Why is the google logo split into three images? :o

Arciel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 11, 2006
13
0
New Zealand
I was looking at google today.

I noticed that the big "Google" image on google.co.nz was infact split into four pictures:

http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp0.gif
http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp1.gif
http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp2.gif
http://www.google.co.nz/images/hp3.gif

However, on google.com, the image is not split:

http://www.google.com/intl/en/images/logo.gif

I'm sure there's some sort of interesting reason for this, but I have no idea what it might be. Would anyone care to enlighten me as to why the image has been split?

Thanks! :)
 

cbetta

macrumors regular
Jul 5, 2006
103
0
funny, i thought it was because of the new zealand written under it, but on the netherlands site it is also 1 image with "Nederland" written under it...
 

beatsme

macrumors 65816
Oct 6, 2005
1,204
1
crazycat said:
I thought about that some time ago but i have no idea why they do it.
3 or 4 smaller pics will load faster than one big pic. It's called "slicing." Helps preserve bandwidth.

If you have a copy of Adobe ImageReady, you could easily do it yourself.
 

spicyapple

macrumors 68000
Jul 20, 2006
1,725
0
beatsme said:
3 or 4 smaller pics will load faster than one big pic.
But they are all .gifs. Slicing into smaller pics won't make it load faster because each file has to be retrieved from the server, so the more images you have, the longer it takes.
 

crazycat

macrumors 65816
Dec 5, 2005
1,319
0
spicyapple said:
But they are all .gifs. Slicing into smaller pics won't make it load faster because each file has to be retrieved from the server, so the more images you have, the longer it takes.
My thought exaclly, it should. Splitting a 1mb pic into ten 0.1mb files is still 1mb at the end.
 

Mal

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2002
6,251
17
Orlando
Two reasons why slicing really does work:

Computers are able to download multiple pieces simultaneously, so when you split up an image, you can maximize the bandwidth available much more easily. Thus, even if the total image size is the same, the page will likely load faster than if it was a single image that the computer had to download in sequence.

Also, when you slice up an image, it makes it easier to reduce the number of colors necessary to display that portion of the image, thus reducing your file size (sometimes fairly significantly). Imageready and Fireworks will both do this rather effectively, and it'd be a good idea to learn this process well and stick to it. The smaller your images can be (without ruining the look you want) the faster your page will load and the longer people will stick around.

jW
 

beatsme

macrumors 65816
Oct 6, 2005
1,204
1
spicyapple said:
But they are all .gifs. Slicing into smaller pics won't make it load faster because each file has to be retrieved from the server, so the more images you have, the longer it takes.
not necessarily. The number of images is less important than the transmission time per image.

think of it like this:
take the cardboard tube that your paper towels are wrapped around. The cardboard tube is your "bandwidth." You can probably just about fit a ping-pong ball through the tube. It'd be a bit tight but it should go through, though it may take a while...heck, you may have to shove it through.

Now take a handful of marbles, and try to fit them through the tube, one at a time. They'll roll on through with no problem.

See what I mean?
 

OutThere

macrumors 603
Dec 19, 2002
5,730
0
NYC
They probably just sliced it for some reason or another at one point...which is really easy to do, and then never bothered changing it back. I mean, as long as it works, right?

Plus, the NZ google isn't getting nearly as many hits as the rest of the Google pages, so they would be inclined to care less. :p
 

Sedulous

macrumors 68020
Dec 10, 2002
2,374
1,651
Gifs with fewer colors are smaller. So instead of one big .gif with 25 colors where only some colors are used in 5 areas, they have 5 .gifs with 5 colors. Something like that.
 

Arciel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 11, 2006
13
0
New Zealand
Sedulous said:
Gifs with fewer colors are smaller. So instead of one big .gif with 25 colors where only some colors are used in 5 areas, they have 5 .gifs with 5 colors. Something like that.
There's one bit, though, that's been sliced so it has a little bit of a green letter, and a little bit of a red letter, and a little bit of a blue letter :eek: So I don't think that's it, although that was my initial reasoning too.


beatsme said:
Now take a handful of marbles, and try to fit them through the tube, one at a time. They'll roll on through with no problem.
:eek: I see! Sort of. It sounds a little insane, but it does make sense. Thanks! That's very interesting :eek:
 

Killyp

macrumors 68040
Jun 14, 2006
3,860
5
Basically, the fewer different colours there are in the image, the less variation in colour the image has, reducing the total number of colours...
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,636
0
cbetta said:
funny, i thought it was because of the new zealand written under it, but on the netherlands site it is also 1 image with "Nederland" written under it...
The logo on www.google.nl is sliced like that, and it does appear that Google sliced it to make it a little easier to get the country name next to the g's descender. My guess is that the additional slice to the left is to allow text on the left side, just in case.