djb
30 Dec 2004, 04:27
Hi Mr and Mrs Magnet On (receives kick in shins from T) ChrisY etc,
A question regarding posting photos, I had thought I read a while back that it was no longer an option, as it bogged down the server too much. At a cursory glance, I don't see any options to post photos so was surprised to see a shot put up in the "white christmas" thread. I must be being thick to not see how its done, so I apologize in advance for the faq aspect of how you do it now.
So assuming we can stick shots up, now a comment about file size of photos allowed. Back in hte old days here, I believe there was an auto limit of pixel size (400x400?) but there seemed to be no limit to kilobyte size.
perhaps I should mention that I completely understand not wanting server space/speed to be compromised by posted photos, especially when you get into the "here's one of the Fiat 500 near my house" and then "here's one of the Fiat from the side" and "here's me smiliing in front of the luverly Fiat 500" etc etc, but my point is, is it possible for the forum software to automatically limit a photo to a given number of kilobytes and not just pixel size? I noticed that the "snow in Texas" shot while loading appeared to be 90-odd kilobytes, waaay to much for what it needs to be.
I remember doing tests teh first time I posted a photo here, and was surprised to see that I could save a 400x400 shot to a jpeg at a very low compression so that it was only about 15 or 20k and it looked fine on screen. I know I have the benefit of working in the field, and not everyone has either the software or the experience to know how to save a photo at a much lower compression to reduce the final file size greatly, even though the on screen size is still 400x400.
A few years back, eatapc asked about this, but to no avail. It makes sense that if server space/speed is a concern, then limiting posted photos to a file size of say 25k is better than a pixel size of "a" x "b" pixels that could be five times heavier in file size. In the end, less kilobytes are less k, so its better for everyone, faster page loading, easier on the server etc.
anyway, don't know if the forum software has any options for this, but seeing the Texas shot made me think of this and so off I went-a-rambling as usual.
David
A question regarding posting photos, I had thought I read a while back that it was no longer an option, as it bogged down the server too much. At a cursory glance, I don't see any options to post photos so was surprised to see a shot put up in the "white christmas" thread. I must be being thick to not see how its done, so I apologize in advance for the faq aspect of how you do it now.
So assuming we can stick shots up, now a comment about file size of photos allowed. Back in hte old days here, I believe there was an auto limit of pixel size (400x400?) but there seemed to be no limit to kilobyte size.
perhaps I should mention that I completely understand not wanting server space/speed to be compromised by posted photos, especially when you get into the "here's one of the Fiat 500 near my house" and then "here's one of the Fiat from the side" and "here's me smiliing in front of the luverly Fiat 500" etc etc, but my point is, is it possible for the forum software to automatically limit a photo to a given number of kilobytes and not just pixel size? I noticed that the "snow in Texas" shot while loading appeared to be 90-odd kilobytes, waaay to much for what it needs to be.
I remember doing tests teh first time I posted a photo here, and was surprised to see that I could save a 400x400 shot to a jpeg at a very low compression so that it was only about 15 or 20k and it looked fine on screen. I know I have the benefit of working in the field, and not everyone has either the software or the experience to know how to save a photo at a much lower compression to reduce the final file size greatly, even though the on screen size is still 400x400.
A few years back, eatapc asked about this, but to no avail. It makes sense that if server space/speed is a concern, then limiting posted photos to a file size of say 25k is better than a pixel size of "a" x "b" pixels that could be five times heavier in file size. In the end, less kilobytes are less k, so its better for everyone, faster page loading, easier on the server etc.
anyway, don't know if the forum software has any options for this, but seeing the Texas shot made me think of this and so off I went-a-rambling as usual.
David
