Quote:
Originally Posted by holograph
it's all good. if client wants 800x600 and their target audience all are viewing at 800x600 it is one thing. but if target audience has mixed resolutions, although you have to make it 800x600 you also have to account for and make your work appealing for viewers on other resolutions by utilizing that extra empty space around to bring main area in better focus or in better light, although it's still a 800x600 requirement.
edit: you don't have to) i'm just saying |
I completely agree. That's why I suggested a small seamless repeating background, rather than making some sort of fixed dimension background. Doesn't matter what it is. Could be a logo or a gradient or whatever.
For example: If your content is 800x600, and you make a background 1024px wide, you're covered for users up to 1024px but anyone with a larger res gets a fucked up presentation. If you have a seamless repeating bg, everyone is covered no matter what their res is.
This goes for any sizes you want to insert into the equation. Fixed dimension, non-seamless backgrounds are bad news no matter what you're designing your content width to be. This should all be obvious & elementary to designers. The only reason I mentioned it at all is because he was talking about making a background of 1600px - 1800px, which to me sounded like he was making one big background image, which is not a good idea. Soon as someone with a resolution bigger than that comes along, his background is blown.