CheshireCat Posted October 1, 2015 Share #1 Posted October 1, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Even though this thread is for showcasing this very nice lens, may I remind all of our current size constraints for images to be posted here: The maximum image size is 1280 x 1280 pixels and with a file size not exceeding 500 kB per Post. This applies to pictures included from off site as well. Thanks to all for complying. Interesting... can't the server check uploaded images ? It's just a line of code. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 1, 2015 Posted October 1, 2015 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here Permissible picture size (OT from APO 50 images). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pop Posted October 1, 2015 Share #2 Posted October 1, 2015 Interesting... can't the server check uploaded images ? It's just a line of code. As I've said above: This applies to pictures included from off site as well. The server does check and rescale uploaded images, not always to the advantage of the image, I must say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 1, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted October 1, 2015 As I've said above: This applies to pictures included from off site as well. Disagree. They visualize perfectly fine on all my devices. Welcome to the 21st century ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 2, 2015 Share #4 Posted October 2, 2015 Thanks for causing me to formulate this in yet another way such that as many members as possible can understand it. Uploading an image file which is too large (which has more than 500 or 1000 megabytes, as the case may be) will not succeed as the forum detects the file size before uploading. Uploading an image file of the proper file size which contains an image which is either too tall or too wide will upload just fine, but the server will then shrink the image to the prescribes size which may not help the appearance of the image. When you provide a link only to an image file which lies on another computer, the forum checks neither the file size nor the dimensions of the image. Nevertheless, the forum rules apply to those images as well, even when the forum lacks the means to enforce them. You may want to discuss the forum rules which impose those limits. If so, please use a fresh thread in the proper subforum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted October 2, 2015 Share #5 Posted October 2, 2015 Disagree. They visualize perfectly fine on all my devices. Welcome to the 21st century ! Lucky you. Many of us are using the Lynx browser on a teletype. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted October 2, 2015 Lucky you. Many of us are using the Lynx browser on a teletype. Yeah, that seems the case given the nonsense forum rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 3, 2015 Share #7 Posted October 3, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, you know, there are people living outside the large agglomerations. You would not believe the bandwidths they have to put up with. Also, there appear to be some people, possibly Guests only, who knows, who try and access the forum using mobile devices. One has to make allowances, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 3, 2015 Share #8 Posted October 3, 2015 Posting simple links to larger pictures stored on our sites or elsewhere if not forbidden by the forum rules as i understand them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 3, 2015 Share #9 Posted October 3, 2015 Posting simple links to larger pictures stored on our sites or elsewhere if not forbidden by the forum rules as i understand them. That's certainly true. The issue is that for some users including huge images is tantamount to a denial of service. The user agent will hang for a fairly long time if not forever, if the connection is a bit shaky. If you can choose whether to fetch a large image from a server or not, that ought not to be an issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted October 3, 2015 Share #10 Posted October 3, 2015 Interesting... can't the server check uploaded images ? It's just a line of code. It is a simple piece of code, but regardless, the image must be loaded to learn the real dimensions (before CSS mangling), no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 3, 2015 Share #11 Posted October 3, 2015 It is a simple piece of code, but regardless, the image must be loaded to learn the real dimensions (before CSS mangling), no? The uploaded images are indeed checked; the file size is checked on the client before uploading, the dimensions of the image are checked on the server. What's not checked are images linked to. That appears to be kind of pointless as the server has no way of telling when the file referred to is changed. After all, the links are just passed on by the server; it's the client which resolves them and fetches the picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 3, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted October 3, 2015 The problem here is that the site is providing a subpar experience to 99% users because of 1% users having subpar connections. This can and should be resolved at the user-agent, i.e. browser plugns, et cetera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted October 3, 2015 Share #13 Posted October 3, 2015 93.75 per cent of all statistics are freely invented. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted October 4, 2015 Share #14 Posted October 4, 2015 The problem here is that the site is providing a subpar experience to 99% users because of 1% users having subpar connections. So what is par? . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 4, 2015 Share #15 Posted October 4, 2015 Indeed and why should not we respect those imaginary 1%? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 6, 2015 Share #16 Posted October 6, 2015 The problem here is that the site is providing a subpar experience to 99% users because of 1% users having subpar connections. Oh I'm sorry is this a 5-minute argument or the full half-hour? Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.