| General > General Technical Chat |
| NEW FORUM UPLOAD FEATURES |
| << < (13/32) > >> |
| GlennSprigg:
--- Quote from: BravoV on July 02, 2019, 05:36:27 am ---.......... Its about my rotting connector plastic that oozed out nasty flakes that I posted at other thread. :( Click to enlarge Of course, I did post huge file sized photos too, .......... --- End quote --- This part impressed me!!, and so my 'experiment' further below. Obviously the problems are many-fold... File-size, Data-Usage, and ease of viewing. Obviously we can't help 'everyone', but to 'ME' the problem is one of 'Readability' by others. What 'BravoV' did above, was to use the *img* & */img* IN-LINE, but added the *width=64* after the opening *img* tag. (REPLY with QUOTE to see the coding, but don't post). I use 'imgur' to store images, but you have to understand that AFTER uploading them, you have to Right-Click on the photos, and select 'View-Image', to get the actual LINK to use for the Jpg image. Here is an EXAMPLE of say 3 images, to be shown IN-LINE within text, with NO attachments...... Here is photo 1, that can be clicked on to see the original image, from imgur... Now there is some more text here, and then another image... And finally, some more 'text', before showing a final image here below... Notice there are NO 'Attachments' below this, and that they are only LINKS above. And that the LINKS have been limited to ICON size representations ! I don't know how it could be simpler. |
| sokoloff:
What I don’t like about recommending external hosting is that you then make the long-run hosting subject to the whims and business model changes (or even tech changes) of a third party provider. I’m on several forums where there’s some old posts with all the images gone. |
| Brumby:
Yes - All we need is another Photobucket fiasco. |
| NiHaoMike:
I wonder how easy would it be to implement a hybrid P2P system where the P2P part is for backup. The backup nodes can run on cheap, low power hardware such as Raspberry Pi and are programmed to retrieve newly posted images, prioritizing those that have the least number of copies on the network. Each posted image will be tagged with its hash, so finding a missing image should be as easy as searching for the hash on the network. |
| rstofer:
--- Quote from: T3sl4co1l on July 02, 2019, 08:41:24 am ---If you can't say it in 800x600 or such*, should you really be saying it at all? Consider first of all, cropping, brightening and sharpening your image. Second, if you must show detail, why not crop sections, or take macro shots? There is so much more information you can present, in so much better ways. --- End quote --- There are probably two sides to this issue: First, as a requester of information, I would probably cut down an image in terms of pixels and color depth just to be able to post it. I need an answer to something that is essentially visual. Second, as a responder, I am not going to spend the time to cut down an image that responds to somebody else's request. Too much effort, no reward. --- Quote ---Most people, simply give it no thought whatsoever, have no clue that this is even a thing to argue about -- they have no need or care of the details, they just want to get an image from here to there. For their benefit, there could perhaps be an added step like, "Would you like your image to be reduced automatically?" The default option would be "yes", encouraging its use. Answering "no" might give a second nag, "would you like your image compressed for faster loading?", which would save it at JPG compression 80-90 say, or PNG indexed, whichever is smaller; assuming this isn't a tremendous load on the server of course**; and if declined both times, just let it through absolutely normal. Possibly add an option "Use these options for all attachments?" for when a user is posting a lot of images and doesn't want the nag every time. Or put it in the user profile as another option ("attachments: advanced mode" say?). --- End quote --- As long as the resulting image displays the intent, I am all in favor of automagic. But if we're looking for that tiny little spike in a scope image, it would be regrettable if the compression eliminated it. --- Quote ---But, speaking of laziness, it may well be more effort to introduce such a feature to the forum software, than it is to provide for the server and connections, and if most users aren't complaining about load times or poorly formatted images who cares, right? Tim --- End quote --- I would see storage space as a bigger issue than download size. My download rate is 300 Mbps and no cap. I simply don't care how large an image is. What I don't want to do is get into a compression game just to upload an image in response to somebody else's question. Automagic, that's the ticket! |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |