windows, and use alt-tab to switch between them.
>
> But with a wide screen monitor, doing everything maximized is not a good
> use of the screen real estate.
>
> Vision problems? I thought so, until I realized my old 19 inch CRT was
> going out. I am reaching the age when carrying reading glasses is
> ful. I thought the fuzzy image on my monitor was related to that.

I'm there. Non-prescription readers.

> I have only had the LCD monitor for a few hours, and I love it.

Cool beans.

I've been shopping.

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Rich wrote:

> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone spoils
> their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open

You should be. As monitors get larger, more people browse with their
browsers not maximized.


> if they want
> to see the full background then they'll open the window !

That attitude is rude.


> I'm not
> about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page

So you are going to build a "best viewed at" site, and not tell the user?


> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of something you
> don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even if you don't use it
> in the end solution!

What you want to do may not be possible without jumping through so many
hoops that the solution isn't reliable.

Set your background color to black. Use the image as a background,
non-repeating, in the upper left hand corner of the screen. Build the
rest of the site design around that. No tricks. No gimmicks. It works
for all recent browsers. That may be your best solution.

Rich wrote:
>
> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>> cf wrote:
>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>
>>>
>>>| |More important: does everyone? |
>>>
>>> Does "anyone?"
>>
>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>
>
>
> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
> wanted to achieve would be good...
>
> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>
> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
> working on a template.
>
> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
> the bottom.
>
> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
> use it this time.
>
> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>
> -- http://www.richdavies.com

How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
waiting and bailed.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

"Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
news:slrnfe6tc2.v81.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
> Rich wrote:
>>
>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>> cf wrote:
>>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>| |More important: does everyone? |
>>>>
>>>> Does "anyone?"
>>>
>>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
>> wanted to achieve would be good...
>>
>> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
>> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
>> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>>
>> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
>> working on a template.
>>
>> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
>> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
>> the bottom.
>>
>> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
>> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
>> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
>> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
>> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
>> use it this time.
>>
>> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
>> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
>> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>>
>> -- http://www.richdavies.com
>
> How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
> never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
> waiting and bailed.


Sorry thats just my own personal page in my sig. The band project hasnt even
made it to upload. I'll upload a page and post the URL.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Rich" <nosp@amnospam.net> wrote in message
news:46e3737d$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
> news:slrnfe6tc2.v81.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>> Rich wrote:
>>>
>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>> cf wrote:
>>>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>| |More important: does everyone? |
>>>>>
>>>>> Does "anyone?"
>>>>
>>>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>>>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>>>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
>>> wanted to achieve would be good...
>>>
>>> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
>>> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
>>> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>>>
>>> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
>>> working on a template.
>>>
>>> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
>>> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
>>> the bottom.
>>>
>>> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
>>> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
>>> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
>>> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
>>> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
>>> use it this time.
>>>
>>> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
>>> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
>>> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>>>
>>> -- http://www.richdavies.com
>>
>> How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
>> never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
>> waiting and bailed.
>
>
> Sorry thats just my own personal page in my sig. The band project hasnt
> even made it to upload. I'll upload a page and post the URL.
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

I've posted an example at http://www.richdavies.com/test/copyright.htm ,
ignore the design and layout, this page is purely to illustrate what I'm
trying to do with a background image.

--
Rich
http://www.richdavies.com



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Rich wrote:

> I've posted an example at http://www.richdavies.com/test/copyright.htm ,
> ignore the design and layout, this page is purely to illustrate what I'm
> trying to do with a background image.

I wouldn't use the image as a background. The image with text over it
will have the image and the text competing for attention. I would
suggest you find a way to use the image without placing text over the
top of it.

Blinky the Shark wrote:

> I'm there. Non-prescription readers.

1.0's. They come in handy.

> Cool beans.
>
> I've been shopping.

Costco has the Samsung 245BW for $480.

Scott Bryce wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> I'm there. Non-prescription readers.
>
> 1.0's. They come in handy.

Started with 1.25s 12 years ago. 2.25 now.

>> Cool beans.
>>
>> I've been shopping.
>
> Costco has the Samsung 245BW for $480.

<clickety>

So does NewEgg, with free shipping, if Costco's out.

I've been shopping for Samsungs...


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28

Rich wrote:
> "Rich" <nosp@amnospam.net> wrote in message
> news:46e3737d$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:slrnfe6tc2.v81.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>> Rich wrote:
>>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>>> cf wrote:
>>>>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>>>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> | |More important: does everyone? |
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does "anyone?"
>>>>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>>>>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>>>>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
>>>> wanted to achieve would be good...
>>>>
>>>> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
>>>> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
>>>> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>>>>
>>>> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
>>>> working on a template.
>>>>
>>>> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
>>>> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
>>>> the bottom.
>>>>
>>>> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
>>>> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
>>>> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
>>>> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
>>>> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
>>>> use it this time.
>>>>
>>>> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
>>>> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
>>>> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>>>>
>>>> -- http://www.richdavies.com
>>> How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
>>> never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
>>> waiting and bailed.
>>
>> Sorry thats just my own personal page in my sig. The band project hasnt
>> even made it to upload. I'll upload a page and post the URL.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
> I've posted an example at http://www.richdavies.com/test/copyright.htm ,
> ignore the design and layout, this page is purely to illustrate what I'm
> trying to do with a background image.
>
> --
> Rich
> http://www.richdavies.com
>
>
>

I see very little of the band at my preferred window size. No, I don't
maximize my window - but right now I have 5 other things competing for
desktop space. As a result, I see a lot of black space with some people
on the very bottom.

And I agree with Scott. This is not a good picture for a background.

As for not caring about whether I'm using my full screen or not - you
had better, if you want me to stay. You aren't putting this together
for you. You're putting it together for me - and millions of other
people out there. It's OUR feelings which count - not yours.

