Reducing image size when it's shared across variants

[forresthowie]

Hi all,
Apologies for yet another question. I'm trying to reduce the size of some of the images I have on my pages. These are shared between my 'desktop' and my 'mobile' variants. If I change the image sizes using the 'Utilities>Optimise all images' option, does this change the image size across both variants? Or would I need to be looking at the destktop version and it changes only the image size for that variant? I figure (possibly incorrectly) that I need the larger size for the 'desktop' variant but can ramp down the image quality for the smaller viewing size 'mobile'.

Or am I better 'unsharing' the image across variants and reducing the mobile variant version accordingly?

Hope this makes sense. I'm currently getting a Chrome audit of 67 percent on my home page. (Thanks for that tip https://www.talkgraphics.com/showthr...SEO-fo-xara-WD Gary)

Yours,
Robert

[Acorn]

As far as I can determine, you XDA is smart enough not to care that you have shared across variants or that you have optimised all photos.
The XDA is optimising the image in the Bitmap gallery and then all your instances (e.g., Main & Mobile) are constructed from that.

The only way to separate this out is to create a Bitmap Copy.

I therefore believe you are good to go without altering anything.

Acorn

[gcellison]

In my experience, “Optimize all” will treat the images in the two variants independently… unfortunately, even if they are not different sizes. Each will be optimized for the size at which it appears in its variant. (as Acorn indicates) So, you’ll end up with two files for the image when you export (one for each variant), and two more (x2) if you select export retina bitmap.

If the files are identical in size for the two variants, you can give the two copies a shared filename, and it will only export one copy. Be careful, however, because if you use a shared filename, and then you later decide to resize one of them without deleting the name, one of them will overwrite the other, and one of your variants will show the wrong size image.

[Acorn]

In my experience, “Optimize all” will treat the images in the two variants independently… unfortunately, even if they are not different sizes. Each will be optimized for the size at which it appears in its variant. (as Acorn indicates) So, you’ll end up with two files for the image when you export (one for each variant), and two more (x2) if you select export retina bitmap.

If the files are identical in size for the two variants, you can give the two copies a shared filename, and it will only export one copy. Be careful, however, because if you use a shared filename, and then you later decide to resize one of them without deleting the name, one of them will overwrite the other, and one of your variants will show the wrong size image.

A good answer, which I omitted as it has the stated shortfall.The new XDPXv17.0 Image Filename does get around this difficulty if the images are identical (only scaled) but introduces new images for any crop or rotation.

Acorn

[gcellison]

A good answer, which I omitted as it has the stated shortfall.The new XDPXv17.0 Image Filename does get around this difficulty if the images are identical (only scaled) but introduces new images for any crop or rotation.

Acorn

Very good to know. I haven't explored the intricacies of the new filename option yet. I'll keep your advice in mind.

[Egg Bramhill]

Optomizing images has no effect on the produced web image, it merely reduces file size of a saved .xar or .web file.

[gcellison]

Optomizing images has no effect on the produced web image, it merely reduces file size of a saved .xar or .web file.

Perhaps it has changed. When I began using WDP v10, I didn’t optimize images for the website export that I published the first time. When I accessed the site on line, the images took too long to download. Afterwards, I optimized all images, and the time was more typical.

I checked the file sizes, and indeed, WDP had exported them much larger before optimization.

In other words, optimization reduced the size of the bitmap stored with the project (.web / .xar), but it also determined the resolution of the images exported for the internet.

If that’s no longer the case, Xara must have changed the functioning of the website export tool.

[Acorn]

Optomizing images has no effect on the produced web image, it merely reduces file size of a saved .xar or .web file.

That is true Egg, until you decide to double the size of the image on the page.

Always keep a master image for backup.

Acorn

[Egg Bramhill]

Yes, agree there Acorn so I rarely use the optimise option.

[Egg Bramhill]

If that’s no longer the case, Xara must have changed the functioning of the website export tool.

I can't recall any changes but I'm of an age were I can't recall much at all these days. The current position is that optimising images within the xar/web file reduces the images resolution to 192 ppi when saving to file to your HD.