FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Picture size for posting

Page  12>
Author
Bob J View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 23 December 2005
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 23826
Post Options Post Options   Quote Bob J Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Picture size for posting
    Posted: 28 August 2015 at 10:27
Why you should keep to Dyxum’s suggested picture sizes

In our rules and guidelines we suggest that members only post pictures that are 1024 pixels wide, or 960 pixels high. We have noticed in recent months that more and more people are posting images that are much bigger than this, and are relying on the forum software to re-size their images to fit. The idea of this message is to explain why we would like people to keep to the posting sizes suggested, despite the ability of the forum software to display large images to fit normal monitor sizes…

Browser incompatibilities

Although the forum scripts resize overlarge pictures, this feature may not work with all browsers , so some members may not see your pictures as you intend.

Slow connections

Even if your image is displayed at a reasonable size in the browser of a viewer, the whole full-size picture is being transferred down the line – this may not be noticeable if you are working on high speed broadband, but for users on slower lines or WiFi it can make viewing a picture post very difficult.

Subscriptions

A number of members subscribe to picture threads so that they get an email sent through with any new postings – the resizing does not work with most email packages, so your image will appear in their email at full size.

DPCs and exhibitions

Our team members spend quite a bit of time dealing with preparation for exhibitions and voting threads for DPCs, the scripts they use to compile these postings do not benefit from resizing, which makes the whole process much more labour intensive. We would rather not lose great pictures from exhibitions or DPC voting lists just because the images are too big for us to work with.

But it is not just for the comfort of other Dyxum members that we think you should keep within the guidelines - there are particular reasons why it is not in members' interests to just leave resizing of their pictures to the forum app:

Sharpening

To get the optimum benefit from sharpening you should be applying the sharpening at the resolution the image will be viewed at (ie you sharpen differently for something to be viewed on a monitor than you would for a print). If you sharpen for a higher resolution and then the forum software resizes, the benefits of your sharpening will be lost.

Copyright

If you post at high resolutions, your images can be downloaded and pirated at that resolution – we know a lot of people spend time applying watermarks to their images, but effectively posting a 600x900 image means that any pirate is only going to have a low resolution copy that they will not be able to do much with practically – however, if they have a 4000x6000 image they have something that they can pass off as their own (and something it is worth spending time removing a watermark from).

For the above reasons we would ask all members to take the time to resize their images so they are at or below the suggested resolutions.
We are also considering commissioning some knowledge-base articles on preparing images for web display and would be grateful for any volunteers to contribute text or useful links to guides elsewhere on the internet.

 



Back to Top
nandbytes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 2178
Post Options Post Options   Quote nandbytes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 August 2015 at 10:50
interesting point about web-sized displays and theft. I am currently in process of designing my website for pictures (have been for last 3 months ), I am relying on wordpress plugins to resize and they work pretty well as far as I can tell.

Otherwise I normally just use lightroom to downsize my images (to about 4mp) and flickr to downsize it further when posting on here.
my flickr
A7RII, A7 (full-spectrum), NEX-5n
Back to Top
MiPr View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Mikre Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 25 August 2006
Country: Poland
Location: Wroclaw
Status: Offline
Posts: 20316
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 September 2015 at 10:13
Thanks Bob for the summary.
I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
skm.sa100 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 January 2009
Country: United States
Location: Charlotte, NC
Status: Online
Posts: 2755
Post Options Post Options   Quote skm.sa100 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 September 2015 at 16:11
My Picasa workflow:
I use Picasa as my hosting site. When I upload from my computer, I use "Best for web sharing" for Image Size. That saves online storage and also prevents piracy to a certain extent due to the smaller image which might not translate very well into a print size. Depending on how finicky you are, you might want to save at this resolution before uploading to help keep YOUR preferred sharpening and then upload original size.

When I copy the image URL from Picasa, the size is included in the URL and I resize it as I see fit.

For example, here is an image URL I *might* have shared before.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-aB0YEoHqOmU/VTHRyh5YQAI/AAAAAAAA4hI/qyqQsNIPqIM/s640-Ic42/UV%252520effect%252520flower%2525202.jpg

The image size his highlighted in yellow.
Earlier, the URL used to have 'h' and 'w' for height and width and I would manually update those values. Now I just update the 's640' to 's800' so it's 800 pixels wide (or high, depending on orientation). The other dimension seems to be auto calculated. You can go up to 1040, as Bob suggested above, if you want a larger size.

If you use Picasa and found this post useful, my effort isn't wasted.


Regards,
Sashi
Back to Top
MiPr View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Mikre Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 25 August 2006
Country: Poland
Location: Wroclaw
Status: Offline
Posts: 20316
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 September 2015 at 20:07
Thanks Sashi.

BTW, we have a thread describing how to post pictures from various sites, including methods of choosing the size of the photo to post.
I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
Sarbey View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 22 December 2016
Country: Armenia
Status: Offline
Posts: 3
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sarbey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 December 2016 at 20:44
Hi,

Thanks for the helpful information.
 



Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 2431
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 09:37
A recent thread about 4k TVs, and in particular this post by Cliff leads me to question whether these guidelines are now archaic and should be updated.

1. In these days of fast internet, hardly anyone nowadays relies on a basic slow telephone-line internet.

2. Most enthusiast photographers (eg those on this forum) will show pictures on a monitor or TV with a lot more than 1024 pixels

3. Restricting images to the quote sizes hides much of the detail in the images that we like to comment on.

4. Most people get around this by linking to another website where full-size (or at least larger) images *can* be displayed, making a nonsense of the restriction.

5. We can still use thumbnails or small sizes when appropropriate.

6. It's not even as if Dyxum are trying to save space on their own servers, because they don't host images . . .
A900, A58, 5d, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
MiPr View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Mikre Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 25 August 2006
Country: Poland
Location: Wroclaw
Status: Offline
Posts: 20316
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 09:54
Re 1) But at the same time - not all people are on fibre optic network I would dare to say that the situation is quite opposite. Not once, when working with pictures for Exhibs or DPCs I encountered a situation when somebody hot-linked full-size photo with alittle compression. I assure you that you could feel the difference in Dyxum page loading. Now imagine that you have several such photos on one page.

Re 2) Even if at work I have nice 3840x2160 display, at home I still use full HD (same as my mobile), not to mention my tablet which is still 1280x800. Have you tried this? You should. For me - looking at threads with BIG photos is annoying because I cannot see them properly unless I rescale the browser or open the photo in a separate tab.

Re 3) You can always go to the original size - if only the author shares it (e.g. not me - I never post original sizes anywhere).

Re 4) And this is IMO the way to go and no - this is not a nonsense.

Re 5) If you show me a single post (except thumbnail threads in challenges, where this is explicit requirement) that uses small sizes or thumbnails "when appropriate" then I will wholeheartedly agree with you

Re 6) The point is not with hosting images (although it would be quite a challenge to host them) but with the bandwidh, speed of the web page loading and ease of looking at photos.
I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
ABDurbs View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 October 2011
Country: South Africa
Location: Durban
Status: Offline
Posts: 709
Post Options Post Options   Quote ABDurbs Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 12:32
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

A recent thread about 4k TVs, and in particular this post by Cliff leads me to question whether these guidelines are now archaic and should be updated.

1. In these days of fast internet, hardly anyone nowadays relies on a basic slow telephone-line internet.



Why would you think that hardly anyone relies on a basic slow telephone line internet these days? Are you basing that on what you see in the UK or USA or modern Europe? There are many millions of internet users who are still using telephone line internet. Unlike most 1st world countries, fast unrestricted fibre internet is very expensive on a continent like Africa. For many millions of African internet users, telephone line internet is still the only viable option.

Edited by ABDurbs - 13 December 2017 at 12:52
Regards
Allan
A99 + VG, A77ii + VG, 70-400G, Zeiss 85mm f1.7, CZ16-80, Tamron 70-200 USD Tamron 24-70 USD, HVL-43, Minolta 8000i, Minolta 50mm f1.7
Back to Top
Winwalloe View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 17 September 2007
Country: France
Location: Paris
Status: Offline
Posts: 2644
Post Options Post Options   Quote Winwalloe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 13:08
There'll always be users with slower connections, lower resolution screens... But the websites & apps can keep improving because there are now adaptive or responsive designs.

(I do that in a relatively dumb methode in my personal website: visitors with a screen taller than 1440 get a higher resolution JPEG than those with a smaller screen).
See my webpage!
A-mount stuff, and few µ43 stuff.
Back to Top
ricardovaste View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 August 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Shropshire
Status: Offline
Posts: 9944
Post Options Post Options   Quote ricardovaste Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 13:35
I occasionally find the compression a tad annoying when posting vertical images, but I'm aware of it so I just try to re-size them when possible. Overall I think the limitations work best to serve all types of users. I can still post around 1000px wide which reveals plenty of details, assuming I am resizing and sharpening for web presentation. If you ever feel like you can't see enough detail at this size, then it's probably poor post production or just not a great photo.

If there is a particular way I wish to present a set of images, or if I wish to present them larger for some reason, I do often just link to a web page on my site. As everyone is hosting off dyxum, I think this is probably quite easy even if you don't own your own website.

I occasionally post on another website, FredMiranda, and it is somewhat easier to post as you can just drop the .jpeg url, however, people do post ENORMOUS photos which can result in the dreaded HORIZONTAL SCROLL OF DOOM quite often. If I just want to check in on my phone to clarify some info for example when researching, it can make the process a bit tedious.

I think it works pretty well here overall.
Back to Top
ricardovaste View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 August 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Shropshire
Status: Offline
Posts: 9944
Post Options Post Options   Quote ricardovaste Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 13:37
Originally posted by Winwalloe Winwalloe wrote:

There'll always be users with slower connections, lower resolution screens... But the websites & apps can keep improving because there are now adaptive or responsive designs.

(I do that in a relatively dumb methode in my personal website: visitors with a screen taller than 1440 get a higher resolution JPEG than those with a smaller screen).


This is true for web design, but remember that dyxum isn't a business and is run by volunteers - upgrading to the latest and greatest just isn't viable AFAIK. It has been brought up numerous times of the years (not responsive design, just general forum upgrades) and I believe it's very much a chase of living within what is realistically possible. So I think we are to count our blessings!
Back to Top
owenn01 View Drop Down
Alpha Eyes group
Alpha Eyes group

Joined: 20 May 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Kent
Status: Offline
Posts: 9033
Post Options Post Options   Quote owenn01 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 14:33
I think what appeals to me on here is the fact that there is a consistent (well, nearly always consistent) image size for everyone; yes, there are potentially some limitations but, on the whole, I know that if I am looking at this on my Mac at home, my laptop at work (occasionally... ; honest) or a tablet device it is likely that I will see the whole image without, as Richard so succinctly put it, THE HORIZONTAL SCROLLBAR OF DOOM. And another thought on that last comment - just think how much more difficult it would make the AMAE's roles if they had to scroll through an image to form an opinion on someone's work?I'm not sure too many people would volunteer, nor would there likely be as many comments as we get now?

No - happy to maintain the status quo as far as image size is concerned at the moment.

Best regards, Neil.
My Mantra: "Comment on other's work as you would wish to have yours commented upon". Go on - it's fun!
Back to Top
owenn01 View Drop Down
Alpha Eyes group
Alpha Eyes group

Joined: 20 May 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Kent
Status: Offline
Posts: 9033
Post Options Post Options   Quote owenn01 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2017 at 14:35
Originally posted by ricardovaste ricardovaste wrote:

If you ever feel like you can't see enough detail at this size, then it's probably poor post production or just not a great photo.


Ah, Richard: thanks for letting me know where I've been going wrong all these years now...
My Mantra: "Comment on other's work as you would wish to have yours commented upon". Go on - it's fun!
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Dyxum Community > About Dyxum.com Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.061 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Find us on Google+

Feel free to contact us if needed.