Welcome to the Treehouse Community
Want to collaborate on code errors? Have bugs you need feedback on? Looking for an extra set of eyes on your latest project? Get support with fellow developers, designers, and programmers of all backgrounds and skill levels here with the Treehouse Community!
Looking to learn something new?
Treehouse offers a seven day free trial for new students. Get access to thousands of hours of content and join thousands of Treehouse students and alumni in the community today.Start your free trial
Can't we just upload all the images required for the site elsewhere?
So, let's say I upload the photos in a service like Google Drive or Flikr... and then link it with an absolute URL to the website, rather than a relative one. Won't that approach be better if I want to take a responsive image approach?
Jared Pooley3,320 Points
Nafis Fuad, The download time wouldnt usually make any significant difference dependent on the server uploaded to. The image file size would be the same as that of a relative url, the only difference would be the server download times which may be largely dependant on server traffic, for example flickr may have a lot of traffic at that moment in time so download times may increase. also its worth considering potential issues with server down times (especially as content is now dependent on multiple, 2 servers), using a reputable service with majority up times would help sort this though.
Hope this helps,
Dear Kieran Barker, I know Absolute/relative file paths don't have anything to do with responsive design. What my point is if we do that then we wouldn't have to upload all those images in different sizes with our website. My question is:
Which approach will decrease the loading time and will be better for accessibility and SEO. Thank you.