Optimally serving large background images across multiple resolutions - css

I have a very large hero image, set as a background-image, that takes up the entire initial viewport size. I want to serve up multiple sizes based on device resolution for improved speed.
Media queries seem like the best approach, but I have some questions about implementing them:
Would it be better to use the width feature or device-width feature? I'm thinking the latter, because the width can change if a user resizes their browser, which could trigger a new background-image to load. With device-width, I can detect the largest possible screen size and load an image whose dimensions can look good if the user resizes their browser to full size.
How do you accommodate for pixel density? I need to make the images twice as big, or in some cases, three times as big, so they render properly on devices with large pixel density. So I can't really cut down the image size that much when I have to account for potentially high pixel density. I could make media queries targeting specific pixel densities and device-widths together, but that's seems like a complicated and suboptimal solution.
I'd love to hear some solutions people have found for this.

Related

Confuse about responsive image use cases

In the Responsive Use Case, I confused about the Resolution-based selection and Viewport-based selection. I think they are the same.
I think they are both talking about choosing the appropriate size image for the specify screen size. If big size image apply to small mobile device, bandwidth and performance will be wasted.
Am I right? If I'm wrong, what exactly the differences between Resolution-based selection and Viewport-based selection?

How to scale images proportionally for higher resolutions?

Some of the images that I am using are small icons. How can I scale them when viewing them at much higher resolutions such as 2560 x 1440?
Bojan is right: Using imulus.github.io/retinajs is a good way to accomplish this. A few things to note:
in your initial design, you should set your entire document to 150ppi. This is double resolution for retina display. When you're designing be sure all of the images and icons are scaleable to this size without pixelation.
Before you begin your build, cut out your images at this size and save them out like normal.Then scale it down to 72ppi so as you can cut out regular resolution images, and take measurements while you replicate the design into a website so you aren't constantly dividing by 2.
retinajs will replace your images as needed, but it will require you to assign dimensions to images that may not have them.
hope this helps

CSS - how to code for a specific resolution

I am designing html/css interface for a 1920x1080 touchscreen. It will always be that resolution, never changing. Should I set width and height to those dimensions and code from there, or should I code in percents at whatever size resolution I'm at and then allow it to adjust to a bigger screen? I am looking for the solution what poses the least roadblocks.
Never assume that anything will always be the same resolution. Regardless of what you're coding for now, there will be next generation devices, and they will be different. So unless your project has a very short lifetime (maybe a temporary web site), my recommendation is to code to current standards. Also, in my experience, coding in ems and percentages is usually faster than coding in individual pixels of a project. If your touchscreen is 1920x1080, and you set a body width of 100%, there is functionally no difference between that value, and setting the body width to 1920px. However, using the percentage approach, you retain more flexibility should the device resolution or browser behavior change.
The best solution (atleast for me) has been described by you as the usage of percentage values.
So if you use percentage values then the code will take care of its content's size in any screen size. But you might want to use this:
#media only screen and (max-width: 1900) {
// css properties here..
}
But the media query will take alot of code lines to make the site able to render itself. So that is why using % is my preference.

What's the point on using % units in responsive design?

I'm redesigning my site because looks awful on different resolutions (apart devices), most guides and tutorials rely on % and em than fixed values. I'm still learning this so I'm reading everything around.
Thought this would solve the question with different display sizes but again: we have to craft some more CSS for fix some specific issues.
If I need to add media-queries for extra display sizes, why use % then? Do use % really reduce coding? Is ok need to add some extra css for some sizes or am I doing something wrong?
Thanks for any advice!
The purpose of using em sizes is to allow the base your design off of the user's choice of font size. I may use a larger font size because I have a huge monitor and poor eye sight, while someone else might prefer a smaller font. By using em units, your design will accommodate both of our font preferences and resize accordingly instead of forcing the font size to a given standard (eg. "12 point font").
In a similar manner, percent (%) units allow your design to respond to different browser sizes. Used in conjunction with em units, this will allow text-based elements to respond to arbitrary font size choices, and layout elements to respond to arbitrary browser sizes.
It is perfectly acceptable to design a single responsive design for all media types. Media queries are intended when you want different display styles on different devices, not to "support" different display sizes. An example would be to use serif fonts on print media and sans-serif fonts on display media, since usabilities studies have shown that these font faces are preferred for these sorts of media.
Furthermore, it allows you to do custom styling for some situations like mobile devices, where you may want to consider that the user has a limited amount of bandwidth and maybe cut down on extra images. Or if you want to display your content in a completely different layout for the microscopic screen afforded by certain phones.
% allows your site to be responsive to the user's method of viewing. Let's say you have a div that's at 100%. It'll fill the entire section, regardless if it's on a phone or desktop.
It should be okay to add extra CSS for sizes as well. As far as I know, you can have some elements display in % and some with a fixed px value, although they might conflict depending on how the page is setup or what it is being viewed with.
For example.
Your website header have the width of 950px; But in a mobile device, it may fit at 450px;
So, you use media-query to reposition some elements and handle some size issues and set the header width to 450px;
But, if you use % values, you can set your header div to have 100% of width base in its parent. So you can only change the body or some container div width, the all childs going to adapt.
Diana,
I am glad I came across this question. I literally just uploaded my first responsive design which is 90% based off of percentages when it comes to font-size and widths.
Check out the below:
http://www.noxinnovations.com/portfolio/responsive/
Obviously, it doesn't look amazing, and the image looks way out of place... But do me a favor and resize your browser window, by slowly making it smaller and smaller. I did that by setting a percentage width!
Trust me, I tried doing this responsive design test with pixels, and it didn't turn out too well. The percentage width ensures that regardless of the resolution and or pixel dimensions (per se) the design will always cater to the size of the screen. Also, I did not have to use one CSS3 Media Query, but I would highly suggest using CSS3 Media Queries only when you need them.
In my opinion, I should probably have a Media Query for a larger screen.
I hope this helps you as much as it has helped me!
Thank you,
Aaron

