I don't know if it's just me or am I lately noticing too often posts with screen-shots that exceeds some common sense image dimensions that should be posted (I guess mostly foobar forum)
First it's ugly, then it's rude and ignorant posting 1600 px image in forum or just anything above at least 800 px should be thumbnailed before posting
I'm using right now 19'' CRT monitor with 1280x960, I have also flat 22'' set on 1680 and occasionally using laptop on 1024x876. While I can only guess what others are using I searched quickly and here is some result based on using browsers (http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp)
And it's not just that, but even today some users are browsing with dial-up modems or limited bandwidth for whatever reasons. I couldn't find statistics with quick search
Please do something about this?
FWIW, I find it annoying as well. Not only when browsing from my mobile (for obvious reasons), but also when the page is simply slow to load just because someone thought he had to prove his point by providing a 2 MB fullscreen image.
But what could we do with it, from the moderation or forum software standpoint? There no way to intelligently filter/reject posts based on linked images or something and what the members post is always up to their own discretion and you can't count everybody will read any number of stickies, notices, big red messages or whatever.
We (as the moderators) could go around replacing inlined images larger than some size with thumbnailed links (or rehost them elsewhere if not possible), but I'm not sure if someone here is bored enough to do that regularly. Maybe I could craft some script to do that with one click, at least.
That could be smart solution
Thanks for considering, Yirkha
consider laptop users or modem users or user not interested in your particular screenshot when postingthanks for considering
I think that rule has kind of been neglected since the forum started resizing large images. Do you have javascript enabled?
Moderation: Added a quote for reference before moving to another topic.
It is resized, but whole image is downloaded anyway.
I think that rule has kind of been neglected since the forum started resizing large images. Do you have javascript enabled?
most image-hosting providers have special
thumbnail links for forums
and it is forum - which can be read by browser, rss reader, mobile phone among other problems stated
although this thread is related to posting screen-shots, imagine annoyance when loading page with more then 10 posts being > 1000 px wide
to me it looks ugly, ignorant and rude and I don't see reason why uploader shouldn't bother with providing thumbnail
as a rule (+ replacing the linked image with actual image and not image-hoster main page)
I can enable caching just for this thread but then users are posting their captures "as is" also elsewere, so I want to promote it
ideas for resolving can be discussed here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=77528)
WOW...ignorant and rude?
It's fine, chill out
It should be AND/OR instead and
And I thought the discussion is concerning the configs. Foolish me :-) As I see it, everyone sharing screenshots of ColumnsUI configs _should_ share a screenshot of a decent size - to be able to look at the configs immidiately and compare. Having to go to external hosts for e screenshot is a pain, especially when ImageShack (which is used very often) is slower than a drunken donkey. My screenshot had already been published on my local blog, so I just used it again. Any comments on the config would be highly appreciated, this is my first. Stay well all.
Having to go to external hosts for e screenshot is a pain, especially when ImageShack (which is used very often) is slower than a drunken donkey
ImageShack forum thumbnail link, looks like this (example):
[font= "Courier New"]|URL=http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imageky.png||IMG|http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7601/imageky.th.png|/IMG||/URL|[/font]
and only the image link looks like this, for example:
[font= "Courier New"]http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7601/imageky.png[/font]
you should change the first link with later:
[font= "Courier New"]|URL=http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7601/imageky.png||IMG|http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7601/imageky.th.png|/IMG||/URL|[/font]
or put it differently, you are one click away from screen-shot that you are interested in if you change:
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imageky.png to http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7601/imageky.png
which isn't big deal when you already bothered with taking the shot and uploading anyway
Having to go to external hosts for e screenshot is a pain...
Having one single page filled with alot of 1000px + pictures that barely fit my screen is a pain.
OK, my last on the topic. I _always_ read rules for posting, if there are any. Of course I didn't read the whole 40 pages of this thread, to be able to see that large screens bother some of you. Several upper posts already included large screens. I am very reasonable, as I hope other people are. If there are many that are bothered with large screens, _please_ set a rule for thumbnails etc. in the first post - it is the only real way to do it. Have a good night.
This is like complaining that the babe threads of the Rage3D forum are full of large images.
I for one, do not have any suitable thumbnailing routine set up for my image uploads currently, as my publication script is just an optipng (for bandwidth) and scp.
optipng, pngout etc aren't likely to do anything for large screen-shot, rather compress them in JPG with some good percentage for bandwidth care, and they'll still blow in your screen (until JS resizer). Just imagine near future when monitors grows even larger with screen-shots 2048, 2560...
and that's one of the reasons I rarely browse CUI/DUI galleries (to laugh, wonder or even admire some foobar layout idea)
wanna see 2pac "Dear Mama" ugly 1920 px shot? lol
future is near, here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28647&view=findpost&p=679377)
I have big monitor, that's not the problem. If you are interested why I'm doing this look in "Site Related Discussion" forum
If by "resize" you mean "scale down the full image in the browser", yes, it "resizes".
Also, JPEG? I bet you five pinecones that a suitably optimized PNG would be half that size, at least.
pedantic
pe⋅dan⋅tic /pəˈdæntɪk/
-adjective
Overly concerned with minute details or formalisms.
this is 2010. the days of dial-up and CRTs is long gone. everybody has a 22" lcd. everyone has optical broadband.
unless you live in Australia, bandwidth is a non-issue.
besides,
the form resizes images.
so what's the big deal?
