My monitor is 2560x1440. I think the 1024 image is acceptable and 1600 is the sweet spot.
Personally I’d prefer smaller thumbnails that just link to the full image. I don’t want to be loading a crap ton of images when I open a thread but I also don’t want a thread without images. Thumbnails give me a good idea of which images I want to see and then I can choose to open just those in full size.
Of course, the issue IS it makes no difference if you store it off site and still use the full size image, but resize (on here) limited - it STILL loads in the WHOLE full size image - this, and this alone is the issue.
To combat it you need to resize the image on your pc and post THAT on here, then LINK it to the FULL size image in off site in storage - then this site doesn’t have to load in the huge size.
Sadly that means hosting 2 versions - 1 to view here, and another, different URL for the full fat one.
Any pages that take a long time to load (because of pix), I just back out and don’t bother reading anything. I hate having a page pinwheeling forever while huge pic after huge pic loads and keeps shifting the display so you can’t even f’n read a word before it shifts the viewscreen again.
Posting a fullsize 24Mpx pic but doing the whole “width=50%” thing does not help, as it’s still loading the huge honkin’ pic anyway.
Yep.
All the images are sized to take up 95% of the frame. I’m just linking to different size images from Flickr.
These are different res. that Flikr picks for download options.
I upload to Flikr at 1280p. My uphill speed is way slower and I don’t want to grow old and die waiting on full sized images.
Then I link to that or smaller in my POSTs. Depending on how wide I want the image to be.
Usually 1024. Sometimes 800 if I’m doing part of the frame or side by side.
I’ll do another run with them all sized to say 600 pixels (?) using the BLF software.
To see how they look.
But as you say, the linked size will still control the amount of data being pulled down (I believe)
All the Best,
Jeff
27” 1920x1080 - though I occasionally view things on my second monitor, a 21” 1080P that is portrait style.
1600 is the first (smallest?) of your images that doesn’t look like steaming hot garbage to me.
I think the best solution to this - and unfortunately, it’s a lot of effort for the poster - is to use a low-ish quality “thumbnail” image that is itself a link to a high-quality version.
I got old and shaky, then came down with a nerve malady that made it worse.
Using a fast shutter speed or tripod for daylight is my trick.
Or for my indoor shots (which is mostly all I do here). I use off camera flash.
Nothing like a 1/5000 second pop to freeze things.
All the Best,
Jeff
Many photo hosting sites automatically generate links to smaller size images, so you only need to load the high quality one. For example, this is how it works with imgur:
On my current display, your images get scaled down to 1,245px × 831px, which means anything higher than this resolution would be a waste. Also, as others pointed out, let’s not confuse resolution with compression. You can have a 1600x1200 image that takes up less space/bandwidth than a 640x480 image if you set the compression high enough.
Excessively reducing image resolution or quality is ridiculous. Enjoying a good internet connection is very affordable nowadays, and devices are not a problem. Most of the time I browse this forum with my smartphone. However, of course I do choose how my smartphone operates and how do I want to see content or my apps to work. I always enforce zoom and use my smartphone, a 1920 × 1080 device, mostly in landscape.
Can't say I like what they have done with all newer generation smartphones, their aspect ratios are all beyond 1:2 which means their screen heights are less than half their width when in landscape, this limits their effective, useful screen height. It already is annoying to see the limited available screen height (in a 16:9 device!) when you face stupid websites with sticky bars and other unnecessary stuff on screen.
This fashion of a large screen to body ratio has lead to this shite. Screens are now more useless than ever due to the very out of proportion aspect ratios of nowadays. Bring me back 8:5 - 16:10 please…
Or a tripod / variant of a tripod. Those bendy ones are particularly helpful. This one is Joby and quite expensive (depending on budget) - you can get cheaper copies like anything, but they won’t be quite so good.
They fit on to just about any object, branches etc
Is there no software of solution that could automate the creation of pictures, optimize them, uploading them, creating thumbnails and then give you the correct code? If not - why not?
Most photo hosting sites do it anyway, it’s an option - just people either don’t know, or can’t do it (don’t understand the info - is confusing if you don’t know web photo terminology)
It is described above, and also imgbb do the same thing.