Large photos on the forum. Good or bad?

[AndrewT]

Hi,
why does the Forum tolerate >2MB of pic attachments?
It's time the Forum system refused to upload this nonsense.

[ikoflexer]

Andrew, I'm not speaking for the forum, but I know that it's very inspiring for many to see pictures of completed work. May not be everyone's cup of tea but many like that.

[jackinnj]

Originally Posted by AndrewT

Hi,
why does the Forum tolerate >2MB of pic attachments?
It's time the Forum system refused to upload this nonsense.

Maybe the forum should take up a collection so you can levitate from "dial-up"

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by jackinnj

Maybe the forum should take up a collection so you can levitate from "dial-up"

Hehe. Funny.

I noticed that the pic opened up fully, then shrunk again. Would be good if it came up as a thumbnail that gets exploded optionally by clicking it (I suspect it is supposed to work this way, though). Sadly, data is expensive where I'm from...

[AndrewT]

Originally Posted by ikoflexer

I know that it's very inspiring for many to see pictures of completed work.

Originally Posted by jackinnj

Maybe the forum should take up a collection so you can levitate from "dial-up"

maybe the same information could be delivered with a compressed pic file with a lower resolution.
I too love to see pics of completed work. I certainly do not want to stop or restrict that.
I am sure many on this Forum think likewise.

Why should this giant file stupidity be tolerated? It would be very easy to stop. It has nothing to do with dial-up or not dial-up.

[AndrewT]

Originally Posted by Shaun

Hehe. Funny.

I noticed that the pic opened up fully, then shrunk again. Would be good if it came up as a thumbnail that gets exploded optionally by clicking it (I suspect it is supposed to work this way, though). Sadly, data is expensive where I'm from...

yes the Forum software sends the whole 2MB and sets the screen size to maximum.
When the page is fully uploaded it shows the full size pic.
Only when I reload the pic does the software shrink it to fit the screen. But it has already downloaded all 2MB.
Yes, posting a thumbnail of restricted resolution and sending that thumbnail as a compressed file would be a far more efficient use of bandwidth. There are other ways the Forum could avoid the stupidity of downloading 2MB of attachments. We need to complain if we want action. They do not seem to want to do this pro-actively.

[Pano]

I'm with Andrew on this one. Over-sized digital images are a huge pet peeve of mine. If you can learn to use a digital camera, then by golly you can learn to resize your pix!!

There are quite a few forum members who read this via dial up or wireless (3G, etc). Huge photos really swamp those connections.

The bottom line is this. There simply is NO need for any photo over 80KB to be posted to the forum. In the range of 50-80 KB you can fill the screen with the photographic glory of your audio contraption. And if you use the right format (GIF, PNG) you can fill the screen with lovely sharp schematics or graphs - and stay under 80K.

Anyone who posts a photo over 80K I put down to sheer laziness. There is simply no need to do it. Except laziness.

[cronic]

Since I see no option to edit my post (#470) mods please delete. I had no intention to offend anyone by posting the pictures, and I am sorry I did, so mods please delete my post. Thanks

[Cal Weldon]

No offense taken cronic it's just that some are on slow dial up and it takes a long time for them to open pics. In the future just downsize them before posting. If you can't do that, send them to me and I will.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.

[AndrewT]

Originally Posted by Cal Weldon

it's just that some are on slow dial up and it takes a long time for them to open pics.

you miss the point.
If we had the option to download the full size pic we could choose what we needed to see.
At present the system downloads all these big files and we have no choice.