SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 73

Thread: best resolution

  1. #1
    Non-Member sagat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    best resolution

    Hi all, i am creating a template using photoshop and i would like to know what the best resolution size is. my screen size is 800X600 and i would like to make a resolution that would fit all screen types. what is the best resolution to use?

    thanks

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard trampt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    1,997
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you are going to use fixed width don't go any wider then 778px. At 800X600 you still have to compensate for the scrollbar and browser window.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yep. I like to use a 750-pixel design when I'm doing fixed-width... it's a nice round number, and also allows for the variables trampt mentioned.

    Otherwise, if it's a fluid design, you should really worry, but beware of wide images.

    Edit:


    Oh, and yes... 750 pixels is also good from a usability standpoint (a noted below), because the lines of text will be a good width too.


    Last edited by cfm; Apr 22, 2004 at 03:19. Reason: Added edit.

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy JRMillion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Arlington VA
    Posts
    2,094
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yeah, i usually stay 750-770 also....

  5. #5
    SitePoint Addict Pace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manchester - UK
    Posts
    298
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah I use 770, though sometimes it can still go over, so be careful....
    Slick!

  6. #6
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I normally stick to 750px seeing as it's a nice round figure, fit most screens and any lines of text won't have too many words per line (usability). You also need to compensate for Mac owners as well whose resolutions are a tad different (I think).
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  7. #7
    SitePoint Addict Pace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manchester - UK
    Posts
    298
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Does anyone know the difference in a Mac, this would be quite useful...
    Slick!

  8. #8
    Non-Member sagat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by trampt
    If you are going to use fixed width don't go any wider then 778px. At 800X600 you still have to compensate for the scrollbar and browser window.
    .

    i use 800X600 which seems ok.what r the usablility issues in using that?

  9. #9
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pace
    Does anyone know the difference in a Mac, this would be quite useful...
    Lots of Macs now come with widescreen resolutions, i.e. 1280x854. Actually, I think 1024x768 is the smallest resolution available on Macs right now .

  10. #10
    SitePoint Addict Pace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manchester - UK
    Posts
    298
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just looks like how people used to work years ago. Its 2004; high power graphics cards and big monitors are rife amongst designers / developers. 800 x 600 is kiddy resolution.... 1024x768 is more like the unofficial web standard if you like...
    Slick!

  11. #11
    SitePoint Wizard LiquidReflex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,861
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pace
    Does anyone know the difference in a Mac, this would be quite useful...
    Anything below 760 is usually good for a Mac. Some Mac browsers (like IE) have a 20px bar down the left with "favorites, history, search, etc", then factor in the vertical scrollbar if it shows up (another 20px), so you're down to 760px wide. Some like to be extra careful just in case a browser isn't maxed out and go a little less (like 755 or 750), whether you want to go that way or not is up to you.
    Kevin Hauge : Modern Leaf Design : Follow Us on Facebook
    Client Axis v.08 - client / project management script

  12. #12
    SitePoint Wizard LiquidReflex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,861
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by vgarcia
    Lots of Macs now come with widescreen resolutions, i.e. 1280x854. Actually, I think 1024x768 is the smallest resolution available on Macs right now .
    It also depends on your monitor though. 1024x768 isn't the "smallest available", you could choose, it's still an option if you want ... most just don't choose that small. I know a few people on newer Macs that still run 800x600 because that is the max their monitor can handle. My palette monitor is a 15" that has a max of 800x600 (it's fairly old but works great for holding palettes and quick checking sites at that resolution).
    Kevin Hauge : Modern Leaf Design : Follow Us on Facebook
    Client Axis v.08 - client / project management script

  13. #13
    SitePoint Wizard trampt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    1,997
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't know what people are talking about as far as compensating for a Mac. I run a Mac and PC and each one displays my sites at the exact same size, scrollbars and all. I've done screen captures and measured just to make sure ... this might have been an older Mac thing, but the only difference I have seen is how Mac's handle text in the browser which isn't a big deal.

    According to most of my stats only 16% of my visitors are using 800X600 resolution, about 58% at 1024X768 ... the rest are using a resolution higher then that. Personally I'm set at 1920X1200.

  14. #14
    Also available in Large Si's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Walsall, UK
    Posts
    1,911
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    trampt, remember that the majority of your visitors are going to be techy minded so are going to use higher resolutions! I stick to 1024x768 most the time on my PC but most of my colleagues (who are programmers) use 800x600.

    You need to think about your target audience when you're putting size specs together for your website - if you are focusing on the public, 800x600 is still fairly prominent although 1024x768 is catching up. Stick to the 750px theory... always a winner!
    Si
    Are you a Photoshop Jedi Master? Prove it!

    Is funky house your bag? You'll love this!

    Voice
    , eyes, ears, body and hands.


  15. #15
    ☆★☆★ silver trophy vgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    in transition
    Posts
    21,235
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LiquidReflex
    It also depends on your monitor though. 1024x768 isn't the "smallest available", you could choose, it's still an option if you want ... most just don't choose that small. I know a few people on newer Macs that still run 800x600 because that is the max their monitor can handle. My palette monitor is a 15" that has a max of 800x600 (it's fairly old but works great for holding palettes and quick checking sites at that resolution).
    True, I was thinking of new Mac sales (i.e. the 12" iBook and Powerbook that only run at 1024x768). I suppose if you had an old CRT monitor hooked up you could still have an 800x600 resolution.

