REMINDER

Moved from another thread:

Vini wrote:
Shame about posting rules though, i enjoy looking at these larger pics. I thought someone as good as yourself where aload this.

There are no exceptions. Not even for Pekka.


All please read the Image Posting Rules. Please ensure You understand them and follow them.


Thanks.

Ok, i see your point Tommy and no disrespect to you. I honestly thought that someone like Brian could do this. After all, he has made over 6,000 posts, he does reply to almost everones threads, him and others like him make this forum very very interesting to us begginers. He has certainly influenced me and probably many others too.
Just thought i would explain why i thought there was an exception in his case........SORRY.

The problem with exceptions is that with 65.000+ members it would be a nightmare to admnister those and other members would ask why can he when I can't. Much better with same rule for all.

Don't take this question as an agressive act but I'd like to know why posting pics larger than 800*800 is prohibited ?
I understand this rule for attached images as this kind of images are located on the forum server but when it is just a link, where is the problem, if the header of the thread contains a warning for those don't have a high speed connection ?

If there is still lot of people who have 56K connexion, at least why not allow till 1024 ? Just asking.

Yacine.

It is not a bandwidth question. It is for readability. With max 800 pixels even users with only 1024x768 display will have a good experience reading. If the photos are larger than 800 pixels it extends the width of the thread and if posts before or after contain long lines of text with no hardreturn it will also be required to scroll to read those posts in addition to scrolling to view the entire photo.

Sorry, forget my question.
I just read the new posting rules and it seems that posting larger pics than 800*800 is allowed when it is a link.
So no problem.

Yep linking You can link to 100.000x100.000 images if You want to It is imbedding that can only be max 800x800.

What would be great is to provide a mean to allow to specify 2 URLs when posting an image : 1 url for the 800*800 max embeded image and another url for the same image but with a larger size. The larger image could be then displayed in a separate window when the user click on the embeded image.

There should be also a mean to indicate that a larger version of the embeded image is available.

What You can is use small thumbnails and link them to the larger image.

Like described here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=157706

It doesn't work only for thmbnails but also for 800*800 pics. Wonderful !!!

Test: Click on the following pic to see a 1680*1050 version.

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Yep doing it like this would make all happy.

Yes it does take a few seconds longer to add the extra linking but who cares about that.

Could you not do a 800*800 image and a URL tag to the larger version

Dave

dpastern wrote:
Could you not do a 800*800 image and a URL tag to the larger version

Dave

Yep that was precisely what yb98 did.

I run a forum with the same software as what potn is run.

I can fully understand the reasons why larger images are not permitted within threads. It can distort the 'page', thus making the reader scroll from side to side which, inevitably, becomes rather irritating after a while.

Just my 2cents worth

I dont have a problem with oversized images within threads, so i have to stretch the page to view them fully, i dont mind as there usually worth it, plus there is no strain on the database as there hotlinked anyway, one thing i have noticed though which is limiting the posting area is oversized avatars - everyone should stick to the 80x80 limit whoever they are imo ...