Not sure if anyone had noticed but when Kathryn's thread got so many views it was croaking the image server, I "quickly" implemented a "thumbnail" option when posting images. Instead of loading/displaying the entire image, the software automatically creates a thumbnail and only loads the full image when you click the thumbnail.
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
To use it, instead of using [img] ... [/img], use [img thumb] ... [/img] instead.
Originally posted by Cliff Pennock: To use it, instead of using [img] ... [/img], use [img thumb] ... [/img] instead.
Do not give users the option. Just make [IMG] tag default 640x480 or less max and click for larger size... Easier to click on 1 or 2 image you need. Many users now use big picture as normal and won't format for smaller size. Many thread are a pain to read because big pictures, even with big screen. Pathetic when full screen browser on 1280x1024 or more monitor and still can read a thread w/o scrolling horizontal... Even worse when 1 or 2 quote the post...
OS/Browser Zoom option? Zoom is a pain too, even w/ Win7 Zoom or FF add-ins. Win7/IE zoom affects everything. FF tools need to click on every image that need zoom out.
------------------ Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should. (Jurassic Park)
[U][b]Many users now use big picture as normal and won't format for smaller size. Many thread are a pain to read because big pictures, even with big screen. Pathetic when full screen browser on 1280x1024 or more monitor and still can read a thread w/o scrolling horizontal... Even worse when 1 or 2 quote the post...
I suggest we just hang those few inconsiderate sobs instead.
I like the thumbnails because you can see a preview and don't have to guess if you have already seen the picture. With the other icon I ended up loading the pictures anyway.
In fact why not just make the thumbnails the default for img tag as well. Lots of boards scale down pictures when they are too large
Don't automatically scale it... sometimes the devil is in the details. Especially in the Tech section.
If the scaled down picture can be clicked on to be seen full size, I would think that the tech section, as well as the construction section would welcome something like this.
Threads complete loading in half the time and you still get the ability to view the picture in full size IF you want too.
If the scaled down picture can be clicked on to be seen full size, I would think that the tech section, as well as the construction section would welcome something like this.
Threads complete loading in half the time and you still get the ability to view the picture in full size IF you want too.
Oh no, THIS is awesome. I was talking about Ogre's suggestion to not have the full size ability.
IP: Logged
09:03 PM
Rallaster Member
Posts: 9105 From: Indy southside, IN Registered: Jul 2009
Oh no, THIS is awesome. I was talking about Ogre's suggestion to not have the full size ability.
Ogre's suggestion was to not give the option to scale, but still allow a click to view full size...
quote
Originally posted by theogre:
Do not give users the option. Just make [IMG] tag default 640x480 or less max and click for larger size... Easier to click on 1 or 2 image you need. Many users now use big picture as normal and won't format for smaller size. Many thread are a pain to read because big pictures, even with big screen. Pathetic when full screen browser on 1280x1024 or more monitor and still can read a thread w/o scrolling horizontal... Even worse when 1 or 2 quote the post...
OS/Browser Zoom option? Zoom is a pain too, even w/ Win7 Zoom or FF add-ins. Win7/IE zoom affects everything. FF tools need to click on every image that need zoom out.
Unless I read it wrong... ???
[This message has been edited by Rallaster (edited 04-22-2012).]
Oh no, THIS is awesome. I was talking about Ogre's suggestion to not have the full size ability.
And Ogre would be spot on. He has a website of his own linked at the top of every page, with many many detailed drawings and schematics, well outlined, and easily readable, and I don't remember having to scroll accross any of them. I've posted lots of wiring diagrams, pinouts, terminal layouts, pictures etc in Tech, and tho I have at times, posted them at 800 x 600, I have never had to make any of them larger than 640 X 480 to be easily readable. If, clicking a thumbnail results in a default 640 X 480 image appearing, no one will ever have to scroll. 800 x 600 should be max for sure.
IP: Logged
11:54 PM
Apr 23rd, 2012
TheDigitalAlchemist Member
Posts: 12767 From: Long Island, NY Registered: Jan 2012
Originally posted by Rallaster: Ogre's suggestion was to not give the option to scale, but still allow a click to view full size...
Yes, scale down to forum max. Let user to click on image to get full image view. 640x480 max or a bit smaller because most uses browser in a window, not full screen. Even w/ my stroke, I use two screen and 5-20 windows, 2-6 are open full time to read/post, monitor systems, etc. PFF is a window, 1000x800 max but usually less, not full screen.
Smaller the better for load time too.
