Imaging size

[Sean_Mcr]

I've read the rules on image size

I always use my pbase gallery to image link on forums such as Fred Miranda POTN. I always use the same method for my shots on pbase 800x533 & 533x355. More time then not they're going to be outside of the allowance of talk. 250 and 450 kb. I've seen the example given and there is no one size fits all solution to file size and quality

I understand that you guys are trying to get bigger and get more members, and i like the forum. I have to admit that i haven't been posting as much here as i would like to because i don't want to get in to different work flow specifically for one forum

I see some posts and though they are with in the rules per image, the thread might have 5 or six images in them. Maybe it would be an idea to limit the amount per thread if using larger files

I also realise that some member are on dial up but i'd hazard a guess that the vast majority will be using BB and 250 450 kb is not too taxing plus with a warning i'm sure there would not be too much to worry about. Naturally this could only be for image linking. I feel you'll get more members if you allow larger image linking (with in reason). I gave a link to this forum to a good few guys as i do think it's a nice forum but they were concerned about the image linking



Cheers

Sean

[Double_Agent]

I see it as a no brainer to be honest.

200 kb for Pbase users and others seems like a fair solution. Its not like you lose too much qulity in the photo anyways and if you wish to link your own Gallery then that is only gonna publicise more of your work.

Cant see the harm in getting free publicity for your own (Offline) gallery and cant see the major loss in quality either byt he restrictions.

Increase the image quality and others might steal your picture and brandish it as their own, print it for commercial gain.

As I say, a no brainer in my opinion.

All the best

Mikey

[matty]

one of the reasons we always had smaller file sizes was that Steve was against larger file sizes for reasons of browser layout, theft, and users on dialup. When steve left we upped the image sizes to 200kb for offsite linked images as we felt it was better, the gallery remains smaller as bandwidth has to be paid for(even more so now seeing as bandwidth is being leeched)

However we will discuss the image sizes in the mod lounge and let you know, we want to encourage people to post and come here, so we need to be flexible(oo-errr).

[Sean_Mcr]

Well anybody that would want to steal a shot 800x533 is welcome to it if they fancy the print size of a beer mate, and if anybody is so nuts or as sad to do that then i'm not going to lose any sleep over that

I'm not after free publicity, i do this for love not money

What's a no brainer to me is that my gallery reflects the person i am and the style of photographer i'm interested in. I put time and effort in every way in to producing my images so they are at their best both in print and on line


Putting that amount of time and investment in to something means that want the end result to be as i want it

That really is a no brainer

Cheers

Sean

[RobertP]

I've not had a dial up connection for ages so file size is a non issue to me. The 800 pixel size makes sense but the file size does not. My preference would be for no file size limits and a warning in the thread title. The recent increase to 200k helped but I still don't see the point of an off site limit.

[Sean_Mcr]

one of the reasons we always had smaller file sizes was that Steve was against larger file sizes for reasons of browser layout, theft, and users on dialup. When steve left we upped the image sizes to 200kb for offsite linked images as we felt it was better, the gallery remains smaller as bandwidth has to be paid for(even more so now seeing as bandwidth is being leeched)

However we will discuss the image sizes in the mod lounge and let you know, we want to encourage people to post and come here, so we need to be flexible(oo-errr).


Matt i well understand that any drain on your server needs to be addressed. I used to be the MOD over on AV forums photo section that DJW Steve Green Robert P and more first met me on. So i know the balancing act you guys have going on there. But i do feel that larger image linking would attract more members

[Sean_Mcr]

I've not had a dial up connection for ages so file size is a non issue to me. The 800 pixel size makes sense but the file size does not. My preference would be for no file size limits and a warning in the thread title. The recent increase to 200k helped but I still don't see the point of an off site limit.


I agree Robert that the files should be 800x533 etc so they can be viewed in one go

Apart from my actually prints, pbase is the most important platform i use to share my love of photography with others, at least in the visual sense. So i tend to use forums that best accommodate my gallery and not the other way round

This forums heart is in the right place, but i do feel that the image linking rule needs to be adressed

[matty]

ok sean ive started a thread in mod lounge, we will discuss!

[Sean_Mcr]

Thank you Matt, that's really good of you

Cheers

Sean

[Kinobe]

I'm currently an admin over at 50Klicks.com (Gaming Community), although I hardly play games anymore but thats besides the point ;) heheh

Anyway we have a automatic resize image plugin. If the image exceeds 600*600 pixels wide then its automatically resized to which the image becomes a marquee clickable link to view the picture "large"

We use vbulliten too and it seems to be working quite well as we have a photo booth section where many members post their works.

