In pixels, what is the maximum size you use in your on-line portfolios?

Ellis Vener

Forum Pro
Messages
22,153
Solutions
54
Reaction score
15,946
Location
Atlanta, USA, US
As I redo my portfolio I am encountering conflicting advice.
My new hosting service, photodeck, recommends UI no larger than 3000 pixels on the wide side (I assume they mean this for landscape orientation), while SEO Expert Blake Discher recommends limiting to no more than 800-1200 pixels width.

Given this discrepancy I am curious: what size images are the rest of you using?

I assume Discher’s recommendation is based on load speed but have you ever had feedback that your portfolio images load too slowly or conversely, are not high enough resolution?

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work, please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
I am on Instagram @EllisVenerStudio
“It's not about the f-stop." -Jay Maisel
Don't be "a photographer.” Be photographing. (Paraphrasing William Faulkner's advice to writers.)
 
Last edited:
Part of our business is creating, managing and optimising web sites, primarily on belf of Canadian lawyers and law firms. (and we do pretty much everything else in the world of public relations and corporate/firm communications.

Normally a web site is part of a program or plan.

And for everything we do, one of our first principles (First Principles used to be our consutancy's name) is:

What do we want our audience to do?

In your situation... you refer to "gallery."

For a lot of amateurs and, I would think also for current, retired or semi-retired professionals, a gallery showing past work is intended to display how talents were employed.

It's a computer-generated very of an art gallery or exhibition. It's for people to look at and enjoy

But if "gallery" in your case refers to pictures / reproductions that you have posted are part of a sales and promotion and marketing effort with goals of preserving or increadsing business,

A Wedding Gallery is to sell weddings. A Portrait Gallery is to get people to have portraits made. A Food Gallery may be to sell ingredients, or sell meals in a restaurant.

(I paused here and watched a documentary about Leonaro DaVinci, and realized I'm getting off topic. My apologies, but I continue on...)

A bit about SEO, Search Engine Optimization.

In most sites with a commercial purpose, site owners want people looking for their field of endeavour to find their site easily, before finding a competitor's site. Making your site easy to find is optming the site for search engines, such as Google.

Getting Google to put your site up high on the first page of the Google results is accomplished via Google's algorithm, partly by having visitors visit it for a long time, and go "deeper" into the site than just the opening, page, splash page, or the top portion of a long site.

Which brings us, partly to an answer to the original post.

Match the number of pixels to the horizonal width of the page, allowing for how you want the page layout to look, and anticipating what size and shape screen will be used.

Most often, screen width and height ratios are proportional and the software will adjust.

I start at 1920 x 1080 as a full screen size, and let software adjust, and I add 50% to make the automatic adjustments better quality.

In the next couple of paragraps, I write about designed pages, not rows of template-satisfying pictures.

So, for instance if I want a picture a full page wide, I'll size it 3ooo pixels across the top. And if below it I want two columns, one a third of a page wide and the other two thirds of a page wide, pictures for the first column would be 1200 pixels and for the second, 2400 pixels.

Photoshop Elements has a Save for Web feature that allows for lowering the quality so it is not visible on the screen, but makes the file much quicker to load than the full with highest quality original

LAYOUT ON THE PAGE

By laying out pages out like a magaze and adding interesting words, the viewer stays with the page longer, and can be nudged further into the site.

And the goal is CONVERSION. This is the stage where the viewer has been convinced by your pages viewed that there's some point in contacting the site owner.

Hope this was useful.
 
BAK,

As always your answers are gratecully welcome and I appreciate your efforts.

me minor correction, and this may just be one of nomenclature, but I did not use the word “gallery.” I asked about images in an online portfolio. In my case, I’m pretty sure I am still a full time working commercial photographer. I rarely do shoot wedding photography.



When I do prepare an online gallery for a clients , it’s of proofs.

when I p

--
Ellis Vener
To see my work, please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
I am on Instagram @EllisVenerStudio
“It's not about the f-stop." -Jay Maisel
Don't be "a photographer.” Be photographing. (Paraphrasing William Faulkner's advice to writers.)
 
Last edited:
As I redo my portfolio I am encountering conflicting advice.
My new hosting service, photodeck, recommends UI no larger than 3000 pixels on the wide side (I assume they mean this for landscape orientation), while SEO Expert Blake Discher recommends limiting to no more than 800-1200 pixels width.

Given this discrepancy I am curious: what size images are the rest of you using?

I assume Discher’s recommendation is based on load speed but have you ever had feedback that your portfolio images load too slowly or conversely, are not high enough resolution?
I think something like 10,000 - for panoramas. Yeah, they have specific needs. I'm saddened that the sites I used to use for such images no longer seem to be available.

For more standard images, I generally use 3000 pixels on the long size.

--
Victor Engel
 
Last edited:
Thanks!
 
I used 800 px back when 28.8 was the state of the art. That was before retina displays and high speed internet were common.

P.S. This week I started using the web module in Lightroom. I was curious what size images it generates. The images I'm currently working with are square, and they are output at 800x800. That's the size I used when I used to use pbase.

--
Victor Engel
 
Last edited:
Currently I use 2600 pixels on the long side. I find that small enough for social media, but large enough to look good on most screens. Though you as a commercial photographer may be dealing with clients using larger screens.

Once I have the final version of a file I use Photoshop Fit Image to create a new downsampled version, then Save for Web to create a decent size JPEG.

Note that the load speed depends on the file size rather than the pixel dimensions. My web files are generally well under 500 KB.

gato

--
It's a work in progress, but the website is up and running:
https://jrsprawls.smugmug.com/
.
Personal pictures, road trips, rural nostalgia, and kitty cats:
https://www.instagram.com/j.r.sprawls/
 
Last edited:
I asked about images in an online portfolio. In my case, I’m pretty sure I am still a full time working commercial photographer.
I look at it in a different way:
  1. Go into your Google stats or whatever other software is been used by your web site provider.
  2. Look for what are your viewers using? Desktop or Mobile. Don't guess, the numbers will be tell you which is which.
  3. If you are mobile first: using panoramic is not a good idea.
  4. If you are mobile first: try to use verticals for your portfolios.
  5. If you are mobile first: try to stay under 1200px width.
  6. If you are mobile first: your jpeg compression can go down as low as 65%. See https://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/jpeg-quality to see actually how low you can go.
  7. If you are desktop first: try to stay within 1080p. Check the stats for how many of your users have 4k+ desktop screen.
When all this is done. Go to Google's OWN testpage: https://pagespeed.web.dev and try your website/portfolio.

BTW, try to not use JPEGs! Convert them to WEBPs which is Google's preferred format.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top