Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

Kat,

It sounds like you and Mike have pretty much hashed out your questions, but
to add to the discussion.

Font size? It seems that most designers use 10, but I decided to go with 12
for text boxes so that older eyes would find it easier to read. I use 10 on
occasion when it is a menu item, a phrase, or there is no problem reading
it. The problem with using 12 is that of course you can't get as many
characters per line as you can a font size of 10. This means longer pages
and potentially more scrolling. I don't think there is a definitive answer.
If you can read it ok, then go for it.

I looked at the guild but couldn't decide what background you were hoping
for. If you are talking about the "beige" background that "pads" the site,
then that is easy enough in Publisher. I don't know what problem you were
having but in Pub 2003, go to Format > Background. You will get a lot of
choices including More colors near the top, where you can choose a beige or
any color you want. If you want more choices, then click on More
Backgrounds. This brings up a Fill Effects dialog where you can choose
Gradient, Texture, Pattern, etc. Note on the bottom of the Texture tab, you
have the choice of other texture. Click that, and browse to your texture
image on your computer, and select it.

As Mike suggested, you can make your own. I once scanned a crumpled up brown
paper bag and made a 100 X 100 pixel GIF out of it, and used that...made for
an interesting effect. But if you can't find what you want in Publisher, and
there sure are a lot, then here is a link to a collection of background
images:
http://bignosebird.com/gallery.shtml Go crazy if you want. At the same
time, might I suggest that you be careful to not distract from the jewelry.
There is a quote on this site that I liked: "Assembled here is a large
collection of graphics to suit almost any taste- even bad ones!"

Hopefully that answered the unanswered questions that you and Mike didn't
address...

DavidF


"The Kat" <TheKat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:03DBC4CE-9A11-4D9C-9846-1EC0FB3F4C6B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
One more glass photo pixel and I'll scream! My brain is fried!

How do you get Pub to tile the image for a web background (just what I
need
- more graphics!)

I know I can't get that fancy with Pub, but I am wondering about a search
capabillity. Something for the NEXT update.

"Mike Koewler" wrote:

Kat,

Why not create your own textured background? Word Art or similar ought
to work. Save it as a jpg file and then use it.

I don't think Pub or any WYSIWYG web design program will easily allow
you to replicate something like the guild site. It uses a lot of
Javascript and other goodies. But you could add a search engine once you
accumulate enough pieces. You would have to provide a description of
each page but then a search would turn up the piece(s) the visitor is
looking for.

Yes, that page is also over 800 pix wide and visitors using a smaller
screen will get scroll bars. Every survey I have seen show that at least
1/3 of all visitors use a smaller screen (800x600 or less).

Mike

The Kat wrote:

I've been watching the jpg file sizes - and have done a batch of
resizing.
I'm getting even the logo stuff into 100 ppi format; Pub compresses
them to
96 or 72 - whichever it wants, but 100 is easy for me to work with (ie:
calculate!).

Very slick site offering similar items: guild.com. Any idea if Pub
will
handle a background wash like this? I have it as a background on
several
pages. Alas, I can't get the textured background used in one of the Pub
schemes to tile for a background - just one in the middle is ... less
than
satisfactory.

I'm getting nervous again. Just looking at a site like Guild can do
that.

They have pages set wider than 800, too. See what you think.

Back to glass photos

The Kat

"Mike Koewler" wrote:


Kat,

To find out the size of the published site - publish it to an empty
folder on your hard drive. In Windows Explorer (not IE!), right click
on
that folder and click properties. You can also check file sizes of
images to see if any of them seem large. If so, I would try to make
them
smaller.

Mike

The Kat wrote:

David,

The good news is that I got the links working in IE browser on my own
computer. They should work once I load the files onto the server.
Glass Art
handed me 3 more photos yesterday that need to go up with the first
try. I've
got one of them done, but one needs serious editing. I'm trying to
get that
one taken with a digital camera so it will be easier to work on, but
he
"hates to bug the client.''

Mike suggested I resize the pages, so I've been squeezing thing
together.
Big question: what size font should I use? Most of the site is in 10
pt
Trebuchet with a few larget accents in Comic sans. I prefer the san
serif
fonts (and Pub want to create the entire site with Georgia, despite
all my
format modifications). Suggestions welcome.

