Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Doo Wop Preservation League
Jul 23rd, 2014, 1:45am
News: Welcome to the Doo Wop Preservation League message board!
Home Help Search Login Register


Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc... (Read 3745 times)
Bryan
Senior God Member
*****


Missing Wildwood...

Posts: 1564
Gender: male
Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Oct 7th, 2009, 4:00pm
 
This has happened a fair amount of times on this site for me.  I love checking out the pictures of trip reports and whatnot, but when they are posted en masse, and are absurdly large, it can not only take forever to load the page, but freeze up my browser window to the point that I need to close the entire program or even force restart my machine.  Some of the pictures I have to scroll back and forth to see the whole thing!
 
It could be the older computers I use at work where I'm looking at it, but just a suggestion for those who do... please resize your pictures before posting them.  I know a lot of digital cameras much like mine produce these huge high resolution shots when loaded from the memory stick/card/device/whatever.  It's the default, but it makes it very difficult to load on a website.
 
Hope this doesn't come off as complaining, but I'm sure others have this issue too.  Here's an awesome program I downloaded a while ago that comes in very handy:
 
http://bluefive.pair.com/pixresizer.htm
 
The best part about this program is it allows you to resize an entire folder of pictures at once.  Very convenient, especially if you load an entire roll of 80-100 photos, and don't want to go through each one resizing them in whatever photo software you have.
Back to top
 
 
Email View Profile   IP Logged
Tech
Senior Member
****




Posts: 326
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #1 - Oct 7th, 2009, 9:11pm
 
Why you complaining?
 
 
 
j/k   Wink
 
 
 
On photobuket you can choose to link with clickable pics:
 
 

 
 
 
Back to top
 
 
Email View Profile   IP Logged
fuzzyscorpio
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwoods fanatic
since '55

Posts: 3238
Gender: female
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #2 - Oct 7th, 2009, 10:42pm
 
Not the first time this issue has been raised, but it's the first time in a while, I think. Might be worth some discussion to update and get a consensus. Or not.  Cool
 
Quote from Bryan on Oct 7th, 2009, 4:00pm:
This has happened a fair amount of times on this site for me.  I love checking out the pictures of trip reports and whatnot, but when they are posted en masse, and are absurdly large

I have to disagree with that characterization. Based on a quick survey it looks like the larger photos in recent trip reports have been in the range of 900 to 1024 pixels on the long side. By current equipment standards, I don't think that's "absurdly large." More on this below.
 
Quote:
it can not only take forever to load the page, but freeze up my browser window to the point that I need to close the entire program or even force restart my machine.

Pixel dimensions alone aren't always the culprit in slow loading; it's also the amount of data in the file. If you edit to correct sharpness or color balance, the file gets bigger. Photoshop users should probably apply "Save for Web" to reduce file size after editing. But I have the impression that "Save for Web" tends to wash out color so I'm often guilty of skipping that step, and did skip it in my most recent trip report. I noticed that thread does load slowly, so sue me. Wink It probably doesn't help that your browser is looking for the photo I deleted from the image host because it was too late to delete it from the source text. Watermarking also adds a tiny bit to file size.
 
Quote:
Some of the pictures I have to scroll back and forth to see the whole thing!  It could be the older computers I use at work where I'm looking at it

Bad Bryan!! Grin Yes. Smiley RAM is also an issue of course, and if your IT manager hasn't added RAM to the systems recently (or ever) that will hurt performance on an image-intensive page, especially if RAM was not upgraded at the time of purchase (basic configuration is rarely adequate and never for long).  
 
Quote:
but just a suggestion for those who do... please resize your pictures before posting them.

But how big is too big? If there are enough others who speak up here about similar difficulties, maybe we should do a monitor resolution poll to determine a standard. Seriously.
 
Quote:
I know a lot of digital cameras much like mine produce these huge high resolution shots when loaded from the memory stick/card/device/whatever.

Yes, for example my pocket camera is set to the middle of its resolution range, producing images that are 2592 x 1944 pixels. That's almost three times the final size that I typically post. Smiley If we all posted our stuff exactly as it came out of our cameras, that WOULD be absurd.  
 
Quote:
Hope this doesn't come off as complaining, but I'm sure others have this issue too.

I'm not so sure. See below.
 

