memory and picture issues XWD6

**Sampie** · 31 January 2011, 08:14 PM

Dear all,

I have several questions, I hope there's someone out there willing to help.
I've made a website for a good friend of mine, a photographer. I'm experiencing several problems:
1. First of all I'd like to know if there's a size limit to the .web file that XWD6 can handle? I have a file of over 150MB (due to all the galleries and I even 'chopped' them up in several galleries) that's giving me hard times to upload. I'm not sure if it's the program or lack of memory in my pc. i'm experiencing problems as 'access violation' messages, scrambled up pages when it does upload, 'out of memory' messages.
2. Is there a way to protect pictures on this website from being downloaded? Or at least a way to hide that the pictures are in the www.domain.nl/index_htm_files when I click on a picture in a pop-up gallery? Now the folder is shown in the bottom left corner of the explorer.
3. I also experienced coincidentally (wanted to move the position of the pop up photo) that when I'm checking the pop up photogalleries on this site when I click and drag a picture all the way to the top of the screen a new explorer window opens with just this particular picture. Is there a way to prevent this?

I hope I described my problems in a clear way, but even more that there's light in my darkness...

Best regards, Sandra

**gwpriester** · 31 January 2011, 10:25 PM

Welcome to TalkGraphics Sandra

150MB is getting pretty large for a website. One thing you can do is select fro the Utilities menu, Optimize all JPEGs.

All of the images you are using are saved at their original size and resolution whereas they only need to be screen resolution for the web. So if you do this, you will save a lot of memory and file size.

I use a utility called Encrypt Web Pro to secure images and text on gallery websites. It is shareware and I believe you have to pay for it. It is fairly easy to use and can protect images, text, from right click, drag and drop, and other forms of copying. It is not a perfect solution but it will keep most people from copying images and content. There are other solutions as well and you might want to check them out first. Do a Google search website image protection.

I am not sure what is happening in your third question but it sounds like what happens if you right click on an image and select View Image.

**bjornkn** · 01 February 2011, 09:34 PM

I don't know if 150MB is considered a big web site - probably not by most?
But it certainly is a big Xara file, that may be difficult to work with.

But there is no need to make an entire website inside one single Xara file.
Make the site from several Xara files, and you can build as big a website as you like.

**Sampie** · 04 February 2011, 06:56 PM

Hello Gary,

Thank you so much, this helped a great bunch. Optimizing the pictures brought the 157MB file back to 19MB...what a difference!
I always was in the supposition that XWD did the optimizing automatically.
If you are allready using Encrypt Web Pro I won't bother doing a google search. I'd rather trust your expert opinion in this area. So that I will buy tonight and I'm sure that'll work out great too.
As for my last question: you're right it is the right click on an image. I think this'll be solved with Encrypt Web Pro as well?

But thanks for everything, I'm a happy webdesigner again!

**Sampie** · 04 February 2011, 07:00 PM

Hi Bjorn,

Thanks for your answer. I allready figured I could do that, but that's just so much work and I kept shoving it forward and forward...
But in the end I realize that is really the best options. But for now I'm happy with just 'optmizing' the pictures.

**pauland** · 04 February 2011, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Sampie

Optimizing the pictures brought the 157MB file back to 19MB...what a difference!

I am really surprised that the site is as large as 19MB. Seems really big to me. Most professional photographers select the images they wish to show and take care over the size of them, so they show their best work with a limited resolution.

If you are allready using Encrypt Web Pro I won't bother doing a google search. I'd rather trust your expert opinion in this area. So that I will buy tonight and I'm sure that'll work out great too. As for my last question: you're right it is the right click on an image. I think this'll be solved with Encrypt Web Pro as well?

Don't imagine that these systems will stop a knowledgable person taking an image. If an image is viewable on a computer it can be copied.

**James Allen** · 04 February 2011, 08:40 PM

Sorry Paul, but from my POV 19 mb is a tiny site for a professional photographer or graphic designer. Many sites are gigabytes big. I have three that total about 5 gigs (though a lot of that is not for public viewing). Certain files are only for some clients to view or download. Other times it is simply the size of videos etc. I have viewing pages for single clients containing images, videos and zipped files (for them to download), that are each more than 19 mb’s. Which reminds me – I must delete a few of those. I receive emails that add up to more than 19 mb every few days. People send funny videos that are usually about 2 mbs each.

It’s true that if you are designing a simple site for a small business that is not much more than a brochure, mostly text with a few small pics, you only need a few mbs, but for any business that has pages added on a continuing basis, especially involving photos, videos etc., it should soon be a lot bigger than 19 mb.

**pauland** · 04 February 2011, 08:48 PM

I hadn't considered the site being used as a repository for client galleries/proofs/whatever and I wouldn't consider that function as being part of a public facing photographers site, nor really as manageable by using xara software in one humungous site. I would have thought that sites involving so many assets would be better served using a CMS not Xara software.

For a static site I still consider 19MB on the large side for a photographer. Less is more as it were.

**James Allen** · 04 February 2011, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by pauland

For a static site I still consider 19MB on the large side for a photographer. Less is more as it were.

Back in about 1990 I bought a 286 ‘compatible IBM’ with 4 mb of ram and about 20 mb of hard drive. Discussing this with a couple of science/physics teachers at a barbeque that night, they both swore I would never need more than one megabyte of hard drive. One teacher had a tiny Apple with 1 mb, and insisted it was all he would ever need. The more I talked about future software, the more they insisted one mb was all anyone would ever need. I thought it was funny then, but it is more hilarious with each passing year.

**pauland** · 04 February 2011, 10:11 PM

James, I won't go into all our yesterdays, but I will stick with less is more. Either way, it matters not.
[edit - your teachers comment might be fair enough in the context of what people were doing with computers at the time. He may not have meant forever. ]