Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 78

Thread: Image Size Limit for Photography Forum

  1. #1

    Image Size Limit for Photography Forum

    Hum......it appears we have a image size limit.

  2. #2

    Image Size Limit for Photography Forum

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Martin View Post
    Hum......it appears we have a image size limit.
    Yeah, the image is displayed at a maximum of 800 pixels. The uploaded photo is still the original size (1200 pixels wide in your photo I presume), but just display of it is reduced. I like the feature to reduce the image sizes automatically. The advantages of it outweighs the limitations IMO.

    I did try to find a way to bypass that so that if someone REALLY wanted to force the original size to be displayed, they could, but I was not able to find a way. Tried to add a width in the img code, tried to post as html with a set width. None of those worked. The only hack way I know to view the original size image is to right click on your image in the thread, go to properties, highlight and copy (ctrl-c) the URL for the image, then open a new browser window and paste (ctrl-v) the URL into the address bar. So it would be like copy pasting the link below into a new window.

    http://www.sgrid.com/forum/attachmen...7&d=1310098772

  3. #3
    Thanks Grant. I just right click on it and choose "view image" and it shows up.

    Oh.....ya, just for the record I don't like that it reduces the image automatically. Here's why. For those of us you process & sharpen our images to be viewed at a cretin size this pretty much kills our work as it usually reduces quality and takes away the sharpening we set. Flickr does this as well. They even resharpen the images when they do this and do a piss poor job. They will accept cretin sizes as standard and not touch them i.e 1024 x 768 which is what I do now. It would be nice if we didn't have to do that here. If we are concerned about tons of large images how about a limit like this, 1200 pixels max on the longest side and the file size can not exceed 350k.
    Last edited by Scott Martin; 07-08-2011 at 11:09 PM.

  4. #4
    I think more importantly than the file size is the size of the image displayed on the monitor. I just checked my Google Analytics and 1280x800 is the most popular screen resolution being used (on my website anyways). At that resolution, an image displayed at 1200 pixels wide would not fit on the screen of people on 1280x800 resolution, since around 17% of the left side of the screen is taken up by the member's information (around the same as backtalk). Users would have to scroll right to see the rest of an image that was 1200 pixels wide. I think 800 pixel maximum width is better since it will make sure the entire image will fit on the screen for the most popular screen resolutions being used. So I guess that means images you post should be a maximum of 800 pixels wide so that the browser or vbulletin doesn't resize it and mess up the sharpness, etc. Thats my thoughts anyways. I "personally" don't mind 1200 pixel max since I now have super wide monitors thanks to the help from you and other sgrid members. Just trying to cater to the majority. Just 3 months ago, I was still on 1024x768, and 800 pixels wide was perfect on backtalk.

    Here are the top 10 screen resolutions for traffic hitting my website (a hiking website):
    Name:  Capture.JPG
Views: 87
Size:  43.5 KB
    Last edited by Grant Tokumi; 07-09-2011 at 12:06 AM.

  5. #5
    Oh, and your image above is a good example of why I was trying to find a way to manually bypass the 800 pixel maximum. For majority quick posts, 800 max, but if you REALLY wanted to go bigger for a specific reason like your side by side by side image, it would be nice to have a back pocket method to force the wider image. It should be just complicated enough so that people use it only on specific posts, not every image post. Allowing html could be a way, but that didn't seem to work when I tried it.

  6. #6
    I'll bet those numbers and top 10 screen resolutions would look different if you were to pull them from a web site for photographers. After all this is a photography thread & 800 pixels wide is from the dark ages. Besides I didn't mean you HAD to post up images that were 1200 just that you could if you needed too. I have discovered through Flicker that most of my work looks like I want it to online at 1024 wide for landscapes & 800 tall for portrait type stuff. I didn't just pull the numbers I used out of the air, 1200 on the longest side & 300k is what the "Photography" site Nikonians uses for their limit.
    Last edited by Scott Martin; 07-09-2011 at 07:53 AM.

  7. #7
    slim1
    Guest
    in my samples i posted i had JUST got LR3 last summer... so I was a lil 'new' and was wowed by the overall results especially not at 100% crops like what i have there. so I didnt spent too much time tweaking for details..

    1024 is a good size i think for forums... 800 looks like a thumbnail to me on my 24inch 1920x1200 res. monitor.

  8. #8
    I was talking to Steve as he went through the image size settings for the forum. I know he adjusted some of them from the default settings. I'll have to go back into the menu, and learn how to access those settings.

    Based on what you guys are used to doing, what numbers would you recommend? I remember on other vBulletin sites, I used to get bothered by wide images, which made the whole display wider than my screen - I couldn't read the text in responses above and below the wide image without scrolling back and forth. The only "fix" came when there were enough responses to move on to the next "page".

    I've now got a very wide screen, but I'm guessing most people don't have one like this.

    As a temporary work-around, I think the photo gallery settings for each user's photos have different settings than what is used in the forums. I'll have to see if that's set for a larger resolution. Maybe that's a better way to show off larger images?

  9. #9
    Besides I didn't mean you HAD to post up images that were 1200 just that you could if you needed too.
    Yes, I do agree there should be some way to display wider resolutions if the user really wanted to post that. But if the default is changed to 1200, majority of images on this forum will be 1200 pixels wide. The non photographer who just wants to post an image of their summer vacation and is not well versed in resizing an image, will upload their 5MP image from the camera, and the forum will display that at 1200 pixels wide. Those are probably the same people running 1280x800 resolutions, so the images will be too wide to fit on their screen.

    After all this is a photography thread & 800 pixels wide is from the dark ages.
    That is a good point.

    Using my finger as a ruler I'm guessing a 1024 wide image will be just a hair wider than the width of the screen at 1280x800 resolution. Around 5% of the image will be off the screen. If 800 is unacceptable, then would 1024 be a happy medium? How about just make the Photography Forum 1024 pixels wide and keep the rest at 800 if that is possible.

    Mike, you might be able to pull screen resolution for sgrid.com (which should include both this forum and backtalk) from your host server, assuming you don't use something like Google Analytics to track site traffic.

  10. #10
    You know it's very possible that 1280 by 800 your seeing in your stats there is just a default settings for most new windows computers from people who don't know any different. I mean if you think about it that is a pretty wacky resolution. It's almost twice as wide as it is tall and not something we should govern this thread buy in my opinion. I have not had a monitor who's native resolution was 1280 in over 10 years, I don't want to go backwards. ; )
    Last edited by Scott Martin; 07-09-2011 at 08:00 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Reducing image noise in picture?
    By Brian Cross in forum Photography
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-09-2011, 11:40 PM
  2. Reply size limits.....
    By Looped in forum Support and Feedback
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-09-2011, 10:50 AM
  3. The business side of photography
    By slim1 in forum Photography
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 06-30-2011, 10:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •