FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Picture size for posting

Page  <1 3456>
Author
neilt3 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 13 September 2010
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Manchester.U.K
Status: Offline
Posts: 2282
Post Options Post Options   Quote neilt3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 January 2018 at 23:45
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

In the meantime, let's do a practical experiment. I'm posting three 16:9 images in different resolutions:

1920x1080:

[snip]

1280x720:

[snip]

960x540:

[snip]

I'm looking at them on a 1920x1080 monitor using Win7, IE11 and also a recent version of Chrome. What hardware/OS/browsers are you using?
I get a horizontal scrollbar with these.....


Same here , looking at them on my laptop P.C which has a screen of 1280x800 .
The last image of 960x540 needs just a touch of movement .
If there wasn't the column on the left of the page I wouldn't need to .

In the evening if I'm just on the internet I use the laptop P.C on the sidetable while watching T.V .
I only tend to use my desktop P.C whith it's larger screen when I'm editing images .

I know when I post images they tend to be 1024 on the long edge and I don't need to scroll as there not larger than the screen space available .
So why even the 960 image wasn't showing that you have just posted doesn't make much sense .


Edited by neilt3 - 09 January 2018 at 23:53
see my photostream on flickr;
http://www.flickr.com/photos/neilt3/
C & C welcome.
 



Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14205
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 01:35
Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

I get a horizontal scrollbar with these.....

Same here , looking at them on my laptop P.C which has a screen of 1280x800 .

My small laptop screen (1366x768) often requires scrolling when dyxum images approach the horizontal limit.

I know when I post images they tend to be 1024 on the long edge and I don't need to scroll as there not larger than the screen space available .
So why even the 960 image wasn't showing that you have just posted doesn't make much sense .

What I've sometimes observed here is that the source that hosts the image files can influence at what point scroll bars appear on small screens. My files are hosted on a shared Linux server managed by a web hosting company.

Anyway ...

What I wanted to confirm is that nobody should be experiencing the kinds of aspect ratio distortions mentioned on previous pages. Is anyone experiencing that?

Edited by sybersitizen - 10 January 2018 at 02:20
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9726
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 07:04
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

I'm looking at them on a 1920x1080 monitor using Win7, IE11 and also a recent version of Chrome. What hardware/OS/browsers are you using?
I get a horizontal scrollbar with these...

That's not too helpful unless we know what you're viewing them with. There are no horizontal scroll bars here as long as I make my browser window wide enough. If I make the window too narrow I get one scroll bar under the last line of text, as I would expect.
Well, your answer doesn't help unless we know what you're viewing them with

And I disagree - a lot of folk say "with all these modern big screens we should allow bigger picture files", my answer simply shows that not everybody uses a screen where you see these bigger pictures. So, it is helpful. My settings are irrelevant in this case.

Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

In the evening if I'm just on the internet I use the laptop P.C on the sidetable while watching T.V .
I only tend to use my desktop P.C whith it's larger screen when I'm editing images.

That is how I use my laptop and desktop too - my 13" laptop for day to day use and my desktop for the serious stuff like editing images.

Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

If there wasn't the column on the left of the page I wouldn't need to.

I notice that in this thread I get a column to the left with links to "cameras", "lenses", "last 200 fosum topics" and many more. I do not get these everywhere on Dyxum.

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

My small laptop screen (1366x768) often requires scrolling when dyxum images approach the horizontal limit.

My laptop has a 13" 1920x1080 screen.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 26852
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 07:27
You really need to do this test in one of the picture threads (Open Views/Themed Views/......) since there the most left column (with the Dyxum.com logo at the top) doesn't show and gives more room for the picture to show. On my 1366 wide laptop screen no scroll bar will show there with pictures of max 1024 wide, but does with a picture of 1200 wide.

This is one of the reasons we're careful before increasing the max horizontal size from 1024. We do like most of our viewers to see images on their screen without scroll bars.
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
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: 21272
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 10:55
Originally posted by neilt3 neilt3 wrote:

Same here , looking at them on my laptop P.C which has a screen of 1280x800. The last image of 960x540 needs just a touch of movement .
If there wasn't the column on the left of the page I wouldn't need to.

Just click this icon



and feel good Tested on on my 1280x800 Win10 tablet/hybrid (Gee! It's not 16:9 but 16:10! OMG, Dyxum should take this into account - this is industry standard for such devices in the end! )

I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3360
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 12:33
Okay, my 2p worth.

