How big should pictures be in paysites?

[RedCherry]

I have old pictures on some sites that are as small as 700w.

I now have more ram and so this set of 3D content I'm making is 1600x1200 is that good? Too big? Personally, it would drive me a bit crazy to have to scroll to see a whole picture, but maybe others like that.

I usually do 800 - 900 on the long side for free sites, unless my content is smaller than that.

Thoughts?

[Cleo]

Been making them 1200 on the long side at the paysites that I manage and people seem happy. The pics are also available as a zip download.

I've just been using Photoshop's gallery maker that puts them into an html page but been meaning to switch to a JavaScript gallery maker that resizes the pics to available screen size.

[Ramster]

The bigger high quality sites go 3000 pixels or more.

I switched most of my sites to 2000 or 2500 pixels.

[RedCherry]

Thanks, I've been doing 1200 now for awhile, and everyone seemed happy, but I know others have higher screen resolution then I do. I think I'll stick to between 1200 - 1600 on the wide side for the pics. Most the content I purchase falls in that range.

[faxxaff]

I have a couple of new paysites done and images were between 1500 and 2000 pix on long side. It's big enough to provide depth and detail.

[Evil Chris]

Originally Posted by RedCherry

I think I'll stick to between 1200 - 1600 on the wide side for the pics. Most the content I purchase falls in that range.

That sounds pretty good.

[housekeeper]

I offer my images at 1280 x 853, my script re-sizes to medium as well which I set at about 940px length, I don't see a need to offer smaller ones in the members section. 1024 length has become pretty standard for preview, though I offer 900. I believe the other posters are correct in that 1600 wide or higher is being used, but personally I don't see the need, at least for now.