Nick, Chris at The Great War Forum has just introduced constraints to image uploads. He has fixed it to a max of 200k and width of 600 pixels. Don't know about resolution at 75dpi or not. Given this is more than adequate for onscreen viewing I would like to suggest we adopt a similar principle to make viewing far more agreeable to everyone, no unsightly scrolling to the right, no waiting for months for image downloads etc etc. If any member wishes to see a larger picture or higher resolution they can easily contact the orginator of the post themselves What do you think? Ryan
I agree on this one,most if not all of us should have some sort of software for re-sizing images so it shouldn't be a problem.There is already one posting i can't/don't look at on this forum because the download time is so long,takes an age when you don't have broadband. The MOST important thing though,it's less strain on the system,by not taking up so much server space etc !!. Steven
Mea culpa! I admit that the unloadable thread in question is the one about my drawings... I firgot to apologise for the guys with dial-up connexions... I made quite a big effort to shrink the drawings and to reduce them in resolution, but still... too many images... Sorry. But the time's worth it! You can open the thread, go and make yourself a sandwich and come back when it's ready. Then, you can enjoy your sandwich and tell Friedrich about his Archie-like cartoons: "You suck at drawing!" Then you get up, get yourself a soda and keep enjoying the forums. :P
As I posted on 23 Feb; ” I would advocate this site has an automatic resizing mode to limit the displayed size of images people link to, i.e. nothing so large it wrecks the standard browser frame.” At the time pictures couldn’t be uploaded, but the same applies. This site already uses a reducer for avatars, so, surely the came can apply to main text area pictures? If you look at the map below, which I linked to in the ‘Imola Bridge’ thread, it happens to be ‘as is’ which I think is a perfect maximum size – 560 pixels. This fills the frame without wrecking it and avoids any need to use the horizontal slider bar to see everything – counter productive to the effect. Moreover, once the frame is expanded to take the whole picture, ALL the text in that thread on that page, even in other posts, now has a new wider frame and you need to use the slider to read all the text. This would also mean no one has to resize any pic they’re uploading from their own machine, as it’s done automatically. If anyone wants to however, MS OS usually give you Photo Editor which does this very easily via ‘Image’ ‘Resize’ on the toolbar. The perfect maximum size I vote for a fixed maximum size auto reducer to limit width of pics to 560 pixels. B) No.9
560 - 600 pixels - whose counting? as long as it doesnt take ages and you dont have to scroll all over the place
Originally posted by salientpoints@Mar 10 2004, 03:15 AM 560 - 600 pixels - whose counting? as long as it doesnt take ages and you dont have to scroll all over the place Not me ,i certainly aren't counting !!.I think 200kb and 560/600 pixels whatever is fine.The above map is great no scrolling from left to right. I took the time to look at Friedrich's drawings,very good enjoyed them but they did take A LONG time to download and there was a lot of scrolling up,down left,right to look at them properly.A good example of the need to limit the image size maybe ??. Steven
