A lot of people have been asking for this so now we've made it happen, so enjoy! These forums will largely self-regulate, just be sure to follow the simple guideline about image size limitations, and keep images in the right forum.

Have fun, looking forward to some great photography and video discussions!!!

Well done WZ and to David for implimenting the changes so quickly. I'm sure we'll see many great images and learn a lot from one another whether we're family snap shooters or serious amatuers.

That's about the only part of the guidelines that I find a little confusing. Is it implying that you must use thumbs OR abide by the image size restrictions? Or is it implying that we must limit the images we hyperlink from our own hosting solution?

If it's the latter then great, if it's the former then I don't quite understand the limitations. I usually save my web files at nothing less than quality 8 which results in a landscape orientation 800px image being between 120 and 180kb. A 650px portrait orientation being about the same and a 1000px wide/panorama being between 200 and 250kb.

Pixel dimensions are optimised for viewing at 1024x768 which should be web standard these days and file sizes are within the limitations of a lot of photo sites which actually host the images.

Little confused but the change is great

Hi Jake, image restrictions only apply to actual images displayed. Text-only links (URL's) to images can be any size, doesn't matter as they are not on display here. The only reason the restriction on displayed images exists is for the dialup users, plus in the chase season a lot of chasers log in from dialup accounts or mobile comms whilst on the road, so a happy medium is needed.

So, images actually displayed need to be thumbs or kept with file size and physical size limits, with a link to higher res version if you want.
Note also that people should still post images in Breaking Weather as they want, there's no intention to change that at all, in case anyone was wondering.

Great thread guys, was definitely needed!

TS

Thanks for clarifying that David, champion effort guys and girls :cheers:

Yes argeed that this was a step forward, thanks to all involved. Now for the pics...


Mike.

wow! awsum stuff guys..was definantly needed! so many awsum photographers out there! needed to b achnoledged more!

Glad to finally see a photography forum, seeing as though so much of the weather we report on relies on photographs.
(Also great timing, my camera arrived at the post office today, pick it up tomorrow and actually get it on thursday )

:cheers: Will

Blue Mountians Photography

Great idea guys well done.

David

Have fun with this all!!!!
This should be good

:cheers:
Ray :p

... Now to convince my long suffering wife about that new lens

Ohhhh PLEASE get rid of the stupid size limit, or at least make it reasonable with this new forum- say max 80kb per image, no more than 300kb per post ... I'm sick to death of having to double click just to see what the photo really looks like.

If you think about it, people on dial up need to do exactly the same thing if they want to look at the pics- you can't get a real feel for a pic by a thumbnail- so there is no time saving ...

IMHO, it is a stupid rule pandering to the lowest common denominator, for no real reason.

yeah i agree with CB a bit here although clicking and opening is not as big an issue for me, i would sometimes just like to be able to load a screen and see some nice crisp images without having to go thru all that rigmarole again

is anyone on this forum actually on dialup still? i'd imagine it to be a fairly small percentage

kudos for starting this thread up though, im especially looking forward to gaining some more knowledge in photoshop techniques!

I disagree. I think thumbnails are very effective in posts with multiple images and make life much easier for this reluctant dial-up user. Even if I'm on broadband I appreciate the extra effort as thumbs allow you to pick and choose what you want to examine in more detail.

I personally can't be bothered looking at threads involving large images when I'm restricted to dial-up speeds.

I agree with Andrew. I have broadband (1.5mb download)but i have gone over my download limit once (you get slowed to dial-up speed!) and trying to load a one 300kb image is a pain!

yep me too.. I wont be checking out these threads if the images are any larger...

Good stuff having a photo section. Keep the size limit tho. If broadband is so quick it won't take long to download. Loading a full page of pics takes me more than 10 mins and that annoys the crap outta me.
:cheers: adon

But my point is, if you really want to see the photos, you are going to have to open the thumbnails anyway, and often the thumbnail will point to a larger image than would be displayed here ... so where is the time saving? Infact it just takes longer?

Also some people here need a lesson in optimising their files for the web, and some better hosting providers- a lot of the delay in downloading images is because the files are over the size they should be and the hosting provider is crap.

Here is an example ... looking at this thumbnail - it looks like a boring photo which I wouldn't bother looking at.


But the medium res inage is a lovely photo which users on dialup would miss if they didn't click the thumbnail ... (only 67kb- don't have a child)


what ends up happening because of this, is that dialup users just click on every thumbnail, or don't click on some thumbnails and miss out on a good photo ...

hhmmmm on the other hand the dial up sufferers (not users) start loading a 2mb page of images that is taking foooorever and get jack of it (as I used to when on dial up) and give up and browse somewhere else and see NO photos. So whats worse, thumbs or nothing.
For this reason its fair to keep the posted images to no larger than 50kb or post thumbs.
Then there is choice for all

I think the current size limit is entirely appropriate for a forum. I can't imagine anyone being so impatient that a simple click on a thumbnail or a text link is considered an imposition.

The difference Cb@SZ is that using thumbnails or links gives the user a choice. If large images are embedded in the posts then you're going to have to wait for them to load whether you want to see them or not.