Most people don't click through to most of the pictures

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #312,076 by drook 7/30/09 8:28:31 PM Reply	Most people don't click through to most of the pictures Although you're right, a few people doing that can really eat up bandwidth. -- Drew
Post #312,077 by Steve Lowe 7/30/09 8:32:06 PM Reply	Server-side compression? You're probably already doing this, but you might explore it further: http://www.webrefere...http/compression/
Post #312,078 by drook 7/30/09 8:40:06 PM Reply	The HTML is coming from blogger.com It's only the static images coming from my site. You know what's funny? The #1 URL by traffic volume is http://cooklikeyourg...r.com/favicon.ico And it's 510b. -- Drew
Post #312,084 by folkert 7/30/09 10:32:14 PM Reply	Re: The HTML is coming from blogger.com I just edited you favicon.ico... Dropped from 510b to 252b. Layer 1, 4bpp, 1 bit alpha, 16 slot palette compressed Layer 2, 1bpp, 1 bit alpha, 2 lot palette compressed You might want to go through you pics/images
Post #312,089 by drook 7/30/09 11:13:07 PM Reply	Yeah, I don't know much about compressing photos -- Drew
Post #312,092 by folkert 7/31/09 6:30:48 AM Reply	Better learn and quickly... Lessen your quality on jpeg... or Reduce you colors count... In the following link (two pics 99K and 66K), I only reduced the quality of the JPEG. You might say its a bit darker, but you can up the brightness a bit. http://www.gregfolkert.net/pics/drook/ Saving at least 1/3rd in image size... with just a weee little bit of processing. Might just be worth that $700/month.

Are there any entry-level content caching services? - (drook) - (27) - July 29, 2009, 05:42:52 PM EDT

AMAZON Cloudfront and S3 - (folkert) - (10) - July 29, 2009, 07:32:24 PM EDT

Are those numbers per month? - (drook) - (9) - July 29, 2009, 07:50:04 PM EDT

Yikes... - (folkert) - (1) - July 29, 2009, 08:03:24 PM EDT

That's what I figured - (drook) - July 29, 2009, 08:10:29 PM EDT

Your images may be a lot larger than that - (scoenye) - (6) - July 30, 2009, 08:20:43 PM EDT

Most people don't click through to most of the pictures - (drook) - (5) - July 30, 2009, 08:28:31 PM EDT

Server-side compression? - (Steve Lowe) - (4) - July 30, 2009, 08:32:06 PM EDT

The HTML is coming from blogger.com - (drook) - (3) - July 30, 2009, 08:40:06 PM EDT

Re: The HTML is coming from blogger.com - (folkert) - (2) - July 30, 2009, 10:32:14 PM EDT

Yeah, I don't know much about compressing photos -NT - (drook) - (1) - July 30, 2009, 11:13:07 PM EDT

Better learn and quickly... - (folkert) - July 31, 2009, 06:30:48 AM EDT

Who have you looked at? - (static) - (10) - July 29, 2009, 07:36:29 PM EDT

I found that same list - (drook) - (9) - July 29, 2009, 07:52:31 PM EDT

Aye. - (static) - (8) - July 29, 2009, 09:11:33 PM EDT

And it's *NOT PORN* - (drook) - (7) - July 29, 2009, 09:50:24 PM EDT

Wow... but what about this... - (folkert) - (3) - July 29, 2009, 10:37:31 PM EDT

Already had to do two DMCA takedown notices - (drook) - (2) - July 30, 2009, 08:28:17 AM EDT

Well, I started... - (folkert) - (1) - July 30, 2009, 09:25:42 AM EDT

I've seen her - (drook) - July 30, 2009, 11:59:39 AM EDT

Obvious question... - (static) - (2) - July 29, 2009, 10:33:56 PM EDT

Great point. -NT - (folkert) - July 29, 2009, 10:37:57 PM EDT

I've asked them, waiting for a reply -NT - (drook) - July 30, 2009, 08:28:33 AM EDT

photobucket, maybe? -NT - (malraux) - (2) - July 29, 2009, 09:53:48 PM EDT

Had Flickr for a while - (drook) - (1) - July 30, 2009, 08:30:49 AM EDT

photobucket should allow that - (malraux) - July 30, 2009, 08:43:38 AM EDT

Hosting Matters? - (Another Scott) - (1) - Aug. 6, 2009, 01:00:11 AM EDT

It not the bits per second he needs... - (folkert) - Aug. 6, 2009, 07:20:51 AM EDT

Better graphics than the Amiga!
71 ms