W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > July 2013

Re: [public-respimg] <none>

From: Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 21:45:46 +0200
Cc: Ritchie Anesco <info@ritchieanesco.com>, Mohsen Nabiloo Azimi <msnazi@gmail.com>, public-respimg@w3.org
Message-Id: <7EAD35EC-85E9-4E6E-8617-F7CF9490EA82@anselm-hannemann.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
On 04.07.2013, at 21:11, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, July 4, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Ritchie Anesco wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> just thought i'll give my 2 cents in regards to this topic, downsampling a large image for the browser to resize definitely has a huge hit on performance if you use css background-size 100%, noticed this whenever you scrolled on tab devices, didn't have much as an effect on inline images.
>> 
> 
> Any chance you have a demo handy?

I can confirm this and mentioned this wherever these 'compressive images' solution was appearing. 
The problem with it is, it comes with a high cost: performance is going down massively due to the heavy repaint on resize.
This means when using such techniques on Tablets or not top of the notch smartphones 
your site gets very unresponsive when scrolling. This can be reproduced on nearly every 10" Android Tablet.
And indeed the performance lack is not as heavy on foreground images than on CSS background images.
A demo is hard to reproduce (of course a video would be possible but not very helpful IMO)

----------
Anselm Hannemann | @helloanselm | helloanselm.com
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 19:46:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:12:39 UTC