I need to calculate just how large this site is. The way Pub stores
the HTML
in different folders makes this difficult. I do know I've got a bunch
of
photos in it.

Also, where is the index page? I can't find one anywhere - never
could. NOW
what have I done? To edit the site I open a file called "pdesgal" that
Pub
created; it is linked to all the pages.

As Dvorak always said: "Real Soon Now." That's when I'll get the site
up. At
least thanks to you all I can see the light and the end of the tunnel
and
feel fairly sure it's not a fast freight.

"DavidF" wrote:



Mike,

I can use all the suggestions and feedback I can get...thanks.

The bigger the site, the harder it is to organize it and the
navigation
system...and the more important it is to organize it well. Otherwise
as you
suggested with your experience, you end up down the road at a dead
end, or
at least a cul-de-sac.;-)

If you have only 5 or 10 pages...maybe even 15 to 20 pages, then
producing
the whole site in one Publisher file, and using the navigation wizard
to
produce your navbar/menu with relative links, is probably the best
way to
go. Add a page...delete a page, and the wizard automagically redoes
the menu
so everything is linked together. And as I understand it, this is the
way it
also works in Serif WebPlus.

The problems start when your site grows to 50 to 100+ pages. This is
when
many people move to different dynamic web applications to produce
their
sites. I, perhaps foolishly, chose to stay with Publisher and found
that it
was easier to manage the site by breaking it up into sections and
subfolders. When I did this, I was also forced to give up on using
the
navigation wizard that wrote relative links and start using absolute
links.
In fact, Publisher 2000's menu wizard would only produce 10 pages.

Kat is using Pub 2003 which allows pretty much as many pages as you
want,
and the navigation wizard will add them to the menu. The only reason
I
suggested that he consider breaking up the site was his comments
about some
pages needing to be updated frequently. I guess I felt it might be a
good
idea to produce these variable pages with one or more separate
Publisher
files, and then linking them together with absolute links. I just
thought it
might be easier to manage that way. Just as an example, say he sold a
selection of rings, watches, and necklaces. I would consider creating
a
separate Publisher file for each category, and create a new Publisher
file
if I added another category. He could use the Pub navigation wizard
to
create a menu if he needed multiple pages within a category, and then
if he
sold out of a particular ring, or added two models of rings, he would
only
have to edit the Ring Publisher file.

I guess the bottom line is that I have no idea of what he is wanting
to do,
and your point is well taken. For most people using Publisher, they
should
not worry about breaking the site up into subfolders...nor do they
need to.
It will be a lot easier letting Publisher's navigation wizard manage
the
links....and as you said, you won't have to remember where the files
are
:-).

DavidF

"Mike Koewler" <wordwiz@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5c0b6$45d79dd1$d844dc4e$12832@xxxxxxxxxxx


David,

Since you gave me the suggestion (or at least encouraged me to do
what I
needed to do), I found there's a great thing and a horrible thing
about
using sub-folders or different files for pages:

You have to write absolute links, not a relative one.

Horrible, as I have to remember the exact location of the file.
Great, as
I don't have to redo all my links.

Now, before everyone decides to use a horde of sub-folders or
different
files for their web site, consider how your site is structured and
updated. If you are going to have several categories that will keep
growing, then I would set up a file for each category. This will
keep the
file size down (saving time with Save, Autosave, Publish, etc.) as
well as
provide a measure of safety if your file becomes corrupted - and it
will
if you add a lot of pages week after week.

OTOH, if one is going to just update a site periodically and not
worry
about keeping the old news, or adding a lot of pages over a period
of
time, there's probably not a good reason to split sites.

Of course, YMMV, Take this with grain of salt, Buyer Beware, E.
Pluribus
Unum, NaNa-NaNa, This Cat is where it's at, etc.!

Mike




DavidF wrote:


I'm back. answers in line


"The Kat" <TheKat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1D55872F-9154-4037-BCB4-86271144786A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Now YOU lost ME. I just did a "save as" of the optimized file
because I
was
unsure what would happen if I re-optimized the files after I added
new
pictures. At least I can uncheck the allow PNG before any more of
them
breed
in my program. The site uses LOTS of photos - stained glass, fused
glass,
jewelry,... and each piece is unique.



Sorry about that. To clarify, when I was talking about using
Publish to
the Web vs. Save As , I was referencing the way you produce your
html
files...not the way you save your Pub file. I think it is always a
good
idea of doing a Save As to a new name when you make any major
change in a
Pub file. Its nice to have that original to go back to.






