How to post oversized pictures from your own server / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

How to post oversized pictures from your own server

Move Thread

LAN_403

Steve Conner

Thu Aug 16 2007, 11:47AM

Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706

Hi all,

You are no doubt aware that one of the board rules limits you to a maximum image width of 400 pixels. Any picture much bigger than this upsets the board format and makes every other post in the thread vanish off the right-hand side of the screen.

If you post images using the Attach File function, this is taken care of for you by a thumbnailing script, but we can't stop you linking to an oversized image you might have elsewhere. So, if you can't be bothered making a thumbnail of your image manually, here is a quick and dirty way to do it using BBCode. I can't type the code exactly as it needs to be, since the mysteries of BBCode escaping are beyond me, so when you see ordinary () brackets please imagine square brackets.

(link=http://your.server/yourimage.jpg)
(img width=400)http://your.server/yourimage.jpg(/img)
(/link)

Please don't use this for *really* big images, since the person viewing gets the full size image file sent, and it gets scaled to 400 pixels by their browser. The result will be to drastically slow up loading of the whole thread for everyone who views it, whether they click on the thumbnail or not. In this case, you should make a smaller preview image yourself and place a link to it in the img tag:

(link=http://your.server/yourimage.jpg)
(img)http://your.server/yoursmallerpreviewimage.jpg(/img)
(/link)

Any debate on this welcome, if the admins agree, it could perhaps be made into a sticky.

Avalanche

Thu Aug 16 2007, 02:45PM

Registered Member #103 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:16PM
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 845

You said debate so I thought I'd get a few thoughts in

I've always thought 400 is a bit on the small side, as it's based on a screen resolution of 800x600. I would guess (and hope!) that most people would be running at least 1024x768 these days... I actually prefer it when someone posts a larger photo.

It's also a shame when someone posts a schematic at like 450 pixels, then after resizing it often makes no sense whatsoever and might as well just be a link. I don't mind scrolling around the screen if it's a schematic, but photos I agree shouldn't send the page crazy.

Just my opinions, If it were up to me I'd bump up the minimum size to 640 width and allow schematics

GreySoul

Thu Aug 16 2007, 03:36PM

Registered Member #546 Joined: Fri Feb 23 2007, 11:43PM
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 239

I have to agree. 400 is a bit narrow for modern systems.

Do we really want to limit 99% of the viewers to allow for the 1% that can't or wont run their old monitors above 800x600?

it is the age old webdesigners question....

Personally, I feel whoever starts a thread should have the final say in how they post their pictures. If they want to make their pictu5res so big no one can see them that's their own failure to communicate effectively.

Myself, I prefer to post my pics at the limited 400px and link them.... but the links open in a new window and I sometimes get a dozen windows opened up on me... I think that's a browser setting on my end though.

As for bandwidth, the image loads it's full file size no matter how small you scale it with width=xxx so no worries there right?

I dunno... I vote for a 640 limit, and narrow the left hand menus a little bit if needed.

-Doug

-Doug

...

Thu Aug 16 2007, 04:48PM

Registered Member #56 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:02AM
Location: Southern Califorina, USA
Posts: 2445

I think that 400 is fine, (and I am running a 1400x1050 desktop), in fact I usually make my images 200 wide, and do 2 next to eachother.

I think that they should be a thumbnail that you are supposed to click on to get an image that is sized correctly to fit your entire screen...

But I would agree that most people aren't running 800x600, but a I ofen use a 640x480 or worse 320x480 screen (hx4700 or th55)... It would definantly be nice to get a slimmed down 4hv that would look decent on them

Steve Conner

Thu Aug 16 2007, 07:29PM

Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706

Sorry if I made that unclear. The 400px limit isn't up for debate. (says he posting from Opera on a hx4700) In fact we recently reduced it from 475.

It's not necessarily about resolution: I have dual 1440 x 900 TFTs, but thanks to my dirty habit of surfing the net at work, my web browser is typically just one of many windows fighting for attention.

What's up for debate is the method of thumbnailing/linking oversized images on your own server.

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob