# Photos: RESIZE, please



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

Please, PLEASE resize photos to a good size. Unnecessarily huge photos that fit on nobody's screen and take a long time to load are just annoying. And it's *so easy* to shrink them! The popular TinyPic for example simply offers it right in the upload form so there's no excuse to not use it:







Their "Message Board" size of 640x480 is probably best for most pictures here. Go smaller if that's still large enough, go larger if you really have a good reason, e.g., it's a sharp high quality photo showing small details of an interesting complex puzzle.

Also, using the [noparse]


Spoiler



...


[/noparse] tag might be a good idea if you want to show many or large pictures. Then they don't make the page huge and people visiting a page again just to read a new reply don't have to load all pictures again. Notice that I do put the below examples in spoiler tags but I didn't with the above picture showing the TinyPic form. That's because it's just one picture and it's quite small (both screen size and file size) so in that case, it would be unnecessarily annoying to spoiler it and to require people to open the spoiler. Plus, spoilering takes some screen size itself. Whether you should spoiler your image(s) depends on the situation, it's a trade-off, just use some common sense. Same goes for *how* to spoiler, like each image in its own spoiler, or all images in one spoiler.

Bad examples:


Spoiler















Good versions:


Spoiler


----------



## kprox1994 (Mar 6, 2010)

This should be stickied.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Mar 6, 2010)

Holy shiz. You are awesome man.
It also is insulting to us small-laptop-screen users to have to scroll down a lot just to see the image.
Why didn't I make a thread of this?


----------



## AndyRoo789 (Mar 6, 2010)

So true.


----------



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> It also is insulting to us small-laptop-screen users to have to scroll down a lot just to see the image.



Or having to scroll left and right and left and right and left and right just to read a post on a page that contains a huge unspoilered picture too wide for the actual screen, making all posts wide. That's vandalism.


----------



## LewisJ (Mar 6, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> Holy shiz. You are awesome man.
> It also is insulting to us small-laptop-screen users to have to scroll down a lot just to see the image.
> Why didn't I make a thread of this?



800x480 eeepc 701 ftw >_>

Definitely a good reminder for every*daniel0731ex*one on these forums.


----------



## JBCM627 (Mar 6, 2010)

Perhaps PJK/Dan could just make an option in the user CP for this? Doesn't even have to be an option... just something as simple as adding max-width=50% to images using css could work.


----------



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

Same deal in ImageShack, here's an example of an even larger picture:

Bad:


Spoiler










Good:


Spoiler


----------



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

JBCM627 said:


> Perhaps PJK/Dan could just make an option in the user CP for this? Doesn't even have to be an option... just something as simple as adding max-width=50% to images using css could work.



That could help a bit, yes.

Wouldn't reduce the load time, though, plus it takes the browsers extra time to resize, plus browsers don't resize as nicely (they care more about speed than quality), plus scrolling over browser-resized huge pictures is slow in my experience. So even if the forum limits the size by telling the browser, properly resizing the image file will still be a good idea.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Mar 6, 2010)

In the image in the post above, what is that and where is it from?


----------



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> In the image in the post above



Um, there's more than one. Little hint which one you mean?

Oh well, I'll make a guess:
http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17565&highlight=scroll+ctrl


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Mar 6, 2010)

Yep. And that one. And seeing those images just baffled me, cause those pictures were HUGE.


----------



## Stefan (Mar 6, 2010)

LewisJ said:


> Definitely a good reminder for every*daniel0731ex*one on these forums.



In Daniel's defense, though: I think he mostly posts images here that were posted by others on the mf8 forum (and they're usually smaller than that). So it's mainly *their* fault. Resizing them afterwards would also make the mf8 logo watermark smaller, giving a reason to not do it. When I used one of these as an example, it was just because of its size and because I found it quickly, not to blame this particular instance or Daniel. The request of this thread is mainly for original posters of photos.


----------



## fundash (Mar 6, 2010)

DEFINITLY should be stickied!