1. The problem with going wider than around 1000 pixels is that at my normal viewing size the pictures fall off the rh end of the browser, and if I zoom out to see the whole picture I can't easily read the writing anymore. I find this an issue with 1024-wide pics on Dyxum and it would be worse elsewhere.

So, while I agree it would be nice to see images in Dyxum in more detail, if this is done the text should be resized as well (bigger). And while we're at it, can we get rid of the truly awful 1970's DOS black background and go to a more modern white background? And get some smoother text font too? The site looks terribly dated.

2. I'm getting really fed up with the modern trend to ever narrower letterbox formats for TVs and monitors. My work screen is 1920 x 1080 which is useful in giving some desktop area to the left of whatever I'm working on, and quite good for spreadsheets, but I can't read a full-page A4 document (eg datasheet pdf) so I have to keep scrolling it up and down as well as changing pages.

My home monitor is something like 1280x1024 which is near square (the pixels arne't quite square, unfortunately) but is great for portraits. Widescreen monitors maybe great for watching videos but they aren't ideal for anything else. And on TVs you now need to get a stupidly large screen to get the vertical size of an old 26" TV.

3. I agree the space taken up on the LHS by the menu/etc is a nuisance and unnecessarily wastes screen area, particularly on long threads where it is just empty black space. I can't even get wide pictures to expand into it.
But to correct all these things will mean a lot of work for somebody.

4. I sympathise with Cliffe but donlt favour a widescreen exemption. Picture formats vary widely and need to for different images.
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, 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: 21272
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 12:39
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

3. I agree the space taken up on the LHS by the menu/etc is a nuisance and unnecessarily wastes screen area, particularly on long threads where it is just empty black space. I can't even get wide pictures to expand into it.
But to correct all these things will mean a lot of work for somebody.

The solution to your problem is one click away - see my post above
I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 26852
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 12:42
Originally posted by MiPr MiPr wrote:

Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

3. I agree the space taken up on the LHS by the menu/etc is a nuisance and unnecessarily wastes screen area, particularly on long threads where it is just empty black space. I can't even get wide pictures to expand into it.
But to correct all these things will mean a lot of work for somebody.

The solution to your problem is one click away - see my post above
And additionally by default it isn't even shown in the picture threads of Open and Themed views. So it's a real non-issue in my mind: In the important forums it isn't shown, and if you want to take it away elsewhere it's just 1 click.
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 26852
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 12:51
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:


So, while I agree it would be nice to see images in Dyxum in more detail, if this is done the text should be resized as well (bigger). And while we're at it, can we get rid of the truly awful 1970's DOS black background and go to a more modern white background? And get some smoother text font too? The site looks terribly dated.


If you use Firefox just go to settings and change the font type and font size to your liking. I would expect that other browsers offer similar options. The text is not dictated by the Dyxum site software but by your browser settings. So it's a problem you can only solve yourself.

Haven't found it yet, but I think you can also change the background color (b.t.w. I really like the black we have now) and if I find it I'll post it here as well.

Edited by pegelli - 10 January 2018 at 12:54
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
Cliff View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 01 November 2006
Country: United States
Location: Richmond Va
Status: Offline
Posts: 702
Post Options Post Options   Quote Cliff Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 14:40
If we are looking at images on notebook sized screens nothing matters. They are too small to see anything significant unless we've got our noses pushed right up against them, and that leaves smudges on the screen.

We have changed the way we view photographs from print to display, but we have not investigated what that implies. All our focus has been on the technology in the camera. That is a topic for another thread.

"Resolution of computer monitors
Computers can use pixels to display an image, often an abstract image that represents a GUI. The resolution of this image is called the display resolution and is determined by the video card of the computer. LCD monitors also use pixels to display an image, and have a native resolution. Each pixel is made up of triads, with the number of these triads determining the native resolution.... To produce the sharpest images possible on an LCD, the user must ensure the display resolution of the computer matches the native resolution of the monitor." source

Modern display systems (video cards and monitors) are better at resolving display issues than they used to be (Engineers rock!). But, can we really go so far as to assert that allowing, not forcing, the maintenance of the native aspect ratio from the image in the camera through viewing is worthless?