Source page: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp
image hosted by

 
Quote:
Here's an awesome program I downloaded a while ago that comes in very handy:

http://bluefive.pair.com/pixresizer.htm

The best part about this program is it allows you to resize an entire folder of pictures at once.  Very convenient, especially if you load an entire roll of 80-100 photos, and don't want to go through each one resizing them in whatever photo software you have.

I too enjoy solving problems with cheap shareware or freeware, but doesn't everyone who buys a digital camera get some kind of photo editing program with it? I seriously doubt any recent version of any such program lacks the ability to batch-resize. Of the photo processing applications I have on hand, at least three out of four (Photoshop Elements and Canon Image Browser, both of which were bundled with cameras I bought, and Apple's factory-installed iPhoto) can do it.  
 
[Edit] Might as well also note that photos can be batch-resized in the process of uploading them to an image hosting site, though with the disadvantage (at least in the case of ImageShack) of having to choose from a short menu of sizes that may not include exactly the size you would prefer.  
 
Bottom line: I think by now those of us who share pictures here know how to control their posted size. I post mine as large as I consider reasonable because for the typical outdoor scenic photo, bigger is better. Details are more easily appreciated and the viewer gets more of a feeling of being inside the scene.  
 
Quote from Tech on Oct 7th, 2009, 9:11pm:
On photobuket you can choose to link with clickable pics

ImageShack also offers that option. The photo you chose to demonstrate it is a good example of why I don't do it. Smiley Very unsatisfying to look at a beautiful sunset that small—I want it to fill my screen. And I don't want to have to click and launch a new page (especially with all that Photobucket clutter on it) for every image that interests me in a large trip report; I'd rather just sit back and scroll. (Of course we could do an opinion poll on this, too.)
Back to top
 
 

Kathi
My eye sees the Atlantis condo, but my heart sees the Atlantis Lodge
click here for Wildwoods slide shows •
View Profile   IP Logged
scca28
Senior God Member
*****


Got Sand On My
Fudgie Wudgie!.

Posts: 1513
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #3 - Oct 8th, 2009, 7:16am
 
I have a 3.2 meg Kodak, a few years old. The pics do come out very large when loaded into my computer, but they have a lot of detail. For this forum I usually reduce them to about a third of their original size, and they still need to be scrolled side to side to see the entire image. The detail is still pretty decent at that size, but I would love to be able to post them full size.
I've been using imageshack, and a couple of times I used the thumbnail setting on my postings, but it's just not as impressive at a first glance of someones trip report. Just my opinions/observations... Smiley
Back to top
 
 

Dave
Email View Profile WWW   IP Logged
Bryan
Senior God Member
*****


Missing Wildwood...

Posts: 1564
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #4 - Oct 8th, 2009, 11:23am
 
Fair points, all of them.  The only one I have to clarify with is screen resolution.  I just checked my work computer, and it's at a resolution of 1280x960, and what I meant is that I have to scroll within the post to see the pictures.  It's the smallest of issues among what I listed.
 
It's just frustrating to open a thread and be assaulted with 100 large pictures that bring the entire machine to a screeching halt.  Maybe it's on my end, who knows, but I suppose if the status quo is fine, my suggestion can be disregarded.
 
It's a pretty menial issue anyway, and probably something I can remember if I learn to just check the pictures when I get home on a more reliable machine.
Back to top
 
 
Email View Profile   IP Logged
fuzzyscorpio
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwoods fanatic
since '55

Posts: 3238
Gender: female
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #5 - Oct 8th, 2009, 3:51pm
 
Quote from Bryan on Oct 8th, 2009, 11:23am:
Fair points, all of them.  The only one I have to clarify with is screen resolution.  I just checked my work computer, and it's at a resolution of 1280x960, and what I meant is that I have to scroll within the post to see the pictures.

Thanks, that clarifies what you're dealing with. My monitor is a wide-format 20" display, normally set at 1344 x 840. I just switched it to 1280 x 800, and at that resolution, a tiny bit gets cut off the side(s) of images on this forum that were posted at the 1024px-wide size. The real estate lost to the avatar column on the left added to the photo width just slightly exceeds what's available in 1280 resolution. But very slightly—I'd estimate it equates to less than half an inch. It's probably safe to say most of us don't compose most of our shots precisely enough to make that hidden half-inch critical, and I'd suggest you don't even bother with the scroll bar. Personally, I'd rather trade the lost sliver for larger image size, both mine and other people's.
 