I will have to oupdate the files frequently as new pieces are
created and
new jewelry styles come out. Will it be best to replace the entire
page
and
load that up instead of trying to place each new photo into the
niche of
the
old one?




One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when
the
website gets big, and when you have pages that need to be updated
frequently. When my site grew, I decided to break it up and produce
it
with multiple Publisher files. I have several parts of my site that
get
updated at least monthly, and I produce these with seperate
Publisher
files.

Depending on how you have things organized, you might be better off
using
multiple Pub files. Reference this article by David Bartosik:
Building a
web site with multiple Publisher web publication files:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/dbartosik/archive/2006/01/16/81264.aspx
I approach it a bit different than David though. I just create
subfolders
on my site for the different sections, and continue to use the
index.htm
as the default file name. Rather than mixing all those files in one
folder, I find it easier to manage the files on my site when they
are
organized in separate subfolders...more like I have them organized
on my
computer. I also tend to just delete the entire contents of those
subfolders before I upload the updated HTML. This is probably not
necessary, but I like an empty folder and to avoid the possibility
of
orphaned image files that aren't overwritten by the new files. To
each
their own. Sometimes if it is only a word or two, I just change out
the
index.htm file. You will need to decide what makes sense for you.
One
caveat...you will probably need to abandon the navbar wizard and
build
your own navbar or menu with absolute links...







Should I presume the larger files will be the 400 pixel ones
(sorry - NOT
dpi, I meant pixels!). I use Photoshop for the image fixes and
crops. The
ones in the site now are at 100 DPI so the 400 "DPI" of which I
spoke was
400
pixels across = 4" on my resize. Is this a reasonable size for the
"big"
shots? How do I link the little PUB thumbnails to the larger
files? And
WHEN?
Before I save as HTML and move that to the site or after the site
is up?




When you resize and optimize your images, I would agree with Rob.
Make
the images 400 pixels (or whatever final width you want), and at 72
or 96
dpi, for your "large" version. I find that 400 pixel wide images
give me
enough detail, but you might need larger, and perhaps not need that
large
depending on the photo. Try different sizes until you find the
smallest
that works for you. I use 100 or 150 pixel wide images for
thumbnails.
100 can be awful small... As to linking the two, you didn't take
the time
to read the article I referenced did you? ;-) The short of it is
that you
will upload your large size images to a subfolder on your site, and
link
to them from your thumbnails. Here is the reference again: How to
Thumbnail in Publisher 2003 Web Publications:
http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/Pub0009/LPMArticle.asp?ID=564







That's where you lost me - you say "publish to the web" and I
don't have
a
clue how to do that! I was planning to load HTML files that PUB
creates
each
time I save.




I don't know if you are still confused about this or not, but when
you
produce the html files from Publisher you can click on the little
icon,
or File > Publish to the Web. If you produce your html files this
way
they are "filtered" and your over all file size and loading time is
minimized. What I didn't want you to do was go to File > Save As >
Save
as type, a web page in html format. That results in unfiltered
html, that
you don't want. Part of the confusion is that in Pub 2000, you do
produce
your html files via the Save As approach, and in Pub 2002 you do
something different. Sorry if I confused you. Here is a brief
outline of
the whole process that might clear things up: Prepare, publish, and
maintain your Publisher Web site:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/publisher/HA011053521033.aspx

Now then, its all clear as mud, eh?

DavidF






.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... The Back to top links are needed on the FAQ, Adornments, and Glass art pages. ... I was referencing the way you produce your html ... One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when the ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... server will let me use Publisher; I had intended to change it to HTML & FPage ... When you resize and optimize your images, ... on the photo. ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... Think I understand what you're saying about the upload. ... I was referencing the way you produce your html ... One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when the ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... Discovered one reason I could not set up the background I wanted: Publisher is looking only in its PUB60COR files for graphics for the website. ... I also tend to just delete the entire contents of those subfolders before I upload the updated HTML. ... dpi, I meant pixels!). ... I find that 400 pixel wide images give me enough detail, but you might need larger, and perhaps not need that large depending on the photo. ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... They should work once I load the files onto the server. ... The way Pub stores the HTML ... I, perhaps foolishly, chose to stay with Publisher and found that it ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)