    Just looks like how people used to work years ago. Its 2004; high power graphics cards and big monitors are rife amongst designers / developers. 800 x 600 is kiddy resolution.... 1024x768 is more like the unofficial web standard if you like...
    Not sure about that one. Last time I looked at a big sample of screen resolution data, 1024x768 was dead even with 800x600. I think there was maybe a 1% difference between the two. Don't count 800x600 out just yet!

  16. #16
    SitePoint Wizard LiquidReflex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,861
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigsi
    You need to think about your target audience when you're putting size specs together for your website - if you are focusing on the public, 800x600 is still fairly prominent although 1024x768 is catching up. Stick to the 750px theory... always a winner!
    This would be the main point: think of your target audience. Everyone has their own opinion on what resolutions/browsers/plug-ins/etc. are in the majority, but what really matters is who is going to be visiting your site. It's best not to exclude anyone, but at least make it problem-free for your target audience. You wouldn't want to put up 1280px horizontal scrolling navigation site done completely in flash if your audience was inexperienced middle-aged users ... you'd want to keep to the standards so the user feels comfortable. If you have a gaming site, a higher resolution and flash navigation may fit 98% of the users, but maybe only 50% of users on an e-commerce site. Just depends on what the market of the site is and how worried you are about losing visitors.

    Quote Originally Posted by vgarcia
    True, I was thinking of new Mac sales (i.e. the 12" iBook and Powerbook that only run at 1024x768). I suppose if you had an old CRT monitor hooked up you could still have an 800x600 resolution.
    Hmm ... didn't know about that. When I was checking them out I guess I never went into the monitor control panel to look ... I'll have to check that out when my Powerbook gets delivered today.
    Kevin Hauge : Modern Leaf Design : Follow Us on Facebook
    Client Axis v.08 - client / project management script

  17. #17
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Lot of truth in the nkow your audience. 90% of our visitors to our tourism site are using 800x600 which I think represents a fairly safe assumption for the general population. If you are designing for tech minded or designers only then you could probably safely consider a higher resolution as your base.

  18. #18
    SitePoint Member OneEyedDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    19
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Lot of truth in the nkow your audience. 90% of our visitors to our tourism site are using 800x600 which I think represents a fairly safe assumption for the general population. If you are designing for tech minded or designers only then you could probably safely consider a higher resolution as your base.
    Very true! All of our sites stats have a high average of both 800x600 and 1024x768 you can not say one is superior in this techno world, newbies are coming aboard every day and have the standard settings (usually 800x600) for a very long time in front of them and some people just like 800x600 on their screens, especially if its a 15" I reakon.
    Deni J. Vanin
    Web Hosting | Web Design | Freelance Jobs | Freelance Forums

    DOMAIN FOR SALE: be4.org pm me to make an offer

  19. #19
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    hawaii
    Posts
    90
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yes, i've read on numerous places that there are still a lot of people who use 800x600 (at least half) so you should definitely design for a max width of 760 or so.
    iPodbank - Forum for iPod, music, tv and movie enthusiasts.
    Golf Rewind - If you enjoy the game of golf, check out my forum.

  20. #20

  21. #21
    SitePoint Enthusiast underzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    81
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I always use 760.

  22. #22
    Afraid I can't do that Dave Hal9k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    East Anglia, England.
    Posts
    640
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just looks like how people used to work years ago. Its 2004; high power graphics cards and big monitors are rife amongst designers / developers. 800 x 600 is kiddy resolution.... 1024x768 is more like the unofficial web standard if you like...
    I agree that it is becoming the standard for designers, but not for the browsing public.

    A lot of designers test their sites with browsers going on for 5 years old. It would be logical to assume that the people using these browsers will also have 'ancient' hardware, so to lament on one side of usability while ignoring the other would be foolhardy.

    It is also wise to remember that the people running these 'bleeding edge' (I'm only on 800*600, lol) resolutions wont be taking up all of their screen with one browser window, the technically adept among them will often resize the window to about 800*600 anyway.

    I am working on an interesting design which uses fluid positioning with some restrictions. I modified some of the code on this site: http://www.svendtofte.com/code/max_width_in_ie/
    to make a "max-width margin" type affect work for IE. The site also elaborates on the well made points above of having the text being around 750px for usability.

    Very interesting thread, I feel that dealing with different resolutions is a core part of web design.

  23. #23
    SitePoint Wizard xyuri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sagat
    Hi all, i am creating a template using photoshop and i would like to know what the best resolution size is. my screen size is 800X600 and i would like to make a resolution that would fit all screen types. what is the best resolution to use?

    thanks
    uuuuuh, why not try many resolutions! design it in 800x600 then change res and stretch the window in different shapes to see how it adapts. thats what most people do.

  24. #24
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Isn't it better that a site can be seen ok in all resolutions? I mean using %...
    Try www.sitepoint.com at 800x600 and then change to 1024x768, and you still can see it perfectly (I don't know higher resolutions, maybe you can tell).

  25. #25
    SitePoint Guru DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    809
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The whole point is setting a minimum resolution to prevent horizontal scrolling (unless of course that is desired) it's then going to look good at higher resolutions. Granted there then becomes a point where you end up with extra whitespace at higher resolutions but that is just the nature of the beast.
    Yet again it goes back to know your audience!

    Isn't it better that a site can be seen ok in all resolutions?
    Yes and no. Reading large portions of text that spreads very wide on the screen (such as the posts here) at higher resolutions is hard to read.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •