Posting XL Photos ?

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,

It would seem that the p̶a̶t̶r̶i̶c̶i̶a̶n̶s̶ , sorry spambusters, get privileges not bestowed upon us plebs .

As one *&^^% to another *&^^%..........no as one *&^^% to a *&^^%s doorstop, I think my account has been down graded

Me%20on%20a%20bike-a-a.jpg (1.43 KiB) Viewed 3733 times

[Mick F]

Large files will make the forum slow to load for people accessing it with mobile devices.

No it doesn't.
Not at all.
This is the activity (download) of page one of this thread complete with all photos - even mine.
Note the file sizes.

[al_yrpal]

P1010540 by Alyrpal, on Flickr

Natural Ankling this photo is using BB code from Flickr, which is best accessed on a PC or Mac. If you want detailed instructions on how to do it PM me.

BTW this is a replica of Shackletons boat that carried him 800 miles across the Antarctic Ocean to save his crew.

Al

[Mick F]

That's fine Al, trouble is, it more than fills the screen so I have to scroll to see it and your post.
U+D and L+R a bit.

[661-Pete]

Do any of you have the use of any photo processing software (e.g. Photoshop)?

With such a tool (I use PaintShop Pro which is one of the cheapest, I prefer it to Photoshop) you can easily increase the compression of your JPG files to make them smaller. There will be some loss of quality, of course, but that won't matter for the forum (it would matter, of course, if you're sending off pictures for publication in a magazine, then they have to be of the highest possible quality and resolution).

Another thing you can easily do is re-size the image to suit the width of a typical computer screen. Normally if I add a picture to a post, I make sure it's no more than 800 pixels wide. That saves a lot in file size.

What I don't know, is if there's a suitable downloadable freebie which will do these things for you. There are several which are really meant for astronomy, but they may do more to your picture than you expected!

Anyway, I believe PSP is now priced at about £30-40, and worth it if you do a lot of photography.

[gaz]

Guide to resizing pics. MS Paint is crude but effective.

[Vorpal]

Camera and phone software often have editing tools that can resize photos, as well.

[661-Pete]

Yes, you're right, most freebies will re-size. It's the saving to a different compression factor that may need a bought-in tool. I'm not sure about this.

Anyway, definitely re-size before posting a picture! If you want to show some detail in it to best resolution, crop the picture instead (MSPaint will do that too).

[al_yrpal]

That's fine Al, trouble is, it more than fills the screen so I have to scroll to see it and your post.
U+D and L+R a bit.

I could have chosen a smaller picture which would fit better. And, if you tap on the picture you can see it all like this


P1010489 by Alyrpal, on Flickr
Al

[Mick F]

And, if you tap on the picture you can see it all like this

Nope.
You need to be logged in, and I have no account.

Sorry, but the BEST way of getting pictures onto this forum is to use the forum properly.
Resize to fit the 256kb, and upload it.

By doing this, everyone can see the "attachment" logo on the message board too. By using Flikr or Photobucket or whatever, the forum doesn't recognise the attachment.

Look at this for instance:

You can see that there's an attachment on the question about mudguards on suspension forks, but you don't know there's a picture on the Tecalemit grease gun question. There's one there, but the forum doesn't recognise it.

[Vorpal]

By using Flikr or Photobucket or whatever, the forum doesn't recognise the attachment.

Look at this for instance:

Screen shot 2014-12-19 at 06.00.38.png

You can see that there's an attachment on the question about mudguards on suspension forks, but you don't know there's a picture on the Tecalemit grease gun question. There's one there, but the forum doesn't recognise it.

That's because it isn't an attachment. It's an embedded image.

[Mick F]

Yes, I know that, but the photo is still "attached" to the post.
Because it's embedded, you can't tell that there's anything there.

I would also expect that because the photo is embedded, it adds to the download size, thereby slowing down mobile devices as you pointed out.
If they were attachments, they would only be sort of thumbnails until you clicked on them.

[TrevA]

Looking at this thread on my iPhone and all the larger pictures posted by MickF take a while to load ( I get a buffering circle). Vorpal is right.

[Mick F]

OK.
Dunno about an iPhone, you must be right .......... but my iPad doesn't seem to notice any slowdown.

[admin]

None of those large images are bigger than 100kB when resized for display in Forum posts. So for the purposes of illustrating posts there's no need to upload anything bigger than 100kB and the limit of 256kB should be plenty.

If you need to allow people to access higher-resolution copies of the images we would rather you stored those on one of the many image hosting services available on the web, rather than filling up the CTC Forum server disk with image files that are rarely, if ever, needed at full size.

The attached images that appear in a few posts on this Forum currently require twice as much disk space (and backup space) than the database with all the text posts, search index, and other data. If we allowed images up to 1MiB to be uploaded we'd potentially be using eight times the amount of disk space to store the images than needed for all the messages, and disk usage would be growing up to four times faster. And for no real benefit, as the images are re-sized to be displayed in posts anyway.

I hope that explains things! If anyone really does need to upload huge images, for some reason, do let me know and I can see what we can do.