Thumbnail Sizes for TGP Sites (not for the galleries)

[Simon]

Preface: I'm referring in this post only to TGP/MGP sites, meaning those sites which list galleries. I am *not* asking about thumbnail sizes for galleries, only about thumbnail sizes used on the TGP sites themselves.

--

Okay, I've seen TGP sites using thumbnails as small as 88x88 and as large as 300x300 (and bigger actually). I'd like to get some feedback from TGP site operators about why you'd choose one size of thumb over another for a TGP site.

I've also seen that some sites use square thumbnails, some portrait orientation thumbs (taller than they are wide) and others use landscape orientation thumbs (wider than they are tall). So again I'd like to get opinions on why you might use or prefer square versus portrait versus landscape orientation thumbnails.

For reference purposes I'll list below a few sites and the thumbnail sizes I see used there. But anyone with a TGP site is welcome to offer an opinion on thumb sizes.

Taller than wide
---------------------------------
120x160 (Toby's favorite size)
babes-in-boots.com
well-heeled-women.com/
dressingforsex.com
stocking-vixens.com

135x180
bravoteens.com
porn-plus.com

110x150
galleries4free.com
atkmodels.com


Wider than tall
---------------------------------
240x180
rawthumbs.com
spermshack.com
spunkdolls.com

180x135
pichunter.com
spermshack.com

150x125
mythumbs.com


Square Thumbs
---------------------------------
200x200
madthumbs.com
el-ladies.com

150x150
pussy.org

[Toby]

You have to analyze that question from a reverse direction. Your thumb size relative to the thumb size of the sites you trade traffic with will have a definite effect on the productivity of those trades.

If you're trading with a site with thumbs substantially larger than yours, your traffic to them will most likely be very good so long as their content is a good match for yours. Conversely their traffic back to you will most likely have a fairly poor productivity. This disparity makes it difficult to maintain an equitable trade.

What you need to do is look at other sites you're likely to trade traffic with, get a general idea of the consensus on thumb size and pick one somewhere in the middle that still works with the site layout you have.

As for vertical vs horizontal, that's pretty much a pic vs movie issue. Having both can be a bear to work into a page layout, so it depends more on what type of gallery will be more common on the site. An orientation that matches the majority of the site content will usually result in thumbs that best show off the goods.

If I didn't have databases full of 120x160 thumbs I'd have to resize I'd probably go with 135x180 if building a new TGP today. I've been using that for building my own galleries for over a year now.

P.S. I hate square thumbs. It's a compromise to try to cover both vertical and horizontal, and ends up not doing either justice.

[Simon]

Thanks, Toby ... and let me toss a slightly revised question back to you. If you were not looking to do much trading besides maybe with your own sites, how would that affect your thinking regarding thumbnail sizes? Would you use larger thumbs? Assuming you didn't have a database full of another size already I mean.

[Toby]

If productivity with trade partners isn't a significant factor then you need to balance thumb size, or more precisely thumb file size, with the number of thumbs you display on the page and the resulting page load time and server load.

One other consideration is thumb size relative the full size images in the galleries. If your using a 240x360 thumb (yes, I've seen some) and the large gallery images are only 525x750 the surfers might be a bit disappointed.

[NY Jester]

I don't run a TGP but for my personal preference or what i think looks best are this thumbs that aren't super huge or very small. I think 240x360 is too large a size. I like how the 135x180 thumbs look together on a page.

[A.J. Angel]

I had decided to use 150x200 for picture galleries and 200x150 for movie galleries upon looking the TGPs that are of the same niche because it is about the average size between the average smallest thumbs and average biggest thumbs used.

[Simon]

Toby - thanks, some good advice again there. I'd like to use larger thumb sizes but not too large, for all the reasons you've mentioned.

NYJ - thanks, personal feedback is good too. I don't like the overly large thumbs on TGP sites either, in part since the sites that use those always seem more interested in sending you off to someone else's TGP site instead of the gallery you're hoping to see when you click that big thumb. I'm thinking some surfers will get wary of the really big thumb TGPs eventually.

A.J. Angel - that might be about the right compromise size for me too, but I need to decide on that vertical versus horizontal orientation for the thumbs.

Ideally I'd like to keep my options open, so that I can have a page with both photo and video gallery thumbs mixed up together, but let the surfers have an option to see only photo or only video galleries if they want to do that.

Which I think will mean either using the same size and orientation for all thumbs, or maybe storing more than one thumbnail size per gallery (which I think TGPX can do) so that when the surfer switches to a "video galleries only" choice I can show them a page with thumbnails better suited to videos.

Storing more than one thumbnail size per gallery should also mean that the same galleries can be used to populate a variety of TGP sites with different thumb sizes.

Anyone using multiple thumbnail sizes for the same gallery now?


-

[Ramster]

My TGPs were 120x160 and I just redid them to 150x200 since a site I bought was that size and I liked the look.

Toby, redoing your thumb size is time consuming but it does allow you to get rid of the dead wood sponsors you make no sales with. You can of course add hem back in but you focus on sponsors that make money first for the new thumb size.

[virgohippy]

Originally Posted by Simon

Anyone using multiple thumbnail sizes for the same gallery now?

Outside of TGP context, I do this.

I have about 4 dimension sets, 4 horizontal and 4 vertical. They're based on 2/3 and 3/4 ratios, at 25 pixels for my unit of measure.

75x100 - 100x75
100x150 - 150x100
150x200 - 200x150
200x300 - 300x200

I trim off an even number of pixels from those dimensions for margins/borders, center weighted, and they're ready to go.

This system works very well with a modular design. If you want help with layouts, I can show you how to work with a modular design system.

Since I started using this system, I've never had to fuss over thumbs, the solutions seem to magically find themselves in every situation I've had to deal with.

Edit: I forgot to mention, I don't like to crop by hand, so vertical pictures use vertical dimensions, and horizontals use horizontal.

[Simon]

Hiya to my favorite Hippy

Interesting...I like the idea of using magic in layouts.

Actually, I do believe there is a lot of magic in certain ways that proportions and percentages balance each other. And I think we've talked about the Golden Ratio and similar concepts.

So yes, I'd love to chat with you about modular design sometime soon.

See ya in chat?

[virgohippy]

I have a few hours this California morning. Gonna do some outside work for the rest of the day.

Edit: I have some primitive notes prepared.

[Simon]

Excellent ... I'm off the phone and in there now.

[Mr Spock]

I am busy installing a TGP script so this thread is very useful ,

Does it make it make sense to have different thumbsizes for pic and movie galleries? Can I then have 2 categories ie) pics and movies.

What is the down side to this approach?

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

I am busy installing a TGP script so this thread is very useful ,

Does it make it make sense to have different thumbsizes for pic and movie galleries? Can I then have 2 categories ie) pics and movies.

What is the down side to this approach?

That works fine, if you are displaying pics and movies in separate sections or pages.

I do that on Stocking Vixens (see sig for link)

[bluebrit]

I have a couple of centerfold sites running at the moment for my metart stuff and the photos are all 170x170.
I actually like the square look for the simple fact that it makes a nice neat page but editing the photos for just the right shot can be laborious.
I don't however have any movie links on those pages but if I do decide to add some at a later date I will build separate pages to accommodate them at the time obviously with a more compatible size.

metcenterfolds.com - metartcenterfolds.com

[Mr Spock]

Originally Posted by Toby

That works fine, if you are displaying pics and movies in separate sections or pages.

I do that on Stocking Vixens (see sig for link)

Thanks Toby , that works very well.