Photobucket Rant

[PeterBassett]

Why do so many people on here use it?

They post something with a picture. The forum makes it clickable. I'd like to see the picture larger so I click it.

That takes me to sodding photobucket where it displays the picture smaller!

Its just such awful unfriendly crap.

So, why is it so popular on here?

 

[Jonzjob]

I use it because I like it and have never had your problem.

 

[RogerP]

Not had that problem.

 

[AndyT]

My pictures don't do that for me when I look at my own posts. Maybe you chanced on someone who had only uploaded small photos, which were then stretched in the initial forum display?

There have been so many versions of the Photobucket software, and of the app, all with various user settings displayed or hidden away in the depths, and so many possible display devices, that it's a wonder it works at all sometimes.

But I do find it frustrating if I need to edit or rotate a picture. I know I've done it and it has saved ok, but until the changes ripple round the PB servers, all I can get is the wrong version!

 

[Racers]

I use Flickr and Photobucket

Bucket is really bad to search through and it throws up stupid adverts, and every "upgrade" seem to make things worse.

Pete

 

[RogerP]

I think I must be using a different Photobucket. 8)

I don't get any problems or see any advertisements.

 

[Racers]

I think I must be using a different Photobucket. 8)

I don't get any problems or see any advertisements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG63OtsKC7k



Pete

 

[RogerP]

 

[Wildman]

I use it all the time, my photos are 640 x 480 because I have thousands of them on a harddrive and only use them on the internet. In a post they will appear as large as the forum allows. If you want to see them larger then use your browser to enlarge to 200% or whatever

 

[bugbear]

I use it all the time, my photos are 640 x 480 because I have thousands of them on a harddrive and only use them on the internet.

In the area of my disk where I've kept photographs from my various digital cameras
over the years, I have 4729 photos, and the smallest ones are 1600x1200

It's around 20Gb

Disk space is cheap these days.

BugBear

 

[Racers]

You should get out more BB I am up to 8000+ on my photo a day project for this year!

Pete

 

[bugbear]

You should get out more BB I am up to 8000+ on my photo a day project for this year!

Pete

Have you miscounted the number of days in a year? :wink:

Surely you should have 337...

Unless you're shooting super-resolution HDR panoramas...

That takes a lot of images.

BugBearr

 

[Racers]

BB




Pete

 

[PeterBassett]

It may be the forum software being "clever" but it results from photobuckets defaults being grounded in 2003.

Case in point.

For Sale thread currently on going
axminster-workshop-air-filter-t93635.html

He has a bunch of photobucket pics in there. If you force refresh the page you can see the images displayed at 1024x768 initially before they get resized in browser to 500px max width.

The image displayed is 1024x768 and exists on photobucket at at least that size. The forum displays all images at a default of 500px width. This is all fine.

However the clickable link directs you not to the image itself,

http://i1189.photobucket.com/albums/z42 ... CN1037.jpg
but to
http://s1189.photobucket.com/user/golde ... 7.jpg.html

And that second link is a page that displays the image at a hardcoded 480px max width. The page also fails to provide any link to the full size image.

How very helpful.

Maybe the forum software reformats direct photobucket links to be clickable but changes the destination from the direct image url to the html page containing the image. Maybe. Dunno.

But to only displays at 480px with seemingly no way to get at the full size one without this sort of debugging nonsense is ridiculous.

Wildman, dont store your images at 640x480, as bugbear says disk space is cheap. You'd loose your entire photo collection on a usb thumb drive these days.

 

[bugbear]

It may be the forum software being "clever" but it results from photobuckets defaults being grounded in 2003.

Case in point.

For Sale thread currently on going
axminster-workshop-air-filter-t93635.html

He has a bunch of photobucket pics in there. If you force refresh the page you can see the images displayed at 1024x768 initially before they get resized in browser to 500px max width.

The image displayed is 1024x768 and exists on photobucket at at least that size. The forum displays all images at a default of 500px width. This is all fine.

However the clickable link directs you not to the image itself,

http://i1189.photobucket.com/albums/z42 ... CN1037.jpg
but to
http://s1189.photobucket.com/user/golde ... 7.jpg.html

And that second link is a page that displays the image at a hardcoded 480px max width. The page also fails to provide any link to the full size image.

I see a magnifying glass icon on that image (top right) - clicking it makes the image (much!) bigger.

BugBear

 

[PeterBassett]

Not for me I'm afraid. I've disabled adblock thinking some of their functionality might be blocked but no, exactly the same output. Screenshot attached.

GOT IT! HA! CHROME! IT DOESN'T WORK IN CHROME.

So, that puts the ball firmly back in photobuckets court. It works fine in IE.

I stand by my opinion that they are stuck in 2003.

What a bag of old crap.

Note that I did not say "rubbish" above.

Rant over now I know what it actually is.

 

[CHJ]

It may be the forum software being "clever" but it results from photobuckets defaults being grounded in 2003.
...................
The image displayed is 1024x768 and exists on photobucket at at least that size. The forum displays all images at a default of 500px width. This is all fine.
..
......
Maybe the forum software reformats direct photobucket links to be clickable but changes the destination from the direct image url to the html page containing the image. Maybe. Dunno.
...............

The forum software adjusts all displayed images to a size that results in a reasonable forum screen display on most monitors, the reason for this is that some members were linking to, or uploading images larger than many monitors native screen resolution resulting in the need to scroll the screen to read a thread so blown out.

(this over size display can often be observed after the image is downloaded but before the forum code has run when previewing posts.)

As far as I'm aware the forum does not edit or otherwise modify the address of any off site links.


This is what I get when clicking PB image referred above. (full width on screen)

 

[PeterBassett]

Thanks, yes please don't read my post as criticism of the forum software. Even if it were altering the urls (which I don't believe it is) it is not the forums fault that photobucket doesn't work in chrome. That was the actual issue. Your screenshots are from ie (edge) too so you see the "working" site.

 

[CHJ]

Thanks, yes please don't read my post as criticism of the forum software. Even if it were altering the urls (which I don't believe it is) it is not the forums fault that photobucket doesn't work in chrome. That was the actual issue. Your screenshots are from ie (edge) too so you see the "working" site.

Critique the software with pleasure, it needs it, it's not my bailiwick, but I don't get the same result in Chrome when clicking that particular PB image.

 

[clk230]

Fine for me in chrome here .