Are big pictures in threads annoying? Vote yes and get a free half bottle of beer. S&H only $99.

BLF Site-related Issues
23

You know, I’m pretty sure I got stuck on a blind date with her once, back in the day. I’ll never forget that laugh.

PTSD is real!

30% size using !IMAGE URL!


[/quote]

24

You dated AOC? :person_facepalming:

25

Yes images should fit the page.

You can just hover over thumbnails and links with this greasemonkey script

The C01 is looking wellworn :+1:

26

For the Advanced Post Editor crowd the fit to width option is not available, but of course it is easy to use a standard maximum moderate width. I usually select around 640 pixels, maybe a little bit more. 540 pixels ensures an always fit in my experience.

27

I believe one can always use the Simple Post Editor to insert the image with the size limit set, then switch to the Advance Post Editor. Doing that will result in the need to edit what has been typed already as some formatting is removed with the change.

28

You can set image size in the advanced editor too, but in a bit weird way: instead of setting width to a certain amount of pixels, instead fill in a percentage in the width field, i.e “70%” , then empty the height field.

29

Good to know. :+1:

30

Yes! Very nice, djozz.

31

I rarely notice long load times, but layout-breaking pics are a thing. Use max-width.

32

So if I upload a large pic to imgur and copy and paste the link in blf using the insert image option then click on relative width and set to 50% does blf have to resize the image ever time it’s viewed and the page loads slow?
This is how I do it to make sure the image doesn’t take up the whole page. If it’s slowing down browsing for some members I’ll resize the image in imgur first before linking.

I vote yes, so where’s my free beer?

33

Most people won’t because their DSL, cable, whatever is fast enough. But when on cell data those big files gobble data unnecessarily. Sometimes when I can see the images “painted” line by line I could scream.

34

The beer is free. $14.99 prepaid for shipping and handling. :money_mouth_face: …… :confounded:

I don’t know about others, the issue I have is the size in the thread. What set this off was a seller posted these enormous pictures that I kept scrolling and scrolling….then hit these tiny posts.

If people put “100” then it’s post width and that should be fine. For me…but others may have data and speed issues on their phones.

35

I knew there was a catch regarding the free beer☹️

36

So, when using that relative width dialog, you’ll get something like:

!https://i.imgur.com/3rZNm2r.jpg!:https://i.imgur.com/3rZNm2r.jpg

But if you just want to make sure it doesn’t break the layout, change it to:

!{max-width: 100%}https://i.imgur.com/3rZNm2r.jpg!:https://i.imgur.com/3rZNm2r.jpg
37

Yup.

I’m no programmer but it appears that 100% represents 100% of the normal post box width. Big or small.

Here is an example of a pic that is very small but is full post box width….13.8 kb.

Same size image….different percentages.

100%

50%

25%

5%

38

The important distinction is that max-width won’t stretch the image if the screen is large, while width will.

39

I’m not sure what you are saying.

See my example above. Choosing the width controls how much of the posting box it fills, no matter what the actual picture size.

40

It's a shame max-width doesn't seem to be an option if you're using the Advanced Post Editor.

41

It does, or so djozz said. See the below example at a 200% 103% O:) width:

^:)

Edited: reduced the 200% annoyance to 103%. Setting it ridiculously high causes havoc you must know. :-D

Sat, 03/23/2019 - 11:08; Sat, 03/23/2019 - 18:00

42

So for the “any size” people I should PM them a 335MP 296MB image? (34,485x9741 pixels)

The above is the full sized version of this…