If you were interested in the plugin let us know, as it works really well imo. In terms of kb size though, most graphic designers, photographers know what a sensible size for the web is, so we leave it to the user but if its just ridiculous then as an admin its one of our responsibilities to notify that user.

Ed :)

[Sean_Mcr]

The only thing with that Kinobe is that i have a pretty complex image resizing program already and i wouldn't want a random program down sampling my images. You might as well say post 600X600 but the file size is unlimted and at that res it would be 200 300 kb or there abouts

[Marcel]

Well we are currently pulling hair and gouging each others eyes out in the Staff room over this :p

Seriously though, Sean, you raise some very valid points. I can understand about you not wanting to break your workflow just to show your images on one forum. We *could* say "fine, just link to the shot or your gallery then", but that would be A: Bloody rude :p and B: Quite counterproductive.
We want (and actively encourage) people to post their shots here..not just links...

I think the general consencus is to keep the 800px along the longest edge (which I think we all agree on), but raise the file size limit....

like I say, thrashing it out as we speak, so if you have views on the subject, please feel free to post them in here, the more views and thoughts we have, the more we can take into consideration.

the automatic image resizing thing, is a good idea in principle, but I think it could cause too much trouble.
Not only could it be quite a drain on the server, I think the main problem will come from members taking offense at having their images resized by some software.
To give an example, I ran a photography competition round on another forum a while ago, with maximum image size of 800px and 200k (or thereabouts). Many emailed me shots over the limit and rather than disqualify them, I resized for them...A few of them got upset at me doing this, stating they could now see artefacts etc etc, and they wanted their entry changing.
This wasn't a problem, and they did have a valid point..but for situations like that, I think automatic resizing software could be a problem.

We *could* use that sort of plugin though, to detect an oversize image and change it to a link...which would be handy ;)
Consider that bit added to the staff room suggestions thread :p

[Sean_Mcr]

Thanks for the reply Marcel

I don't mind leaving links at all, i don't normally flood a thread with shots i'll normally post a couple then give some links to shots for anybody that's interested

I think all of us can be a little lazy at times when it comes to checking links. So a shot with a few links would be no bad thing

As you say, 800 is perfect for web viewing and fairer for those who don't have 20inch monitors

I do appreciate the quick response fellas

Cheers


Sean

[Marcel]

Thanks for the reply Marcel

I don't mind leaving links at all, i don't normally flood a thread with shots i'll normally post a couple then give some links to shots for anybody that's interested

I think all of us can be a little lazy at times when it comes to checking links. So a shot with a few links would be no bad thing

As you say, 800 is perfect for web viewing and fairer for those who don't have 20inch monitors

I do appreciate the quick response fellas

Cheers


Sean

No worries at all :thumbs: that's what we're here for ;)
I suppose people could post links, but I personally think it's nicer when people can post inline images....saves that one extra click for a start, and we all know how lazy we can get when browsing the web....one more click can sometimes be one click too many....lol

[matty]

jsut thrashing out the details on this now folks, announcement soon!

[matty]

ohhhh i think we have reached a decision!

[matty]

we talked about it, put forward some options, had a vote and now....

250kb max for images you link to, gallery and pixel size remain the same

we feel that 250 is enough to cover most peoples images, we think that if you post a 56k warning, then its fair.

[Marcel]

Yup, please note this was done purely on the basis of the members pointing it out to us and requesting it :thumbs:

I know this sounds ultra cheesy, but we really want this to be a forum for the members. If you lot aint happy, then we have no forum ;)
So we like to make you happy.

(Sorry, no requests for scantily clad females, we're sold out).

If you're posting alot of 56k images, just be mindful and put (56k) in the title to warn the modem users that the thread might take a while ;)

[Keltic Ice Man]

If you're posting alot of 56k images, just be mindful and put (56k) in the title to warn the modem users that the thread might take a while ;)

Whats 56K images then - is that pictures of a band called 56K?

and as for the scantily clad females is busterboy back from his hols yet :D

(Sorry Marcel couldn't resist)

:coat:

[CT]

Whats 56K images then - is that pictures of a band called 56K?



LOL It's an old modem speed. They went 14K, 28K, 56K, all slower than a really really slow thing compared to broadband. 56K has become a sort of euphemism now for dialup connections.

[matty]

something like 56k Hell or 56k? No Way! normally ends up in bracket sin the thread title

[matty]

well we changed it again

No offsite limit but BE SENSIBLE! we will break links we feel that are too big

[Joe T]

Thanks guys.

I have always refused to post images on another particualr forum due to their 640x480 rule - which like the OP, meant I had to alter my workflow.

Good work guys. :)

[matty]

we aim to please, eventually, lol

[Sean_Mcr]

Thanks lads for the new rule

It won't be abused by me

Cheers again

Sean