Answer from FOTOPIC about resizing

[JMAS]

This just to share what I received today from Jon Stockill. Not sure this is the right forum to do it.
More that 15 days ago I wrote to Fotopic about the resizing problem we all seem to be experiencing when posting pics from that site on here.

Here's Jon's explnation of the fenomena:
Oops, sorry, ignore that last email - it should've gone to a different user.

The problem you are experiencing is because the size of the photos aren't fixed - it depends on the resolution of the screen of the person viewing it - so if the forum is trying to force it to a particular size it's going to cause problems, since the picture won't necessarily be displayed at the same size as on the screen of the person who submitted it.

Jon

--
Fotopic Support Team - email help@fotopic.net
Online help-centre available at: http://fotopic.net/help/ Operational status info at: http://fotopic.net/help/status.php

For sure the solution is on Fotopic's end as all other sites don't have this problem. but I don't think they will look into it.

I'm going to try Photobucket, as I don't think this problem will be solved, and Photobucket users seem to have no problem at all.

Cheers,
Jaime

[Tom W]

Thanks for looking into that, Jaime. While I don't mind resizing my own images before saving (in fact, I almost never put a full image on the net), I have found that the forced resize to 500 pixels is a pretty drastic downsize and contains all kinds of "jaggies".

I'm considering a different hosting site as well.

[Scottes]

I really don't think this is really the answer.

I run my own web server and got curious due to another thread somewhere. I looked at my logs, and sniffed my network a bit. So I'm kinda guessing but it's an educated guess.

It looks like Pekka has a script that partially retrieves the image listed in the link. Once this script has retrieved enough of the image to determine the image size, it drops the connection. Now Pekka has the image size information, and if it's larger than 800 pixels wide or high, Pekka forces the image to be constrained to 800 pixels wide or high. This is done so that large images don't blow out the right margin when reading a thread - I've seen what happens when someone posts a 3000x2000 into a PHPBB thread... it ain't pretty.

Fotopic doesn't support this little partial retrieval trick. I think because the images aren't directly linked but are done through a CGI or PHP script. The ? in the link is a giveaway, for example: http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506124&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&no stamp=1

So Pekka's script can't retrieve the image directly to get the image size, so he safely forces the width to 800 pixels wide.

You'll also note that the link above contains the string "noresize=1" which indicates that the image shouldn't be resized when viewed. So this one, at least, does not depend "on the resolution of the screen of the person viewing it."

[PhotosGuy]

More that 15 days ago I wrote to Fotopic about the resizing problem...

I'm still waiting for my answer too, but I went to PhotoBucket last weekend & it works just fine!
http://img72.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/Car%20Stuff/

I always resize my pics, too, to between 500-600ppi & 72 dpi. I they're of something special, I don't sharpen them much either just to keep the 'hijack quality' down. :wink:

[Tom W]

I really don't think this is really the answer.

I run my own web server and got curious due to another thread somewhere. I looked at my logs, and sniffed my network a bit. So I'm kinda guessing but it's an educated guess.

It looks like Pekka has a script that partially retrieves the image listed in the link. Once this script has retrieved enough of the image to determine the image size, it drops the connection. Now Pekka has the image size information, and if it's larger than 800 pixels wide or high, Pekka forces the image to be constrained to 800 pixels wide or high. This is done so that large images don't blow out the right margin when reading a thread - I've seen what happens when someone posts a 3000x2000 into a PHPBB thread... it ain't pretty.

Fotopic doesn't support this little partial retrieval trick. I think because the images aren't directly linked but are done through a CGI or PHP script. The ? in the link is a giveaway, for example: http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506124&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&no stamp=1

So Pekka's script can't retrieve the image directly to get the image size, so he safely forces the width to 800 pixels wide.

You'll also note that the link above contains the string "noresize=1" which indicates that the image shouldn't be resized when viewed. So this one, at least, does not depend "on the resolution of the screen of the person viewing it."

Pekka downsizes it to 800; fotopic images are downsized to 500. That's a pretty small image. Regardless of whose fault it is, I really don't like things being shrunk down that small.

It is relatively new - when I first started with fotopic a couple of months ago, you could utilize all the size that Pekka allowed.

[Scottes]

Pekka downsizes it to 800; fotopic images are downsized to 500. That's a pretty small image. Regardless of whose fault it is, I really don't like things being shrunk down that small.

Pekka's script forces it to 800 wide if the script finds that the image is too wide. If the script can't find the size, the image is forced to 500 wide. This is true for ANY image with an unknown size, not just Fotopic's images. I'd guess that this saves upsizing images wider than they actually are, which might look even worse.

And the images aren't resized, they're forced to displat at a particular width. This is done with HTML img tags, ie; <img src="blahblah.jpg" width="500"> Normally the "width=" and "height=" would list the actual sizes, but since they're not known they're set to a certain to viewing space. The image never changes, just the size of the viewing area.


But I wholeheartedly agree that it stinks, regardless of who's "at fault." I think Pekka's little script saves a lot of ugliness.

[CyberDyneSystems]

What's curious is that I used to be able to do this with my fotopic account.. something changed..

But I have to say.. foftopics answer is bunk.. I'm sure Scott is closer to the truth here.. fotopic only resizes to individual screen/browser sizes if you let it .. I habve that "option" tunred off and it does not resize the images for your browser.

[shniks]

I too have this problem, and I can second what CyberDyne said, this problem is new, I didn't had the resizing issue a few months ago. I wonder what's changed. Hopefully someone clever will come up with a solution. Maybe Pekka can change the script, if its not too much work, to ensure fotopic images are not resized.
Photobucket is good, but it only allows files up to 250k, whereas fotopic allows files of any size.

[Scottes]

Maybe Pekka can change the script, if its not too much work, to ensure fotopic images are not resized.

That's impossible. The script can't retrieve the image, so it can't get the size, so it has to pick a size. So images will get resized unless they just happen to be 500 pixels wide.

Now maybe Pekka could change it so that Fotopic pics are resized to 650 wide or something - does Fotopic have a "standard" size?. 500 does seem a bit small. If the images get resized only a bit maybe it won't be so bad.

[JMAS]

My personal opinion is that we should try to keep Pekka's workload to the minimum. He already does so much by keeping this cozy place for all of us.

I'm sure Fotopic's owners also do what they can / know.

I'll keep my current gallery in Fotopic so that the photos posted here before can still be viewed, but I will post new photos to Photobucket.
From time to time I will try Fotopic, uploading in preview. Maybe they will change the settings some day. :wink:


have fun,
Jaime

[CyberDyneSystems]

Maybe Pekka can change the script, if its not too much work, to ensure fotopic images are not resized.

That's impossible. The script can't retrieve the image, so it can't get the size, so it has to pick a size. So images will get resized unless they just happen to be 500 pixels wide.

Now maybe Pekka could change it so that Fotopic pics are resized to 650 wide or something - does Fotopic have a "standard" size?. 500 does seem a bit small. If the images get resized only a bit maybe it won't be so bad.

I would say it is not really worth the trouble to alter the size that these images get changed to.. the point being that no matter what . even if it is making them larger.. the scaling causes them to look bad. I guess if it were a given size like 650 we could upload images at 650 wide.. but that leaves out a lot of flexibility.

I guess if posting here were my only reason for a gallery it would not matter.. but I do use my gallery for other stuff... and despite the recent HD crash they suffered.. they have done a dman fine job of offereing space and tools to maintain it for FREE! :)