Smaller that 648x480? like [img thumb] as default [img]? I have no problem... a bit bigger than thumbnail above for people with eye problems. A lot of people here have eye problems... difference thumbnail to 400-500 width is nothing in bandwidth...
Default [img] tag would automatically fix already posted big pictures. (Assume Red X has not visit the thread...)
quote
Originally posted by theBDub: That's a great addition. On large photos, I've been trying to put the [hide} tags so people with lower bandwidth don't get killed.
Reprogramming [img] tag stop nube etc posting huge images. And no need to guess which tag does what... very few use [hide] tag. Same thing [img thumb]. Don't give users an option... options that people won't read.
Scaling IMG will stops high bandwidth thread if done w/ [img thumb]. unesco.org/bpi/photo_gallery/mab_2009/fraser_island2.jpg = 2,966px × 1,986px 832.87 KB (852,860 bytes) images.fieroforum.com/thumbnails/2012/THUMB_FULL_fraser_island2.jpg = 200px × 134px 3.45 KB (3,535 bytes) 99.5+% reduction, I think....
[This message has been edited by theogre (edited 04-23-2012).]
IP: Logged
02:34 AM
buddycraigg Member
Posts: 13620 From: kansas city, mo Registered: Jul 2002
hmmm. I just tried it and it opened the full picture in the same browser. I couldn't get back to the topic to keep reading the rest of the information. So it might not work out so great for the tech section.
EDIT, I figured out that i could click on it again and the big picture would go away. But i would be left looking at a different part of the thread.
[This message has been edited by buddycraigg (edited 04-23-2012).]
IP: Logged
05:09 AM
Xanth Member
Posts: 6886 From: Massachusetts Registered: May 2006
Originally posted by maryjane: I suggest we just hang those few inconsiderate sobs instead.
I do like the thumbnails!!
In my view, the "inconsiderate sobs" are not the O.P. of a given image. They are the ones that copy ALL of the images posted, only to give an inane two word comment, such as: " I like ! ".
Not sure if anyone had noticed but when Kathryn's thread got so many views it was croaking the image server, I "quickly" implemented a "thumbnail" option when posting images. Instead of loading/displaying the entire image, the software automatically creates a thumbnail and only loads the full image when you click the thumbnail.
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
To use it, instead of using [img] ... [/img], use [img thumb] ... [/img] instead.
Any chance we can get this as part of PIP.. i never post tags, I always let PIP do the work and hit control-V to paste.
Originally posted by tbone42: Any chance we can get this as part of PIP..
PIP feature? Scaling PIP saves disk space and bandwidth at server end BUT Many people will not use PIP for many reasons.
PIP and Red X "problem" in a nutshell: Many images are Deleted/moved photobucket et al on purpose for image control reason. Jazzman is not first or only one that says copyright... Many links are broken by Photobucket etc... Many service were bought out or went out of business... PIP doesn't work on Linux and Mac w/o help. PIP doesn't use automatic scaling. Cliff now said a future feature? see Please Help Fight the Red X or just use search... Forums is full of PIP problem, I hate PIP, etc...
That why default scaling [img] tag is needed. Way more that PIP feature list. and Scaling can helps stop Red X too... Less forum has the scaled image/"thumbnail" if full file goes MIA... And a bit bigger "thumbnail" is good...
IP: Logged
10:09 AM
Apr 25th, 2012
rogergarrison Member
Posts: 49601 From: A Western Caribbean Island/ Columbus, Ohio Registered: Apr 99
In my view, the "inconsiderate sobs" are not the O.P. of a given image. They are the ones that copy ALL of the images posted, only to give an inane two word comment, such as: " I like ! ".
This is one thing I notice too. It would be nice to be able to just disable repeating a photo when you use " quote ".
I also noticed some recent posts with large pictures, still display a large pic that you have to scroll across to view. I thought this was an auto default.....?
Do not give users the option. Just make [IMG] tag default 640x480 or less max and click for larger size...
i tend to agree and make the regular img tag do it, to save bandwidth on existing threads too.. Help out all the bandwidth/screensize impaired users ( like phones.. )
IP: Logged
06:05 PM
Rallaster Member
Posts: 9105 From: Indy southside, IN Registered: Jul 2009
This is one thing I notice too. It would be nice to be able to just disable repeating a photo when you use " quote ".
I also noticed some recent posts with large pictures, still display a large pic that you have to scroll across to view. I thought this was an auto default.....?
This is not a default setting. The poster has to specifically set the [img thumb][/img] code. The [img][/img] still works normal and has not been changed.
.jpg)
!!!
I never use PIP because I have to go through too many programs to get it online.
.jpg)