Camera sensor photosites, aka pixels, are square. LCD screen pixels can be square, and many are, but not always. See the 'Subpixels' heading in the link above. All pixels are not created equal. We confuse the conversation by calling them by the same name. More variations on LCD pixels here (scroll down).

I am surprised. I asked for something simple, that a single high definition world wide display standard be allowed, not forced, in Dyxum displays whose stated current constraints are driven by lowest common denominator bandwidth, file download size. It did not seem controversial, the file size is smaller than the current Dyxum limit and it embraced a display standard. From the response you'd think I introduced woolen and cotton mills in the early 1800's.
Contax RF, Minolta7000i, Sony A100, A65, Nex5T, A7ii, A6500. 2 many lenses, mostly ordinary Minolta & 3rd party A, MC/D, other mf, vintage Vivitars & cats, LA-EA2,3,4 E16-50&55-210mm
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: 21272
Post Options Post Options   Quote MiPr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 15:06
Cliff, I'm afraid I still do not get your point. The size ("resolution" - how this term was "stolen" and overused for the purpose that is only vaguely related to the proper meaning is a good topic for another discussion) of the photo has nothing to do with the screen "resolution" or screen display ratio, unless you want to watch the photo full-screen in which case it would make sense to prepare the photo in the "resolution" that fits the display. Any photo with the size lower than the size of the screen will show exactly as it was intended (although the smaller the bigger the screen is). Quality degradation may appear only when scaling such photos.

BTW, in the information you provided above (Wiki quotes) I see no reference to picture sizes or picture "ratios". Only hardware is discussed (i.e. graphic card, display, etc.).

EDITED:
But to summarize - plese correct me if I'm wrong- your real problem is that:
1) You want your photos to be displayed big,
2) You prefer to watch them full-screen,
3) You want Dyxum to adopt to this and allow photo sizes around full HD (why not 4k?)
4) You refuse to accept any reasonable explanations because you have big screens and high-speed internet and so you don't care about others who still use smaller screens and slower network. Have I mentioned my feelings when waiting until Dyxum page loads because somebody posted full-size-24MP JPG with little compression (quality!) - they are not positive


Edited by MiPr - 10 January 2018 at 15:16
I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... |   BTW, Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ...
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 26852
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 15:08
Originally posted by Cliff Cliff wrote:


I am surprised. I asked for something simple, that a single high definition world wide display standard be allowed, not forced, in Dyxum displays whose stated current constraints are driven by lowest common denominator bandwidth, file download size. It did not seem controversial, the file size is smaller than the current Dyxum limit and it embraced a display standard. From the response you'd think I introduced woolen and cotton mills in the early 1800's.
Cliff, please read what we wrote and don't misquote us. The main consideration for the size limits in pixels is set by the display sizes our viewers are using, and file size (to preserve bandwith) is a secundary (but still important) consideration.

Secondly you don't answer questions people ask in this thread, don't respond to suggestions/remarks we make but just keep harping the same points and then blaming us for not willing to listen, followed by derrogatory/cynical remarks.

I must say that doesn't help solving your "problem" and it's not in the spirit of the site.

So as promised here we will keep looking how to increase the size limits for showing images on the site, but from now on I won't be specifically addressing your concerns anymore.


Edited by pegelli - 10 January 2018 at 15:19
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3360
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 15:48
Originally posted by MiPr MiPr wrote:

Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

3. I agree the space taken up on the LHS by the menu/etc is a nuisance and unnecessarily wastes screen area, particularly on long threads where it is just empty black space. I can't even get wide pictures to expand into it.
But to correct all these things will mean a lot of work for somebody.

The solution to your problem is one click away - see my post above


Oh, wow! Never knew that!
Thanks, MiPr. I shall use that button in future!

Edited by Miranda F - 10 January 2018 at 15:53
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, 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
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14205
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 January 2018 at 16:35
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

I'm looking at them on a 1920x1080 monitor using Win7, IE11 and also a recent version of Chrome. What hardware/OS/browsers are you using?
I get a horizontal scrollbar with these...
That's not too helpful unless we know what you're viewing them with.
Well, your answer doesn't help unless we know what you're viewing them with.

Twice already I've told you what I'm viewing them with. It's still right there in the text you quoted. Now it's three times.

Long after the comment you first made, you actually said something about what you're using, so thanks for that.
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Dyxum Community > About Dyxum.com Page  <1 3456>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.062 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.