Mon, November 22nd, 2004 by Frank Lynch
In the past there have been discussions about the extent to which we post vertically or horizontally, but I don't think there was discussion about when it might make good sense. This spolight is meant to showcase not just a single photo, but also how it works in its situation. I have more to say, but don't want to say it before you've seen it. (My additional comment will be in the thread.)
http://kosoof.com/archive/2004/Nov/12/168.php
November 22nd, 2004 at 8:53 pm
(Spoiler space.)
The point is of course that you have to scroll on most monitors. If overused, the technique would get annoying (kind of like those presenters who continually shade part of their charts to allow them the voila on the overhead.) But I think this is an effective use of the limitations of a computer monitor, and it wouldn't have the same effect in a gallery or a book.
November 22nd, 2004 at 9:56 pm
I think posting pictures that tall should never be done. It ruins any composition an image may have and it's just plain annoying.
November 22nd, 2004 at 10:47 pm
Alex, the point is the reveal.
November 22nd, 2004 at 11:46 pm
Hmmm, I didn't have to scroll. Does that mean I have a big monitor? It's all about size, right?
November 23rd, 2004 at 1:06 am
The photo has good merits, but the scrolling part really turned me off. All that was left after my scroll was garbage. huh
November 23rd, 2004 at 2:52 am
i actually really really enjoy scroll photos. to me, they add to the overall effect immensly. things can be completely changed before you see the bottom of the page. i guess it's different for everyone.
November 23rd, 2004 at 6:26 am
I think it works with this image because you see the beautiful landscape then move down to the trash....
But in general it annoys me when I see really long images on blogs because it's impossible to get an overall sense for them. I have a 1600x1200 resolution and sometimes I come across images that are twice the length of my page! I don't see how this benefits the photographer displaying his/her work, or the person viewing it, except in exceptional circumstances such as this one, where the scrolling actually enhances the image and the user's experience of it.
I think some bloggers set themselves a width and stick to that, whether it's portrait or landscape orientation. I have a max width and a max height, which means that sometimes portrait shots are smaller relative to the landscape ones but it means almost everyone can view them without scrolling. My yard stick is my parent's monitor, I like them to be able to see the whole thing
November 23rd, 2004 at 9:55 am
To me it depends on what the person wants to do. If you want to present a picture I agree that scrolling is irritating. But if you want to make a statement beyond the picture itself then the reveal works perfectly.
What I've tried to balance on my site is how much content there is above the picture itself. Some sites with reasonably sized pictures require scrolling because the header is way too big.
November 23rd, 2004 at 11:51 am
i'm with miles. in this case, the scroll is very appropriate since you get a real surprise. in general, it's not that i mind scrolling to see a photo in its entirety, but what does irk me is when i can't see the entire photo on my screen. my monitor here at work is set at 1280x1024, and my mac at home is set even larger, but there are times when i find photos that go off my screen. and that definitely detracts from my ability to appreciate that photo fully. and it's important to realize that while those of us who do a lot of graphic-intensive stuff onscreen have a large viewing area, there are plenty of folks out there working with much smaller space.
November 23rd, 2004 at 12:58 pm
Infrangible's got a classic in the vertical scrollng category:
http://www.infrangible.com/2004/docs/051704.shtml
November 23rd, 2004 at 2:12 pm
I actually think there's a usability problem with that Infrangible example: the page takes so long to load (it's something like 3 meg, according to NetMechanic), it's not clear once it's fully loaded and it's not clear you should even start scrolling!
November 23rd, 2004 at 2:18 pm
Get firefox, and then the Imaze Zoom extension for it. Then you can resize images to fit within the screen space... the quality of the resizing doesn't seem to be bicubic, but it'll give you a sense of overall composition.
November 23rd, 2004 at 3:14 pm
Sam (ddoi) has a great example too:
http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/archives/photos_cityscape/040324_533.shtml
November 23rd, 2004 at 3:18 pm
Frank, there's a sound file on that page which I think accounts for a lot of the page weight.
November 23rd, 2004 at 5:45 pm
Funny this thread should come up. I was just pondering this dilemma on the way home this evening--to post more portrait-oriented images, or stick to the landscape format. In some ways, I feel limited by always posting horizontally. In fact, it affects the way I shoot, because I'm so hesitant to post vertical images because of the presentation on the web and its inherent horizontal orientation. At the same time, however, (and judging from some of your comments I see we're pretty split on the issue) I don't feel scrolling is the best way to display photographs. It feels a bit unnatural. Some images work by revealing parts at a time, but most don't.
November 23rd, 2004 at 10:17 pm
I have two stitches for this discussion. One fits a screen, the other scrolls right after a click.
http://www.tapdig.com/gallery/norman/park_pan?full=1
http://photo.tapdig.com/cgi-bin/blosxom.cgi/nature/111004cloud.html
98.2% of images on my site are 640px max in either direction. I shoot whatever direction the subject dictates. Like in sports: generally football is horizontal and basketball is vertical. Landcapes tend to be horizontal unless foreground is a focal point, such as the garbage.
November 27th, 2004 at 11:13 pm
Generally I want users to be able to see a picture at once and let their eyes see what they light on as their eyes and minds see fit; I don't want a "need to scroll" to dictate anything. In this case, as many have seen, there is something to the delayed information.
My own preference with a shot that requires a vertical layout is to try and capture it in "most" people's monitors, and if that won't work, I don't consider it suitable for web publishing. It's not a slight against either the shot or the medium, just a recognition that the twain don't always meet.