Image size

While generating the videograms of Bergensbanen, I discovered that Max/Jitter cannot export images from matrices that are larger than 32767 pixels wide/tall. This is still fairly large, but if I was going to generate a videogram with one pixel stripe per frame in the video, I would need to create an image file that is 1 302 668 pixels wide.

This made me curious as to what type of limitations exist around images. A very quick run-through has told me this:

  • GraphicConverter: 32 000 pixels
  • Photoshop: 30 000 pixels
  • OSX Preview: 30 000 pixels

So it seems that approx. 30 000 pixels wide/tall is some kind of limit to how large digital pictures can be. I guess there is a memory/storage issue related to this, e.g. related to file sizes not exceeding 2GB. For now I have therefore decided to generate videograms that are maximum 32767 pixels wide, but may decide to make some with several separate videograms instead.

Browser screen estate

A blog post at NRK beta tells about the recentĀ popularity of Chrome, and mentions that the small pixel footprint the browser takes is an advantage. But how big is actually the difference? I decided to check out how much screen estate some of the most popular browsers use. Here is the result of this informal test on an OSX.6 machine (smallest at top):

  1. Chrome
  2. Safari
  3. Opera
  4. Firefox 4

See the screenshot below to check for yourself:

Browser screen estate comparison

Of course, screen estate isn’t all that a browser should be evaluated for, other functionality also weigh in. But I do agree that having more content and less application is a good thing.