Quote:
It's the smallest of issues among what I listed.

It's just frustrating to open a thread and be assaulted with 100 large pictures that bring the entire machine to a screeching halt.

I suspect that's primarily a RAM issue, and I sympathize. The number of things that don't go well on a computer with insufficient RAM never ceases to amaze me. Within a certain range, for everyday computing, I think it's a lot more important than processor speed.
 
My Mac came with "only" 1 GB of RAM four years ago. It is one of the last pre-Intel Macs, so by this year, the RAM chips it requires had gotten dirt cheap. A couple of months ago (while I still had a paycheck) I bought 4 GB of additional RAM and installed it. Huge difference. Until then, editing photos and Web pages was a boggy affair. Now it's like butter Smiley. More to the point, Web pages launch and reload noticeably faster.
 
Anyway, the ease of viewing photographic trip reports on this forum for any given viewer is going to be the product of some equation involving number of images, size of images, and image resolution (PPI). Anyone else who's having any trouble viewing posts with large or multiple images really should speak up, and supply system details, to help image posters figure out how to optimize for everyone's comfort, convenience and pleasure. After all, we're posting 'em because we want our fellow fanatics to enjoy 'em!
Back to top
 
 

Kathi
My eye sees the Atlantis condo, but my heart sees the Atlantis Lodge
click here for Wildwoods slide shows •
View Profile   IP Logged
SandArtist
God Member
*****


Sun, Sand, Surf
& Kites!

Posts: 931
Gender: female
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #6 - Oct 8th, 2009, 7:48pm
 
Hmmmm. I totally understand the dilemma, but I personally enjoy seeing large format photos (because I'm a detail freak). What I'm not so keen on is scrolling down lots of photos in order to read the comments once they start rolling in.
 
Perhaps what would be best if people posted a link to their gallery of pics and/or use thumbnails to click on. Seems like most image hosts have that capability.
Back to top
 
 

I support Doo Wop preservation.
Graphic Design & Coastal Photography: http://www.leshockarts.com/
View Profile   IP Logged
Bryan
Senior God Member
*****


Missing Wildwood...

Posts: 1564
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #7 - Oct 9th, 2009, 10:35am
 
Quote from SandArtist on Oct 8th, 2009, 7:48pm:
Hmmmm. I totally understand the dilemma, but I personally enjoy seeing large format photos (because I'm a detail freak). What I'm not so keen on is scrolling down lots of photos in order to read the comments once they start rolling in.

Perhaps what would be best if people posted a link to their gallery of pics and/or use thumbnails to click on. Seems like most image hosts have that capability.

 
Hmm... I think I agree with that just as much.  I definitely think there are better suggestions than my original one, come to think of it.  Perhaps something along the lines of "spoiler" tag, where all the pictures can be in the tags where the user would have to click "show" to expand it.
Back to top
 
 
Email View Profile   IP Logged
FlyinGN
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwood fan since
'61

Posts: 6630
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #8 - Oct 9th, 2009, 2:36pm
 
how did you do that tech? Thats a good idea.  
I am the one who that has happened to. Sometimes the pics are bigger then other times. Cam reco is set the same too. Why does this happen?m
 
 
Quote from Tech on Oct 7th, 2009, 9:11pm:
Why you complaining?


j/k   Wink



On photobuket you can choose to link with clickable pics:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v38/flissss/th_100_0795-2.jpg




Back to top
 
 

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v665/flyingn/mustang%20GT/
Email View Profile   IP Logged
Tech
Senior Member
****




Posts: 326
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #9 - Oct 9th, 2009, 4:00pm
 
Quote from FlyinGN on Oct 9th, 2009, 2:36pm:
how did you do that tech? Thats a good idea.
I am the one who that has happened to. Sometimes the pics are bigger then other times. Cam reco is set the same too. Why does this happen?m


Quote from Tech on Oct 7th, 2009, 9:11pm:
Why you complaining?


j/k Wink



On photobuket you can choose to link with clickable pics:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v38/flissss/th_100_0795-2.jpg





 
 
 The easy way....
 
