Quantcast
  • We invite you to join UKWorkshop.
    Members can turn off viewing Ads!

Image Size plea

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

tim

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2004
Messages
2,307
Reaction score
0
Location
Herefordshire
I have noticed that recently lots of very large (unecessarily so) images are being posted. These could be made much smaller by the poster, still leave the image looking good and allow anyone on a dial up connection to look at them as well.

Is there a way that this can be controlled or monitored please.

Cheers


Tim
 

Gill

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2003
Messages
3,537
Reaction score
0
Location
Lincs
I'd like to endorse Tim's plea. Whilst it's nice to see pictures of work in all their glory, those of us with small monitors have to continuously scroll the threads sideways in order to see them and read accompanying text. This means you lose track of the threads meaning very quickly as you focus your attention on scrolling left and right. As a result, I just don't read such threads - they're too much effort.

Gill
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
I can only agree - 640x400 is plenty big enough and I would welcome it as much as the next person on the end of a bit of string. :D

Cheers, Alf
 

Charley

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2002
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
5
Location
Collingham
I'm afraid on the forum there's no control of the images as they aren't hosted on the server.

I agree it's a PITA when people post images that break the forum table so you have to scroll left and right.
 

Midnight

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2003
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
0
Location
Scotland
I have to admit that my tolerance for oversized pics has gone wayyyyyy down lately too...

Philly... dare I suggest adopting Alf's method; a wee thumbnail pic that doubles as a link....???
 

Philly

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2003
Messages
6,874
Reaction score
0
Location
Dorset, England.
Mike
I would need a grown-up to show me how-then I would be happy to!! :roll:
Cheers
DumbPhilly :D
 

Adam

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2003
Messages
3,768
Reaction score
0
Location
UK
I have to say though, adding thumbnails takes quite a bit longer. Its a slow process to add all the additional text in - so not easy to stick up a few "quick" pictures, and requires you to have a web host with two copies of the images, a small one and a large one, and that in turn requires you to generate the two sizes yourself, or use a host which offers a conversion process (i.e. pbase) and this costs ££.

Adam
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
Yep, the thumbnails do add a bit of extra work; I think if you're only doing 2 or 3 pics then using the larger 640x400 size is okay. It's when you get to a particularly image intensive post that the thumbnails are worth it. It helps to copy'n'paste the relevant code and then just manually edit in each file name. The latter is much quicker if you use a basic <thispic001.jpg> <thispic002.jpg> etc format. If you run Windoze XP, you can easily make an additional, smaller sized, image using the Image Resizer "Power Toy". One of the reasons I started to use the Coppermine Photo Gallery on my site is it gives me three sizes of image automatically, including a thumbnail. Might be worth considering something similar, Philly? As you already have a website. FWIW.

Cheers, Alf
 

tim

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2004
Messages
2,307
Reaction score
0
Location
Herefordshire
To be honest guys I don't think that Philly is the offender. Its mainly newer members who have uploaded an image (that they may have reduced in dimension but left) high in resolution.

The majority of these images are found and will be posted in the projects section so could a mod or Charley write a sticky entitled: Please read before posting images to this section. It woudl only be a set opf guidelines (not rules) becuase I think that these posts are only made unwittingly. The content could contain ideal parameters and info on the thumbnail options if posters want to use them. To be honest, I'm not sure of the merits of these because I always want to see the bigger version. My problem with large images is when they are unecessarily big ie 4-500 kb and above.

The honest truth is that its great having people post pics and I don't want anyone to be put off from doing so but reducing resolution is such a simple thing to do and doesn't compromise quality (at screen level).

What do you think.

Cheers

Tim
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
I wasn't trying to suggest Philly was the worst offender by any means, except it'd be nice to have smaller scale gloats... :wink: :lol: As it happens, I belatedly realised he's already got an album set up that'll lend itself nicely, #-o so I'll gloat on his behalf to demonstrate. :D



I believe Charley did mention he wanted to make it possible to host images on the site, which would presumably give some control over file size. I dunno where he's got to with it; I was waiting until he was feeling really better again to broach that, and other subjects.

Cheers, Alf
 

Charley

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2002
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
5
Location
Collingham
Alf":fdsrdq9d said:
I believe Charley did mention he wanted to make it possible to host images on the site, which would presumably give some control over file size. I dunno where he's got to with it; I was waiting until he was feeling really better again to broach that, and other subjects.
The upload script I found takes about an hour to install, going through the different files and editing them, I would most likey have to re-apply the mod every time PHPBB release an update so at the moment it's on hold.

I've disabled the 'no right click' javascript in the sites gallery system now so members are able to link to the images without having to view source :)
 

Philly

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2003
Messages
6,874
Reaction score
0
Location
Dorset, England.
Alf
I certainly need to learn how to do that-was it easy? (ish)
And what a pretty "bevel" of chisels, there. Gloating for me, now. What is the world coming to?? :roll: :lol: :lol: :wink:
Cheers
SawItWithMyOwnEyesPhilly :D
 

Alf

Established Member
Joined
22 Oct 2003
Messages
12,079
Reaction score
0
Location
Up the proverbial creek
Charley":2kvh17h0 said:
The upload script I found takes about an hour to install, going through the different files and editing them, I would most likey have to re-apply the mod every time PHPBB release an update so at the moment it's on hold.
Urgh. :(

Charley":2kvh17h0 said:
I've disabled the 'no right click' javascript in the sites gallery system now so members are able to link to the images without having to view source :)
Ahh, excellent. =D>

Philly, the code looked like this:
Code:
[url=http://www.philsville.co.uk/images/ln%20chisels.jpg]
[img]http://www.philsville.co.uk/photogallery/photo19850/ln%20chisels.jpg[/img][/url]
I've put in a break to avoid unnecessary screen scrolling, but it should be one line to work I believe. The link for the main, large sized pic goes in the first bit between the "url" tags, while the link for the thumbnail goes in the "img" bit. Using Firefox I just right click on the thumbnail on your gallery page, select view image, and it opens in the window with the correct url in the address bar. With IE you can just right click, select properties, and copy the url from there. I imagine there's a good deal of egg sucking instruction in there, but it might be helpful for someone else too, in case they didn't get that far in Adam's tutorial.

Cheers, Alf
 

CHJ

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2004
Messages
20,131
Reaction score
72
Location
Cotswolds UK
Can a few of you indulge me a little and give me some idea of the image quality that is acceptable on your monitors.
I have been trying here with a selection of differing quality monitors but I am now down to the limitations of my eyesight.
I have put together a test page of an image in Three sizes and Four compression ratios.
I would be glad of some feedback on the lowest common denominator Picture size/File size that you think is acceptable.
They may give some guidance to others on minimum quality considered acceptable.

The Picture Size Test Page is Here

Edit: A set at 640 X 480 That I missed out #-o (Thanks Alf)
 

Gill

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2003
Messages
3,537
Reaction score
0
Location
Lincs
Hi Chas

Those all fit nicely on my monitor, although the 800x600 piccies might cause problems if they were placed in the UK Workshop message frames.

All of them seem to be quite clear, too.

Gill
 

CHJ

Established Member
Joined
31 Dec 2004
Messages
20,131
Reaction score
72
Location
Cotswolds UK
Gill":21xn6jdh said:
Hi Chas

Those all fit nicely on my monitor, although the 800x600 piccies might cause problems if they were placed in the UK Workshop message frames.

All of them seem to be quite clear, too.

Gill
Thanks Gill Are you saying that even Image L is clear enough in detail for you.
 

Latest posts

Top