Of course, if you want to drive people away from the site, this is a
good way to do it.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:hpOdnQBBvqUAZX7bnZ2dnUVZ_sCtnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Rich wrote:
>> "Rich" <nosp@amnospam.net> wrote in message
>> news:46e3737d$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:slrnfe6tc2.v81.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>> Rich wrote:
>>>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>>>> cf wrote:
>>>>>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>>>>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> | |More important: does everyone? |
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does "anyone?"
>>>>>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>>>>>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>>>>>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
>>>>> wanted to achieve would be good...
>>>>>
>>>>> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
>>>>> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
>>>>> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
>>>>> working on a template.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
>>>>> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
>>>>> the bottom.
>>>>>
>>>>> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
>>>>> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
>>>>> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
>>>>> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
>>>>> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
>>>>> use it this time.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
>>>>> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
>>>>> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>>>>>
>>>>> -- http://www.richdavies.com
>>>> How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
>>>> never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
>>>> waiting and bailed.
>>>
>>> Sorry thats just my own personal page in my sig. The band project hasnt
>>> even made it to upload. I'll upload a page and post the URL.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>>
>>
>> I've posted an example at http://www.richdavies.com/test/copyright.htm ,
>> ignore the design and layout, this page is purely to illustrate what I'm
>> trying to do with a background image.
>>
>> --
>> Rich
>> http://www.richdavies.com
>>
>>
>>
>
> I see very little of the band at my preferred window size. No, I don't
> maximize my window - but right now I have 5 other things competing for
> desktop space. As a result, I see a lot of black space with some people
> on the very bottom.
>
> And I agree with Scott. This is not a good picture for a background.
>
> As for not caring about whether I'm using my full screen or not - you had
> better, if you want me to stay. You aren't putting this together for you.
> You're putting it together for me - and millions of other people out
> there. It's OUR feelings which count - not yours.
>
> Of course, if you want to drive people away from the site, this is a good
> way to do it.
>


Great feedback from all, and of course I've decided to ditch the large BG
image. Thanks to all who responded.

This has taught me to consider all visitors, regardless of how they brose,
and you're right, if the designer doesn't care about the end user, the site
is doomed !

--
Rich
http://www.richdavies.com
http://www.copyright-band.com




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Rich wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:hpOdnQBBvqUAZX7bnZ2dnUVZ_sCtnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Rich wrote:
>>> "Rich" <nosp@amnospam.net> wrote in message
>>> news:46e3737d$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:slrnfe6tc2.v81.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>>> Rich wrote:
>>>>>> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:slrnfe6iej.rtq.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net ...
>>>>>>> cf wrote:
>>>>>>>> let it be known on 8 Sep 2007 18:11:17 GMT Blinky the Shark
>>>>>>>> <no.spam@box.invalid> scribed:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> | |More important: does everyone? |
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does "anyone?"
>>>>>>> I'll bet OP does. Y'know, for a lot of computers-as-toaster users,
>>>>>>> resizing a window would fall under "high tech". See also, "i just
>>>>>>> wan't to do e mail and look at pix of kittens he he lol omg".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the replies so far, I guess more information about what I
>>>>>> wanted to achieve would be good...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I really mean browser window size, and I'm not bothered if someone
>>>>>> spoils their own enjoyment by browsing without the window fully open,
>>>>>> if they want to see the full background then they'll open the window !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm putting together a website for a local band, and at the moment
>>>>>> working on a template.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've made a background image which is basicly black, but has picture
>>>>>> of the band playing on stage, well lit, against a black backdrop at
>>>>>> the bottom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This looks great, but of course only with the right screen res set.
>>>>>> I'm not about to put up a "best viewed in 1024 x 786" on the page, and
>>>>>> I'm well aware I might be better to simply do the design with the
>>>>>> photo as part of the body. But I would like to try serving up the
>>>>>> right image size based on user settings, even if in the end I don't
>>>>>> use it this time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I'm sure everyone here is the same, when you hit a wall of
>>>>>> something you don't know how to do, you simply have to know how, even
>>>>>> if you don't use it in the end solution!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- http://www.richdavies.com
>>>>> How big does the background image you're using now make that page? I
>>>>> never saw a background image even start to render; I got tired of
>>>>> waiting and bailed.
>>>> Sorry thats just my own personal page in my sig. The band project hasnt
>>>> even made it to upload. I'll upload a page and post the URL.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>>>
>>> I've posted an example at http://www.richdavies.com/test/copyright.htm ,
>>> ignore the design and layout, this page is purely to illustrate what I'm
>>> trying to do with a background image.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rich
>>> http://www.richdavies.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I see very little of the band at my preferred window size. No, I don't
>> maximize my window - but right now I have 5 other things competing for
>> desktop space. As a result, I see a lot of black space with some people
>> on the very bottom.
>>
>> And I agree with Scott. This is not a good picture for a background.
>>
>> As for not caring about whether I'm using my full screen or not - you had
>> better, if you want me to stay. You aren't putting this together for you.
>> You're putting it together for me - and millions of other people out
>> there. It's OUR feelings which count - not yours.
>>
>> Of course, if you want to drive people away from the site, this is a good
>> way to do it.
>>
>
>
> Great feedback from all, and of course I've decided to ditch the large BG
> image. Thanks to all who responded.
>
> This has taught me to consider all visitors, regardless of how they brose,
> and you're right, if the designer doesn't care about the end user, the site
> is doomed !
>
> --
> Rich
> http://www.richdavies.com
> http://www.copyright-band.com
>
>
>
>

OK, with that out of the way, might I make another recommendation? This
picture might look good shrunk down to around 150-200 px and used on
your page?


--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.