| Hezz |
Guys,
I constantly see pictures posted in threads that are 700-800 kbytes in size but when I try to post with an image it does not allow me to attach anything over 100 kbytes. This makes it very difficult to post a picture large enough for useful viewing. Anyone know what is wrong.
Hezz |
|
|
| SkinnyBoy |
| host it yaself ya slacker.. :p hehe |
|
|
| Netlist |
If the picture is hosted on another server, there is no limit though the 56k-ers will not like it. ;)
You then simply have to include the URL in your post.
Here, the limit is 100k, 800X600.
/Hugo :) |
|
|
| SkinnyBoy |
let me add to that abit... if everybody attaches an 800k pic to their posts so that it has to be hosted by this sites server, it is going to be SOO slow...
if you want to attach a bigger pic, upload it somewhere else... most ISPs give some webspace...
EDIT: I was too slow, I'll leave this here anyway.. lol |
|
|
| Fred Dieckmann |
| 100 KiloDittos....... When all else fails read the directions. |
|
|
| Hezz |
Guys,
I tried resampling the picture in paint shop pro down to what I thought was the minimum acceptable resolution so people could see it. I cropped the picture, reduced it's size and then reduced the color depth but it was still about 250k.
Posting the pictures on my own website is an alternative but I'm asking why there are 700-900k size pictures posted on some of these threads which exceeds the supposed memory allocation for an image.
I'm running with a DSL connection that last time I tested it could run at up to 900k per second. I don't think my connection is the problem unless my ISP is limiting my bandwidth for uploads.
Hezz |
|
|
| Hezz |
Let me also ask this,
If what Netlist is saying is correct then all I have to do is download the pictures to my earthlink web page and then use that URL when I attach the picture. Then that will allow me to post larger file sizes. I think that if the picture is informative even the 56k guys would be willing to wait for it. Especially if they are looking for technical ideas in visual form.
Hezz |
|
|
| Netlist |
The >100k pictures posted here are hosted on another server. Can be any server but not the DiyAudio server.
When you attach a file it can't be bigger then 100k. When you host it at your ISP's it can be bigger and then you provide a link like this: 
This is the link: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/news/publ...ver/picture.jpg
This has nothing to do with your bandwidth. I only meant to say that 56k-er's would have to wait a long time before they actually see the big downloaded picture.
So if you really can’t downsize your picture, you have to host it at your ISP.
In the 'vB Code' section, you can click on the 'IMG' button and insert the link that way.
/Hugo :) |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
| A 100K JPG photo can fill the screen with plenty of resolution. There is no justificatin for posting anything larger and I think those who do should be hung out to dry. |
|
|
| jcbklyny |
| Best bet would be the "Save for Web" function in Adobe Photoshop. |
|
|
| Hezz |
Guys,
Thanks for your help,
The photoshop option sounds good but I don't have nor will I buy photoshop because I can't justify the cost for occasional use. I believe that paint shop pro cannot compress a JPEG enough. In fact are there not two JPEG file formats. I know the one designed for web photos uses a lot less memory.
I have about 40 MB of web space available at my ISP. I will try that route or find a utility that can compress type 1 JPEG's into the web format.
Hezz |
|
|
| Hezz |
I think I have found part of my problem. There is a discrepancy of the file size that paint shop pro reports as opposed to what windows XP reports as the file size. A picture which paint shop pro reports as 768 KBytes windows reports as 32 KBytes. I don't know the true file size but I expect that paint shop pro is reporting the computer memory required to manipulate the file.
I will try some now pictures. I have also found a free utility that compresses JPEG to different levels.
Hezz |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hezz
The photoshop option sounds good but I don't have nor will I buy photoshop because I can't justify the cost for occasional use. I believe that paint shop pro cannot compress a JPEG enough. In fact are there not two JPEG file formats. I know the one designed for web photos uses a lot less memory. |
What version of Paint Shop Pro are you using? I'm using 4.12 and I'm able to save a JPEG with enough compression. Are you using the Option... during the save to set the compression level or are you just using the default?
The attached image was taken from an 8MB uncompressed 2048 x 1360 TIF file which I resampled to an 800 pixel width and saved it as a JPEG with the DPI set at 300 and the compression level at 25. It's a mere 41k and still looks very good. Of course for a given compression level different photos will save to different file sizes depending on their makeup but I don't see why you wouldn't be able to compress enough to get under the 100k limit and still have a good result.
Experiment with the compression level (Save As... Options...).
se |
|
|
| Hezz |
That looks great Steve,
my version is a cut down version that came bundled with other software. It is version 3.12-32 but I expect that it was a OEM cut down version. There is no option under the JPEG save command or anywhere else under the menuing system.
Hezz |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hezz
That looks great Steve,
my version is a cut down version that came bundled with other software. It is version 3.12-32 but I expect that it was a OEM cut down version. There is no option under the JPEG save command or anywhere else under the menuing system. |
Then just go to http://www.jasc.com and download the latest version (which I think is 6.somethingorother). It's a 15 meg downlaod but if you've got a high speed line that's not a big deal.
Just tried to get on their web page and I can't access it at the moment so you might have to try later.
se |
|
|
| Hezz |
Thanks for the info Steve, I will do that. Is it shareware or freeware?
Hezz |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hezz
Thanks for the info Steve, I will do that. Is it shareware or freeware? |
It's demo shareware, but the compression level is active even in the unregistered version unless they've changed things since the version I have.
se |
|
|
| peranders |
| I think that everyone should think about large pictures. Lot's of people out there have modem connections and when is it _really_ important to show a huge picture rather than supplying a link? At home I have at the moment modem so I'll appreciate this 100k limit. |
|
|
| Elso Kwak |
Hi, I am using Irfanview to resize/resample pictures for the forum
Irfanview is free of charge to downlaod at www.irfanview.com
Irfanview also lets you convert BMP files to JPEG or GIF which are smaller to send over the net using a dial up modem.
GIF is best suited for schematics, JPEG for pictures of your equipment:cool: |
|
|
|
