Loading a website with chrome is awfully slow...tips to solve it?


#1

Hi,
I have a problem with the loading of my website with google chrome. It loads really slowly until not at all…
On the other hand the loading of the site with safari or firefox is very fast.
It would be nice if you have a tip concerning this fact.
To verify the situation: http://www.bernhard-bauer.com
Many thanks for your kind answers!


#2

Alle Browser laden deine Seite sehr, sehr langsam.
Das liegt allerdings weniger an den spezifischen Browser als eher an den großen Dateien (per Bild um die 1,4 MB).
Das packt kein browser in Lichtgeschwindigkeit :slight_smile:

Eifach mal die Bilder auf eine Größe von ungefähr 1300 Pixel reduzieren und dan z.B. in Photoshop unter “für web speichern” sichern.
Hier kommst Du dann für das erste Bild auf 124 KB zum Beispiel, je nach Qualitätseinstellung (hier auf Mittel gesetzt).

Viel Erfolg


#3

Some of your images are way too heavy for web usage, the ones I saw were over 1MB. Consider scaling them down, start with 600 x 600, 1024 x 768 or 1280 x 960 for landscapes. Another good procedure would be to compress the images using apps like JPEGmini or PhotoBulk, I use both myself with great results.


#4

I use this:
https://www.hugyapps.com/compress/en/


#5

Following the recommendations of @eldar in one of their Blocs training videos, I use this: https://imageoptim.com/mac

It is free, it has no limit on the number of images.


#6

Hallo,

Danke für die Tipps…hat alles gut funktioniert! Die Seite ist jetzt auch schnell im Chrome!
Und…ich bin froh!
Danke


#7

TXS for the tip!


#8

Thanks a lot Lucas!


#9

Txs for the tip, Wam!


#10

Bernhard, can I suggest that you take the background image away from your photo gallery? I think it will make your images easier to see and look much better.

I will also say that for wide pictures, 1300 pixels is a bit small - they will look blurred on a retina screen if no @2x version is provided.


#11

I just tried the site on Safari, followed by Chrome and it seemed to be half a second slower at most with Chrome. This makes me wonder if @Bernhard is using an adblocker or some other extension on Chrome that is causing the delay.


#12

@pauland
Off topic:

I agree with you…
but unfortunately this “@1x-3x version” doesn’t work properly in Blocs, if you don’t use Safari or an iPhone.

Just my experience …
so I chose a @1x solution for the desktop, with 1900 pixels and a bit more KB. And for smartphones 1000 pixels and a bit less KB… without @2x-3x version.

If you put value on portraits …
this works well for me, even with older mobile phones or tablets.
Not perfect, but safe.
[ Of course, if I didn’t do anything wrong in Blocs. ]

Therefore, for beginners
it would be good to have a clear and editable view that distinguishes these 3 devices… without any deeper knowledge. WYSIWYG in every view, so to speak. Which is of course taken into account in the export file. But, wrong here.


#13

I tend to double up on my images sizes as a matter of course. I know how rubbish good images can look.
On mobile for images I use a mobile-only bloc so that the image can be made smaller but still remain sharp.


#14

@pauland
For beginners,
it’s not so easy to understand why it’s better to have your own bloc for smartphones.
And how do you put that into practice?!

Therefore, my wish for the 3 views in Blocs.
Best regards :wink:


#15

My point of criticism in “PhotoBulk”:

you don’t have a preview in reduction,
no KB/MB data before saving;
and actually,
only the lowest setting is the best for the web.
For this, the program?