4 ms·

Pandora: Is there a reason the image on this blog post is so large? This one image, resized in the browser to 300x200, is consuming 2+ MB. Namely, this one:

Pandora: Is there a reason the image on this blog post is so large? This one image, resized in the browser to 300x200, is consuming 2+ MB. Namely, this one: <img alt="tim-map.jpg" src="http://blog.pandora.com/pandora/tim-map.jpg" width="300" height="200" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0 0 20px 20px;" /> I've been noticing the resurgence of browser-based resizing of large images on a few different business blogs/formats, recently. In this case (and some others), the resize is to much less than 1/4 the original, so I'm thinking it's not a "Retina" thing. Maybe it's just convenience for the company/blogger, not bothering to resize. But then, every access is a 2+ MB hit -- which is how I noticed it -- both for you, and for the viewer, which may particularly impact mobile viewers and others on limited bandwidth connections.

pkulak 14y ago
They are probably just not familiar with bandwidth costs... wait...
rm999 14y ago
Probably an oversight. I usually surf on 30+ mbps connections, so if I were testing a site I wouldn't notice it.
- bo1024 14y ago
  It's a bit different when your job is to make a website.
  - hnriot 14y ago
    But blogs are often run by marketing interns who usually don't care or know any better any bandwidth.
    - elliottcarlson 14y ago
      Or marketing executives with the same lack of concern.
MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
This happens all the time, all over the web. It's because interns or non-webdev staff often don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post. So they'll upload a JPG right from a camera's memory card and use the WYSIWYG editor to set its dimensions. The worst are when images like this are referenced within broadcast e-mail messages. Luckily you can swap the file out on disk without inconveniencing future readers. I wrote an image API at my place of work to take a file by name and accept dimensions in the query string. It resizes the image, caches the file on disk, at and serves the smaller file. However, it's tough to integrate that API with every little WYSIWYG editor we have, so sometimes we still serve up large files in this way. Usually, intentional retina-quality images have plenty of telltale signs (like the @2x naming convention).
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post That's a job for a computer, not a human. It's a waste of an editor's time to dwell on such details, just as it's a waste of a newspaper editor's time to worry about the ink in the printing machines.
  - mike-cardwell 14y ago
    Googles mod_pagespeed for Apache does dynamic resizing of images.
- alexchamberlain 14y ago
  Any real evidence that interns are any worse than full-time employees?
  - Calamitous 14y ago
    They're easier to get rid of, for a start, and that makes it harder to establish firm relationships and long-term projects.
- shock3naw 14y ago
smackfu 14y ago
You see this problem a lot when reading via a feed reader. Images end up huge because the style sheet that resizes them isn't in effect.
carlob 14y ago
There might be an overall QA problem here: anyone else noticed vocational spelled with an extra a?
- willvarfar 14y ago
  or a missing space... "a vocation"

pkulak 14y ago

They are probably just not familiar with bandwidth costs... wait...

rm999 14y ago

Probably an oversight. I usually surf on 30+ mbps connections, so if I were testing a site I wouldn't notice it.

bo1024 14y ago
It's a bit different when your job is to make a website.
- hnriot 14y ago
  But blogs are often run by marketing interns who usually don't care or know any better any bandwidth.
  - elliottcarlson 14y ago
    Or marketing executives with the same lack of concern.

MiguelHudnandez 14y ago

This happens all the time, all over the web. It's because interns or non-webdev staff often don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post. So they'll upload a JPG right from a camera's memory card and use the WYSIWYG editor to set its dimensions. The worst are when images like this are referenced within broadcast e-mail messages. Luckily you can swap the file out on disk without inconveniencing future readers. I wrote an image API at my place of work to take a file by name and accept dimensions in the query string. It resizes the image, caches the file on disk, at and serves the smaller file. However, it's tough to integrate that API with every little WYSIWYG editor we have, so sometimes we still serve up large files in this way. Usually, intentional retina-quality images have plenty of telltale signs (like the @2x naming convention).

anigbrowl 14y ago
don't know they should resize a file before uploading it and attaching it to a post That's a job for a computer, not a human. It's a waste of an editor's time to dwell on such details, just as it's a waste of a newspaper editor's time to worry about the ink in the printing machines.
- mike-cardwell 14y ago
  Googles mod_pagespeed for Apache does dynamic resizing of images.
alexchamberlain 14y ago
Any real evidence that interns are any worse than full-time employees?
- Calamitous 14y ago
  They're easier to get rid of, for a start, and that makes it harder to establish firm relationships and long-term projects.
shock3naw 14y ago

smackfu 14y ago

You see this problem a lot when reading via a feed reader. Images end up huge because the style sheet that resizes them isn't in effect.

carlob 14y ago

There might be an overall QA problem here: anyone else noticed vocational spelled with an extra a?

willvarfar 14y ago
or a missing space... "a vocation"