----------



## Muesli (Mar 6, 2010)

IMHO Spoiler tags work just fine. People need to be educated on them.


----------



## IamWEB (Mar 6, 2010)

*thread is stickied at this point*

This post also maybe feel that the option to close a spoiler could be at the end of the spoiler area, should you open it to fine a large amount amount of data and don't want scroll back through them to close it.

~IamThinking


----------



## Lucas Garron (Mar 7, 2010)

How about doing the following, which I've seen in some forums?

Dynamically display images with a limit size, and provide an in-place resize button in Javascript. Should be doable, but I don't know the API.


----------



## hyunchoi98 (Mar 7, 2010)

~Phoenix Death~ said:


> Holy shiz. You are awesome man.
> It also is insulting to us small-laptop-screen users to have to scroll down a lot just to see the image.
> Why didn't I make a thread of this?



I have a big 21.5" mac (not trying to brag or anything) 
and even I have a VERY HARD TIME seeing it.


----------



## Thomas09 (Mar 7, 2010)

Is this good?




Stupid commerce assignment made me lose.


----------



## ariasamie (May 25, 2010)

> The popular TinyPic for example simply offers it right in the upload form so there's no excuse to not use it


it is blocked in my country, Iran!


----------



## Sharkretriver (Jul 7, 2010)

Is 1024X768 too big? (PC screen quality on my camera) :confused:


----------



## irontwig (Jul 7, 2010)

Sharkretriver said:


> Is 1024X768 too big? (PC screen quality on my camera) :confused:



Yes, and you probably don't need that high of a resolution for most things anyway.


----------



## Sharkretriver (Jul 7, 2010)

Then I'll just switch to TV quality (640X480)


----------



## DarthCuber (Jan 6, 2012)

I'm sorry if it has been mentioned before, but there's one usefull thingy called IrfanView.
It's free to download, and it's awesome, since you can resize a whole bunch of pictures at once, at desired size.

Pros:
- you can resize a bunch of pictures at once
- it's FREE
- it will take you less time to upload pictures
- it's unbelieveably simple to work with

Cons:
I couldn't find any...

If anyone here wants to know how it works, I'll be glad to explain it.

Option No.2

Upload your pictures on Flickr. It's site hosted by Yahoo, and I'm pretty sure it's among the top 30
most visited websites. You can uplaod videos and pictures. Registration is free.

Now, why is it so much better than Imageshack, TinyPic, and other lame sites for uploading pictures?
It's very simple:
You can upload picture/video at any size, and Flickr will offer you different sizes of picture to post on forum.
(thumbnail, 640x480, 800x600 and some other sizes)

Once again, I'll be glad to explain how the whole thing works, if anyone is interested.

EDIT:
@*irontwig*: I beg to differ. Higher resoultion is very usefull when you're editing pictures in photo-editing
software. Since photo-editing software could be used to make the picture sharper, it's definately a good thing.


----------



## Stefan (Jan 6, 2012)

DarthCuber said:


> Now, why is it so much better than Imageshack, TinyPic, and other lame sites for uploading pictures?
> It's very simple:
> You can upload picture/video at any size, and Flickr will offer you different sizes of picture to post on forum.
> (thumbnail, 640x480, 800x600 and some other sizes)


 
I almost never want to post different sizes. TinyPic etc are perfectly fine for most cases.



DarthCuber said:


> @*irontwig*: I beg to differ.



Yes, in the sense that you're talking about something different. He probably wasn't talking about editing but about what's posted here, and he's absolutely right about that.


----------



## Kirjava (Apr 22, 2013)

Big images are automagically resized now.

Possible reason to unsticky, but loading times are still affected. Is this still an issue these days?


----------



## Stefan (Aug 12, 2013)

elrog said:


> why don't we have a thread just for trying out the forum tools.



We did have the sandbox thread. Just realized it was closed, though. No idea why.

But you can always "preview" a post, no?


----------

