Oversized pictures in non-screenshot threads

[Red_Rattler]

I'm not trying to be a moderator, however I'm sick & tied of opening threads that are not screenshot threads that I'm interested in, and finding oversize, and/or supersize pictures in the threads, that I'm not expecting. Some have been on here for a while, and also use oversize images, and should know what the limit is by now.

Please think of those on slower connections, or those that are on broadband where their speed has been reduced to dial up.

Auran's CoC #18 clearly states that the limit in non-screenshot threads is 800x600 pixels, and that they will be changed to links, or removed if found to be oversized.

If you must use large images that are over the CoC limit, please use the URL tags, or thumbnail if possible, instead of the image tags.

 

[JCitron]

I agree. The pictures are really annoying and really slow even on a TI at work.

Bump to keep this at the top.

John

 

[tardis626]

Doesn't really bother me as they don't take long to load for me but I know that it can be a problem to people with slower internet. Also it annoys me when they are so large they don't even fit on a computer screen and you can only see a bit of the picture without zooming out or using the scroll bars. i don't understand why people can upload things this size and not think to make them smaller or put them as text links!!


phil
________
Medical clones torrance.

 

[bigboy4010]

It could be a case where they don't know how large the picture they are uploading really is. Either that or they take for granted the speed of their internet connection.

 

[Iced8383]

I agree! I am sick of seeing oversized images in non-screenshot threads. They make my browser start to lag.

 

[Johnk]

My guess is that some contributors are still using Windows Picture Viewer or other programs that automatically resize photos to fit the screen. They say "Hey, that's perfect", then ftp it to their server.

I hate to say this, but I think ALL (yes I'm yelling) pictures and sig pictures should be banned except for the Screenshots section. Really, what's wrong with a link I ask? If I want to see the pic or visit someone's web site a link is just as good. No it's not... it's better because this super slow forum would all of a sudden get a new lease of life.

 

[JCitron]

My guess is that some contributors are still using Windows Picture Viewer or other programs that automatically resize photos to fit the screen. They say "Hey, that's perfect", then ftp it to their server.

I hate to say this, but I think ALL (yes I'm yelling) pictures and sig pictures should be banned except for the Screenshots section. Really, what's wrong with a link I ask? If I want to see the pic or visit someone's web site a link is just as good. No it's not... it's better because this super slow forum would all of a sudden get a new lease of life.

John that's the real way of going about it and it's simply done with the forum administrator's permissions. I manage another UBB (non railroad) related and this is what we do to prevent shots in any place except for the screenshots.

The people that upload don't realize that when a screen capture is taken it defaults to the actual screen resolution. With screen resolutions growing beyond the "normal" 800x 600 or 1024 x 768, they can get quite unmanageable online. The answer to this is having a size rule or restriction on the screenshots folder to not allow pictures larger than 1024 x 768. This would cut the size down subtantially and increase the loading speed of the rest of the forums.

As I said this site has become really slow loading for me at work on my TI which is a lot slower than cable. It maxs out at 64MB total for all connections so if a field engineer is streaming a remote connection and someone else is downloading system drivers or logs, this can put a damper on the bandwidth. Take all this in addition to local traffic between the multiple servers and workstataions and the network crawls a long. The local servers aren't just database and file servers, these are really RIPs processing huge single-bit tiff images for digital printing. Each image is 4GB each and uncompressed for 4-colors (CMYK) plus spot colors. This is a lot of image traffic on a local network.

Anyway, I'll go along with a total ban on anywhere except for screenshots with a size restriction.

John

 

[bigboy4010]

I think all pictures to be banned is a little drastic. What about project makers on the freeware or payware announcements? They should be allowed to post screenshots of their progress or their finished project. It's that much quicker. I think it should be the person who starts the forum who decides whether to posts pictures or links, not everyone else. It is their thread they've started after all. They can set the limits, and if the pictures are over the set limit by the thread starter, then someone, a moderator I guess, can set it to being a link or something. I'm a die hard Libertarian, so I believe in free choice, so a total ban is something I'm against. It should be the choice of the person who starts the thread.

 

[Sourdough]

The oversized pic problem is usually compounded by those who feel a need to quote the poster when replying and the pic is posted over and over.....banning all pics and sigs isn't really the answer....I disable sigs so I don't have to look at them....report oversized pics....

 

[JimDep]

So is prototype "talk" an appropriate place to post photo's of prototypes?
In the forum description, it doesn't specify whether you can or can't.

If not, we should have a prototype screen shot category so we can show
pictures and discuss prototypes. Just a suggestion and not a criticism.

 

[BLACKWATCH]

I can understand the loading issues that Red Rattler finds very annoying, I'm also in agreement with Sourdough on the very very annoying habit of quoting a picture needlessly, just to say "hey great pic".
However, I don't think a ban is the way to go, but a strict enforcement of the 800 x 600 rule would be a better idea, and if it's possible, for any post quoted that contains a picture, for just the link to appear in the quote rather than the actual image.

 

[IsambardKingdomBrunel]

post deleted

 

[JCitron]

Moan, moan whinge whinge.................... you need to get out more and get a life.

If your not happy with the forums, don't visit them and don't read them.

IKB.

It's not like this is a selfish request for the benefit of one person like many of the I wanna now posts here. This is a request that would benefit everyone. The implementation has to be worked out so that it works logically and easily.

John

 

[gfisher]

This is a request that would benefit everyone.

Not necessarily. I have no problem with the way things are being moderated at present. And red rattler is wasting bandwidth by starting two threads on the same subject when he could have simply posted his complaint directly to a real moderator.

 

[deeelare]

Someone please start the popcorn !

 

[Gandalf0444]

I have been to other forums(hosted by the same company as hosts Auran) And guess what? The forum AUTOMATICALLY re sizes the pictures. It's amazing how far technology has come huh? Now if auran could implement this(I don't know what is required to get it etc,weather its a software update etc) But if they got that,it would render this problem obsolete,don't you think?

 

[JCitron]

Someone please start the popcorn !

Do you want cheese or carmel?

John

 

[JCitron]

I have been to other forums(hosted by the same company as hosts Auran) And guess what? The forum AUTOMATICALLY re sizes the pictures. It's amazing how far technology has come huh? Now if auran could implement this(I don't know what is required to get it etc,weather its a software update etc) But if they got that,it would render this problem obsolete,don't you think?

I think this has to do with what features get implemented in the version that the company purchases and how much customization that they do. The other version of UBB I use has a slightly different interface, but the underlying coding and set up is the same.

John

 

[Gandalf0444]

I think this has to do with what features get implemented in the version that the company purchases and how much customization that they do. The other version of UBB I use has a slightly different interface, but the underlying coding and set up is the same.

John

That is what I was thinking,however with all the money Auran brings in,don't you think they could purchase the upgrade or whatever you want to call it?:hehe: And I think in the long run it could save auran money by reducing bandwith etc and not relying on the people(like they do now) to do it for themselves.

 

[Mouse84]

Or, people could just follow the rules.