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
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…
DB…I have a spectacular view like this from my inherited house in the old country. Too bad the house is over a century old and hardly anybody lives in the village.
In fact……where is the picture from?
That photo was taken from just below Nogal Peak looking towards Ski Apache in the mountains just North/Northwest of Alto, New Mexico. It’s actually 43 images at 18MP in 3 tiers, taken with a Canon 7D and 24-105mm lens at 105mm.
I envy you, the view there was breathtaking, my wife and I enjoyed it immensely. The town of Nogal on the North side of Nogal Pass is only 96 people, only even on the map because the Post Office has been there since 1880.
To illustrate max-width, here’s an image of two Emisar D18s. It’s 619px wide, so if you view it on a typical phone, it will be wider than the post panel, or the phone’s screen. Viewed on a desktop, it’s considerably narrower than the space available.
First, with max-width: 100%
And now with width: 100%
Both fill 100% of the space on a narrow screen, but the second is stretched on a wider screen.
I always put 95. I absolutely cannot stand when people ignore scaling their image. Maybe the webmaster can set some kind of default width of 100? That way this catches mistakes. But yeah, I also think it’s painfully negligent and inconsiderate for people to embed images greater than a couple megabytes. 15Mb? That’s OBNOXIOUS.
In my user stylesheet (managed with Stylus) for BLF, I have
img {max-width: 100%;}
which means no image is allowed to be larger than its container. This could be added to the forum CSS.
Nothing to envy….in fact it’s pitiful. It’s in the old country and maybe 10 people live in the village in winter. 100 in the summer. If I don’t pour money into it, it’s going to fall.
Every time i go back, I check up on it, but never slept a night in my life in it. But the view….oh God. It’s feeds the eyes and the soul.
Tell you what, free rent if you fix the roof. Lol
I see no difference in two tablets, one phone and desktop. Turn devices sideways, still nothing.
I agree, and I'll send a link to Mr. Admin so that maybe he can do that for all of us. 
Perhaps they all have screens narrower than about 1180px. Here’s what it looks like with the window wider than that:
4k on desktop
1440 x 2560 phone
Maybe your set up?
+1
This seems like the most universal way to improve things, and should probably be in the default CSS.
Also, I just added this to the script I use to generate the markup for adding images. I had been doing 800px images, but now it’ll do 800px which also scales down on small screens. A normal width=“100%” hint is annoying on large screens, but the max-width method can improve things on small screens without creating extra problems on big screens. 
Short on cash at the moment…can you consume said 1/2 bottle of beer and let me know how refreshing it is??
I can do 3 easy payments of $1.99.
I thought the beer was a ploy, he was buying you had to come to the cache site to drink it… his place that needs work. Figured he’d gather a crowd on the beer premise then put everybody to work. 
This forum “speaks” two languages, and I mean the Advanced Post Editor. I use no other due to the Simple Editor's unability to handle special character links.
The max-width thing does not work in the advanced post editor, or I do not seem to make it work. The advanced editor may thank some improvement. As I have said elsewhere this could get improvement with unification. Concerning conversion Simple to Advanced is incorrect, and Advanced to Simple is hopeless.
Onto what matters: the max-width thing is not really necessary for those who care to check their image's size. Images up to ≈640 pixels can be left unscaled, while the remaining can use width x%.
:-)
It's possible to use max-width with the advanced post editor. Just click the "advanced" tab in the image dialog and add it in the style section.
I always never have deliberate ulterior motives.
Always be afraid trust a flasholic bearing chains gifts.
Thanks for the tip zak.wilson, never used the advanced tab anyways. I guess some editor documentation would be of help.
^:)