On the Photobucket page, scroll over the corresponding photo, click on the 'Share' tab, then click on 'Get Link Code' and then there will be a code for 'Clickable thumbnail.'
Back to top
 
 
Email View Profile   IP Logged
ezeddie
Senior Member
****


Supporting the
Wildwoods since
1979.

Posts: 410
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #10 - Oct 10th, 2009, 4:27pm
 
Interesting...we keep our 22" widescreen monitor @ 1024 X 768 due to old eyes. We will normally reduce all digital photos to that resolution unless we have a shot that detail is important. If I post a photo, I reduce it to at least 1024 X 768 so most folks won't have to scroll. I assume that most folks are using a higher resolution today.
 
Ed
Back to top
 
 
View Profile   IP Logged
fuzzyscorpio
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwoods fanatic
since '55

Posts: 3238
Gender: female
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #11 - Oct 11th, 2009, 2:20pm
 
Quote from SandArtist on Oct 8th, 2009, 7:48pm:
Perhaps what would be best if people posted a link to their gallery of pics and/or use thumbnails to click on. Seems like most image hosts have that capability.

There are image hosts, and there are image hosts. My opinion of the link-to-external-gallery method ranges from "meh" to "ugh" depending on which host would be used.
 
For example, SmugMug has been used. This gives your images a fast-loading, ad-free environment, including the option of viewing a gallery as a captioned slide show. Why? Because you pay for it. Smiley
 
For many of us, I assume, certainly for me at this point, paying for an image host is way down the list of justifiable expenses, if it's on the list at all.
 
There are a LOT of problems with the use of linkouts to free image hosts. I won't blather on about that except to point out that they are perishable—meaning chances are good that for one reason or another, a link posted on this message board to a gallery or slideshow on a free hosting site will be a dead link within six months or a year.  
 
Personally, I think photos that are shared here should ideally remain part of the forum archive. A compromise we might consider is to hotlink only a few of our very favorite ones for direct viewing in a post and include a link to the complete collection of images at the end of the post.
 
Quote from ezeddie on Oct 10th, 2009, 4:27pm:
If I post a photo, I reduce it to at least 1024 X 768 so most folks won't have to scroll. I assume that most folks are using a higher resolution today.

I think at least a majority probably are, as suggested by the table I posted from w3schools.com up top. But the problem with 1024 width on this forum is that your image doesn't get all the available width; unless your monitor's physical dimensions are really cinematic (high ratio of width to height) or its resolution is gigantic (greater than 1280 or so), the username/avatar area on the left and the orange border on both sides are going to chew up, very roughly, 20% to 40% of the viewing area depending on the width of your monitor.
 
I'm thinking maybe wait a few more days to see if anyone has further inputs, then try to devise a poll post that might show us where the middle ground is on this.
Back to top
 
 

Kathi
My eye sees the Atlantis condo, but my heart sees the Atlantis Lodge
click here for Wildwoods slide shows •
View Profile   IP Logged
FlyinGN
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwood fan since
'61

Posts: 6630
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #12 - Oct 11th, 2009, 9:08pm
 
ok thanks. I had to check off that addition to a link on my photobucket as it was not there on mine. Thanks
 
Back to top
 
 

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v665/flyingn/mustang%20GT/
Email View Profile   IP Logged
fuzzyscorpio
Ultimate God Member
*****


Wildwoods fanatic
since '55

Posts: 3238
Gender: female
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #13 - Oct 14th, 2009, 12:18pm
 
Gotta give some props to Photobucket, since I've discovered their photo editor as a result of this thread. Here's an example of one of its numerous special effects. Cute huh?
 

photo hosted by
Back to top
 
 

Kathi
My eye sees the Atlantis condo, but my heart sees the Atlantis Lodge
click here for Wildwoods slide shows •
View Profile   IP Logged
Al Alven
Forum Moderator
*****


Through this magical
arch...

Posts: 5817
Gender: male
Re: Pictures posted in Trip Reports, etc...
Reply #14 - Oct 15th, 2009, 10:47am
 
Very cool. The photo editor is a relatively recent addition, isn't it?
 
I also just realized some of the features earlier this week.
Back to top
 
 

Al Alven

Wildwood 365: www.wildwood365.net
Email View Profile WWW alalven   IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print