You don't need to understand everything
If above posts aren't clear enough for you, just carry on
the forum resizes images automatically
Well, it doesn't work properly if your browser isn't somewhere near maximised (i.e. it works from the screen resolution or something)
what other definition of the word "resize" are you imaging?
seriously, this is innane. if a few extra MB cripples your bandwidth allocation, then get a better service package.
and if an image is bigger than your monitor - well, maybe it's time for a hardware upgrade.
Please don't throw yourself around with your 1920 px screen-shot
Make it thumbnail or don't post if you don't know how to do that
To request a member not to post here only because his posted images are larger than you want to have them (I did read your thread you are referring to) is indeed something which is beyond your rights as a member, 2E7AH.
As long as there is no picture size limit described in Hydrogenaudio's ToS or a moderator/administrator mentions either a limit or the duty for thumbnailing a member only can ask or beg another member to do something.
By the way, your avatar picture (the last one you used before the actual one) was a terrible animated gif which I got headaches from so that I blocked it in my browser.
Never I would have considered to brief you to change it or not to post here anymore. And there are some good reasons against animated gifs as well as against not thumbnailed oversized pictures.
By the way, your avatar picture (the last one you used before the actual one) was a terrible animated gif which I got headaches from so that I blocked it in my browser.
glad it worked
glad it worked
I hope this is meant to be funny.
Otherwise I am sure a wilful annoyance of other members with each of your posts by an unsuited avatar image is worse than the posting of one (too) large picture...
Hey guys calm down.
Maybe a moderator might move that discussion's part which does not belong to CUI to 2E7AH's thread Post your screen-shot (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=77528)?
2E7AH: dude, get over it. the forum resizes images automatically - why do you have to complain every time? go buy a real monitor if you can't handle big images...
Even if the image is
displayed at a smaller size, it still is over 600 kilobytes that have to be downloaded. It is common courtesy to not waste your fellow netizens bandwidth. Throwing more hardware at a problem is a poor solution, even if you can afford it financially.
i understand. i don't agree - 600kb is nothing, especially these days - but i understand.
@2E7AH, why not use the board options to turn off images in posts?
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....rCP&CODE=04 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=UserCP&CODE=04)
all images are then replaced with clickable links.
I frequently use low bandwidth connections, old hardware, & mobile (cell) phones to access the internet, so I often can't successfully view something with large inline images. Here's how I just went about posting a large image on here:
[url="http://example.com/screengrab.png"][img]http://example.com/thumbnail.png[/img][/url]
[i]1152 x 840 (57.5K)[/i]
By putting the screengrab on the uploads forum I got a thumbnail automatically. I right-clicked the thumbnail & from its properties got the thumbnail url & target (screengrab) url. I used the insert image & insert link tools to make the clickable thumbnail, & also copied the target image details from the uploads post. Finally I edited the uploads post to include a link to the thread.
It sounds a bit of a faff, but was no more so than using an external file host or my own domain.
I put this up because I searched for a simple way of doing such a thing, without success. This was the most obvious place someone else might end up looking for the same info.
Having said all that, I get the impression this thread was split from a discussion in a screen-grab thread. In which case I have to accept that huge images in such threads became the norm quite a while ago. I don't like it, but being as I rarely am interested in those threads anyway, & am probably in a minority, I'm not complaining.
what can I say: deviantart and non-deviantart users think all forums are suitable for their artistic and non-artistic expressions: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=707780 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=58574&view=findpost&p=707780)
just want to keep awareness about this old problem as monitor resolutions are going up as always and some appropriate image size should be considered as allowed - not with JS resize to 640x480, but with preventing users from posting images that oversizes allowed size. Is that hard for php to check posted image size?
Any hacks applied to the forums must be maintained when updating the forum software. Which as far as I know is a massive pain in the behind. Not to mention that you then need to load enough of the image to parse such metadata, opening yourself for exploits.
I write most of my posts offline with the help of HA's BB code page (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=&act=legends&CODE=bbcode), however I fail to find the correct pattern to insert an imageshack.us thumbnail image as a clickable picture - I must do something wrong.
Could someone please provide the complete BB code, if the URLs would be
- for the thumbnail picture (http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/9948/quicksearch.th.png)
- for the full size picture? (http://img820.imageshack.us/f/quicksearch.png)
Many thanks in advance.
Could someone please provide the complete BB code
Clickable small_image, linked to big_image:
[url=big_image][img]small_image[/img][/url]
In your case:
[url=http://img820.imageshack.us/f/quicksearch.png][img]http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/9948/quicksearch.th.png[/img][/url]
Which looks like:
(http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/9948/quicksearch.th.png) (http://img820.imageshack.us/f/quicksearch.png)
Imageshack also offers the premade code directly on its page ready for quick copy'n'paste.
Clickable small_image, linked to big_image:
[url=big_image][img]small_image[/img][/url]
Thank you very much,
ojdo!
Considering how often pictures from imageshack.us are used: to add this pattern to HA's BB code page could encourage and remind more members to use thumbnailed images?