Which unit of measurement is best for webpage layouts, px, percentages, or ems? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
what is the difference px,em and ex?
I have a question for all the coding geniuses on StackOverflow.
I am a newbie, and I am about to start building my third website. Being that I had some problems with the layouts of my first two websites, I am asking this question before I start on my third:
What measurement is it best to use for
the css elements? Percents,EM's or Px?
Which form of measurement will ensure that I have a site that will not get distorted on different browser sizes/resolutions? Is there anything else that I have to be careful of when building my site so that it will not get distorted when a user zooms, or looks at the site from a different browser size/ resolution? (as was he case on my other sites)
Thanks for your time, guys. Any help would be greatly appreciated!!
Thank you.
Whichever is easier for you to work with.
Modern browsers (i.e. everything in use today except for IE6 and IE7) have a concept of "CSS pixels" which is different from "actual pixels," so e.g. zooming changes the size of a "CSS pixel." Fonts will scale just fine; if you say the font is 14px, it will start out that way, but if the user zooms it'll get bigger. Thus, if it's easy for you to measure in pixels, for example to size page elements relative to an image of a given pixel size, you should do pixels.
Sometimes you want to size things relative to text, though. If the width of an em-dash is a useful measurement, somewhat representing the "longest possible character," go ahead and use ems.
And finally, if you're trying for a fluid layout, percentages can be great: a gradient that starts fading 50% across the page is often what you want, as opposed to one that starts fading after some fit number of pixels. Even if you're not fluid, and the width of your container is fixed to e.g. 900px, it's still often useful to say "this goes at the 50% mark" or "I have one thing at the 33% mark and one at the 66% mark." That's much easier to work with than figuring out what the corresponding pixel offset is every time, and makes your intent clearer to anyone reading your code.
Short answer: it depends.
Longer answer:
There is a place for all three units, frequently in the same design. There is no "best" unit; they serve different purposes.
Pixel units generally offer the most precise control over the size of the elements in the user interface, but also restrict that size such that it does not change with regard to the other elements of the page design. The size of pixels themselves may change. For example, a Retina display packs more pixels into the same physical space as a non-Retina display, so images which were designed for traditional displays get scaled up. Similarly, traditional desktop web browsers may adjust the size of pixel in response to the user zooming the size of a page. In these cases however, the pixels change sizes throughout the entire document, and retain the same proportions with regard to one another, so you can use px values and expect them to work sanely in most conditions.
EM units vary according to the size of the text. They're most commonly used for setting the size of text, and for line heights; but there have been some interesting things done with "elastic" layouts such as the elastic lawn zen garden (turn off page zoom for this site; switch to text-only zoom and change the size a few times).
Percentages vary according to the size of the containing element, expanding and contracting depending on how much room is available to them.
And, really, it's very common to see web designs that use all of these. For example, suppose you have a site with two columns. The main column must expand and contract with the browser width, but the secondary column needs to stay the same width. The main column might have a width of 100%, but also a margin set in pixels for the secondary column to float in. And the text and line height might be set in ems.
So, the real answer is: they all have their uses. Keep practicing, and pretty soon you'll figure out how it all fits together.
EDIT: In the example above, I should have said "a width of auto" -- meaning take up all available space after margins, padding, and borders are accounted for. Sorry, I tend to think of that as a percentage even though it's actually a keyword.
from accessability point of view need to use EM's. You need you layout to adapt to very different fonts sizes so if allmeasurements are in EM's everything will scale as accessability tools increase font size
When creating liquid layouts, it makes sense to use percentages for the widths of your blocks, so they shrink and grow with browser size changes.
For heights, pts have a specific spatial value, and em are related to your current point size. This is useful because things specified in those units will be roughly the same size on everyone's display (unless they have different zoom factors applied). em are also useful when working with a dimension driven by an amount of text.
Browsers will also scale values specified in pixels, so they are not any more a "trap", but they are rarely the "natural" choice for layouts, unless working with raster images.
As Will and Domenic say: use all three, when appropriate. As you get more experience, you'll get a better feel for when to use which.
If you want to design a fixed layout website then use px or em.
If you want to design a fluid layout website then use percentages.
Percentage is always relative so page content with dimensions in percentage will automatically resize on window resize and on different screen resolutions.
px and em are one and the same thing. Same in their nature. They define the absoluteness of the dimensions. Btw for the difference, 1em=current font size. So if your html or body has css font-size:19px; then 1em=19px.

Resources