Images overhaul? How about clipboard paste?

[paulca]

I think it goes without saying the post / attach image functionality is less than ideal.  Maybe it's just me?

A more 2020s feature would be the ability to copy and paste and image into a post directly, rather than uploading or linking it.  Half the time the thumb nails don't work, or maybe that's just for the OP?  It has invisible restrictions which can get confusing when you hit them.  It gets very confused if you upload two images with the same name or sometimes confused when they have different names, but you want to remove one.  I believe I ended up with a picture of a schematic instead of a cat once.  Simon ( I think ) fixed it.

Is there any spare time/effort to put a little TLC in that feature?  Is it still PHPBB?  Oh.  SMFPacks.  Never heard of.

[Zero999]

It sounds like a bad idea, unless it's smart enough to decide what format to use and reduce the colour depth, if necessary, for optimal bandwidth.

If I'm posting a schematic, I use png and reduce the colour depth, as 24-bit for an image containing a few colours just wastes bandwidth.

For photographs, I use Jpeg, with the quality set to the point when the artefacts are not noticeable.

[jpanhalt]

@paulca
I agree, but would push the antiquity date to 2010, shortly after Windows 7 was released.

As for format, I have never seen a site that allowed pasting and had a problem.  It's seems to be either png or jpg -- png being the usual Windows snipping tool format.  Our current system allows either without a problem.

[Zero999]

As for format, I have never seen a site that allowed pasting and had a problem.  It's seems to be either png or jpg -- png being the usual Windows snipping tool format.  Our current system allows either without a problem.

How does it decide the format? It would annoy me if photographs saved in PNG appeared here because the files would be enormous, or fuzzy schematics in JPEG. Heck I already see enough of the latter. I don't want it to get worse.

[DavidAlfa]

90% of forusm do have ths and guess what, they work just fine.
It's up to you to adjust the picture in the post.
Bandwidth is not a problem unless you live in a cave.

[ataradov]

We tried rich text editor not so long ago, it was not good and the change was reverted. Unless there is a robust editor and ability to disable it in the profile settings, I would not break the forum again.

[Zero999]

Bandwidth is not a problem unless you live in a cave.

It is for me, when I'm using my mobile phone and don't have wifi.

90% of forusm do have ths and guess what, they work just fine.
It's up to you to adjust the picture in the post.

And how does one tell the forum software they want it encoded as a 1-bit PNG, or JPEG, rather than the default bloated format?

[DavidAlfa]

No need of 1999 optimization. For general pics it's ok.
For high detailed schemnatics, then manuallyy upload pngs as always.
But 99.-99% of the time you just want to show some simple detail. Probably always uses jpg by default.

[jpanhalt]

@Zero999

The attached image was uploaded as a png.  Still waiting for the "crash."

[DavidAlfa]

Lights went out when opening that picture, I'm in darkness now.

[Zero999]

@Zero999

The attached image was uploaded as a png.  Still waiting for the "crash."

Now try a photograph. It will be huge, compared to a JPEG. That file is also larger than necessary. Here it is converted to 8-bit, which is smaller and has no loss in quality.

[DavidAlfa]

Aaand another overdramatic thread added to the ignore list 

[ebastler]

How does it decide the format? It would annoy me if photographs saved in PNG appeared here because the files would be enormous, or fuzzy schematics in JPEG.

The format is decided when you copy something into your clipboard. If you Ctrl-C a previously saved JPG photo, rest assured that it will be pasted as a JPG, and likewise for a PNG. The proposed "clipboard paste" mechanism for the forum would only simpliy the action of attaching the picture to a post.

[Zero999]

Aaand another overdramatic thread added to the ignore list 

Why bother posting? That kind of post makes others more inclined to add you to their ignore list.

How does it decide the format? It would annoy me if photographs saved in PNG appeared here because the files would be enormous, or fuzzy schematics in JPEG.

The format is decided when you copy something into your clipboard. If you Ctrl-C a previously saved JPG photo, rest assured that it will be pasted as a JPG, and likewise for a PNG. The proposed "clipboard paste" mechanism for the forum would only simpliy the action of attaching the picture to a post.

How would that be any quicker? One still has to navigate to the file, regardless of whether it's from their desktop or the file upload dialogue box.

My concern is it will promote laziness. People generating huge files by pressing the print screen button, then pasting, rather than bothering to export to PNG, or cropping the image and saving it.

[jpanhalt]

It seems a bit odd to continue making it difficult for everyone else just to avoid such theoretical abuse.  If the ability to paste is abused, such abuses should be handled on an individual basis.

From prior discussions of this matter, however, I believe EEVBlog had another reason that was related to hardware capacity or the forum software.

[Zero999]

Testing shift+insert paste.


EDIT:
That's interesting. I tried copying and pasting a smilie into the rich text editor. It appeared, but didn't show up in the post. I went back to edit the post, only to discover, the forum software had put it through a binary to text converter and put the text in between two img tags, which don't work.
Reply to this post, using the quote button, to see the text. Obviously, use the standard text, not rich text editor.

OS: PC Linux
Browser: Firefox

Attached is a PNG of the smilie.

[ebastler]

Testing shift+insert paste.

Don't!! As you have eloquently explained, that functionality is evil!

[T3sl4co1l]

It sounds like a bad idea, unless it's smart enough to decide what format to use and reduce the colour depth, if necessary, for optimal bandwidth.

As if anyone paid any attention to that already.

Tim

[Zero999]

It sounds like a bad idea, unless it's smart enough to decide what format to use and reduce the colour depth, if necessary, for optimal bandwidth.

As if anyone paid any attention to that already.

Tim

I do. Most of my attachments are 1-bit or 4-bit per pixel, no transparancy, PNGs. True, most people don't bother to go to such lengths, but do appropriately choose either PNG or JPEG. There still are a good number of fuzzy schematics saved in JPEG and overly large PNGs, which are annoying.

[paulca]

When people were worried about image bandwidth, users had 56kbps connections and 1080p jpegs took 5 seconds to download.  Downloading a 1 minute video for the web too half an hour.

Now a childs toy phone can play a 4k video live over wireless.

In the case of WordPress the feature (CTRL+V) to past an image, creates a 50x50 thumbnail, a picture the size you resize it to in the post and the full size image.

I produced said images with "PrintScreen", draw box, double click... go to WordPress, CTRL+V.