OK, heres an issue which could last all day with any graphics person:<br />
<br />
When our graphics guy designs work for our site, he designs for 800X600 screens. Now we use 1024X700 and I see lots of extra space hanging around all over. The debate is this: He likes his design to stay EXACTLY as he made it in ImageReady or Illustrator ..usually a 800X600 design. I design for the expansion/ collapse of the screen (you know, one layout which fits all sizes and rez)....so (hypothetically) the pages will look good no matter which screen size/ resolution you use. He really hates this because he thinks it "ruins" the layout effect you were going for. <br />
<br />
So what is it... <br />
Design for the most common screen size? Design for all screen sizes?<!--content-->Of course the answer can only be....it depends. A static design for 800 x 600 resolution is much easier, especially for a graphical design.<br />
Design for 640 x 480 is too limiting, and design for res higher than 800 wide will really be hard to view at lower resolutions. I think design for 800 wide screens is a good compromise, at least for the present. <br />
<br />
Kevin<!--content-->yes, what I try to do is use tables which expand to allow for a 800X600 design that fills in the "extra" space of a 1200+ screen size. The graphics guy would rather have the screen filled with lots of empty space, rather than have the tables expand to fill the screen up.<!--content-->Well Depending on the type of layout your designing, An expanding design based on browser size is'nt possible in all cases. Thats why I stick with the 800x600 standard or to be exact 780 pixels wide to take account of the scrollbars.<!--content-->In my experience, the choice to design for 800X600 vs. higher resolutions depends on how much content will be in the body of the page. Screen resolutions larger than 800 X 600 are not yet the norm, so I would definitely say design for the mojority of users and stay with 800X600 for the time being.<br />
<br />
Sillyfish<!--content-->Hi All!<br />
<br />
I my opinion 800x600 res is the best. I use 21" monitor with 1024x768 res, most of the time I open more than two browser windows (say 600x400, 500x400 or something similar) and all sites look fine. Contents of the site never looked bad due to expandable tables or else - and if i have to look what is on the extreme right I use scroll bar. Neat, and I think, if I am not wrong 80% of interenet users have 15" to 17" monitors and a site designed at 800x600 res look great.<!--content-->
<br />
When our graphics guy designs work for our site, he designs for 800X600 screens. Now we use 1024X700 and I see lots of extra space hanging around all over. The debate is this: He likes his design to stay EXACTLY as he made it in ImageReady or Illustrator ..usually a 800X600 design. I design for the expansion/ collapse of the screen (you know, one layout which fits all sizes and rez)....so (hypothetically) the pages will look good no matter which screen size/ resolution you use. He really hates this because he thinks it "ruins" the layout effect you were going for. <br />
<br />
So what is it... <br />
Design for the most common screen size? Design for all screen sizes?<!--content-->Of course the answer can only be....it depends. A static design for 800 x 600 resolution is much easier, especially for a graphical design.<br />
Design for 640 x 480 is too limiting, and design for res higher than 800 wide will really be hard to view at lower resolutions. I think design for 800 wide screens is a good compromise, at least for the present. <br />
<br />
Kevin<!--content-->yes, what I try to do is use tables which expand to allow for a 800X600 design that fills in the "extra" space of a 1200+ screen size. The graphics guy would rather have the screen filled with lots of empty space, rather than have the tables expand to fill the screen up.<!--content-->Well Depending on the type of layout your designing, An expanding design based on browser size is'nt possible in all cases. Thats why I stick with the 800x600 standard or to be exact 780 pixels wide to take account of the scrollbars.<!--content-->In my experience, the choice to design for 800X600 vs. higher resolutions depends on how much content will be in the body of the page. Screen resolutions larger than 800 X 600 are not yet the norm, so I would definitely say design for the mojority of users and stay with 800X600 for the time being.<br />
<br />
Sillyfish<!--content-->Hi All!<br />
<br />
I my opinion 800x600 res is the best. I use 21" monitor with 1024x768 res, most of the time I open more than two browser windows (say 600x400, 500x400 or something similar) and all sites look fine. Contents of the site never looked bad due to expandable tables or else - and if i have to look what is on the extreme right I use scroll bar. Neat, and I think, if I am not wrong 80% of interenet users have 15" to 17" monitors and a site designed at 800x600 res look great.<!--content-->