Q about thumbs size

[X-Drive]

I got rejected a few times by netpond's reviewers the reason is my thumbs are too big and I was asked to keep them under 10kb. But seriously guys, just imagine how miserable a movie gallery will look with only 4 tiny thumbs placed on the whole page.
I currently make nice and smooth thumbs 320x240 (about 16-18kb each).
Since I never got rejected by other LL, I had to stop submitting to netpond.
Just like to hear your opinion on this issue.

[neticule]

I dont think the size of the thumbnail should matter, its the size of all the thumbnails put together on a page that should matter. i.e. 15kb thumbs on a standars 10 picture gallery will equal 150k, not good for 56k users, thats 30 seconds just to loa 1 gallery.

however, if they are movie thumbs, and there are only 4 on a page, i see no problem.

As long as you keep all the thumbs on a page (put together) under 100k, preferable under 70 or so, then its good.

I think netpond should redo their rule, and make video thumbs under 15-20kb as opposed to 10... Because yes, a thumbnail that big, which many many people use for video thumbs, ARE going to be over 10k, or atleast hovering really close.

Dont change the way you do thumbnails my friend, just change who you submit to.

[X-Drive]

Hopefully somebody from Netpond will read this topic and maybe they will change their thumbnail size policy for movie sites. |cool|

[Jeremy]

X-Drive

The overwhelming majority of Movie Sites submitters have their thumbs under 10kb. If your images are too big in terms of size to get under 10kb, then are they really thumbs?

Surfers generally prefer fast-loading pages (or pages which appear to be fast-loading) and they tend to buy more from them. The quicker your page and its content loads, the more sales you will make.

Maybe you should look at getting a better optimiser :-)

[X-Drive]

Originally Posted by Jeremy

X-Drive

The overwhelming majority of Movie Sites submitters have their thumbs under 10kb. If your images are too big in terms of size to get under 10kb, then are they really thumbs?

Surfers generally prefer fast-loading pages (or pages which appear to be fast-loading) and they tend to buy more from them. The quicker your page and its content loads, the more sales you will make.

Maybe you should look at getting a better optimiser :-)

What's the difference if I have 4 big movie thumbs 16kb each (64kb) and webmaster who submits picture galleries with thums 6kb each, but 15 on the page, totaling 90kb ?
My gallery eventually will load faster.
As for movie galleries I belive that surfers prefer nice & big thums over small and crappy ones.

[Jeremy]

Originally Posted by X-Drive

What's the difference if I have 4 big movie thumbs 16kb each (64kb) and webmaster who submits picture galleries with thums 6kb each, but 15 on the page, totaling 90kb ? My gallery eventually will load faster.

As I said "or pages which appear to be fast loading".

A page with 10 or 15 x 6kb thumbs usually *appears* to load faster than one with 4 x 16kb. Even if it actually doesn't, it's a question of perception.

Originally Posted by X-Drive

As for movie galleries I belive that surfers prefer nice & big thums over small and crappy ones.

Define "nice and big"?

A well-optimised 200*150 thumb comes in easily under 8kb. Even 225*180 comes in around 10kb.

A thumb just needs to be big enough and clear enough to enable the surfer to decide to click on it. Too small and they'll back out, too big and it's not a thumb, it's something they'll whack off to.

[X-Drive]

I make 320x240 thumbs, never had my tgp galleries or free sites declined because of the size, except netpond..
I guess it's just the matter of *perception*.