Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

was:Something different...., now: posters small images pls!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:14 am    Post subject: was:Something different...., now: posters small images pls! Reply with quote
...

Last edited by kds315* on Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:59 pm; edited 5 times in total


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice, but the images are too large. I can't read the long line of text.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Resized, but quite some visible quality loss now.
Does your browser not allow scrolling?


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Resized, but quite some visible quality loss now.

Thank you Klaus. A long time ago we had a poll to decide the maximum image size for posting that suits everyone. It was actually agreed to adopt 800 as the maximum width, but in fact 900 doesn't seem to cause anyone any scrolling problems. Please appreciate too, that large images can take a very long time to download for people who aren't using a fast connection.

If you have an image that you feel has to be displayed in a large size then the rule is that you either post a direct link or a smaller image with a clickable link to the large one.

Quote:
Does your browser not allow scrolling?

Yes, but when I scroll to see the end of the line of text part of the image disappears off the other side. Smile

I am sorry to have to pick on you - so many others post over-large images as well. Apparently nothing can be done to automatically restrict the size of images and there are no instructions anywhere to remind people about it. Most new posters don't know about it. Orio has occasionally mentioned it, but in general the moderators don't seem to be concerned, so mostly it's been me that has to complain, which doesn't please me whatsoever, believe me. It shouldn't be my responsibility at all.

From now on I am going to copy and paste this message every time I see a large image until either a) I get kicked off the forum or b) the message gets through.[/img]


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
It was actually agreed to adopt 800 as the maximum width, but in fact 900 doesn't seem to cause anyone any scrolling problems.


Actually, the vote said 900, if I remember correctly.

EDIT: I did remember correctly, for once Smile
http://forum.mflenses.com/ballot-poll-size-of-limit-restriction-t1002.html#8655


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK, since this seems to be the major concern...

Voilá, and the "problem" is solved...


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
peterqd wrote:
It was actually agreed to adopt 800 as the maximum width, but in fact 900 doesn't seem to cause anyone any scrolling problems.


Actually, the vote said 900, if I remember correctly.

EDIT: I did remember correctly, for once Smile
http://forum.mflenses.com/ballot-poll-size-of-limit-restriction-t1002.html#8655


Yes, you're right. I was thinking of the first vote:
http://forum.mflenses.com/poll-embedded-pictures-size-restriction-t789,highlight,size+limit.html


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:

Thank you Klaus. A long time ago we had a poll to decide the maximum image size for posting that suits everyone. It was actually agreed to adopt 800 as the maximum width, but in fact 900 doesn't seem to cause anyone any scrolling problems.


I hadn't realized. Problem is that Flickr gives you either 500 or 1024, so I tended to post the 1024 version here (and didn't get complaints).

Quote:
Quote:
Does your browser not allow scrolling?

Yes, but when I scroll to see the end of the line of text part of the image disappears off the other side. Smile


The impact on line length is, to e, more troubling than the large images themselves. But wiki and forum style sites tend not to offer much control over that ...


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
OK, since this seems to be the major concern...

Voilá, and the "problem" is solved...


Well, now we can't see them at all, either inline or as links.
I thought the (resized down slightly) ones were fine, myself.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Why bother if the "rules" seem to attract higher interest than the content of the post??


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Why bother if the "rules" seem to attract higher interest than the content of the post??


I suppose the majority of forum browsers use IE, probably with auto image-resize turned on, in which case a large image isn't much of a problem, but FF doesn't do it and I've only now found a plugin that helps. Anyway, the result of a too-wide image is that the line formatting extends to the width of the image, which rapidly becomes a pita.
It's not so much 'rules', it's just a bit of give and take. Anyway, what was the picture again? I've forgotten.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Peter wrote:
Orio has occasionally mentioned it, but in general the moderators don't seem to be concerned, so mostly it's been me that has to complain, which doesn't please me whatsoever, believe me


Dr Klaus wrote:
Why bother if the "rules" seem to attract higher interest than the content of the post??


This forum have about no rules and the quote of Peter "moderators don't seem to be concerned" show it clearly
Peter concern is more for slow internet users than for himself.

Please Dr Klaus, show us your picture. We have more interest to it than for the rules.


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It's also here, newest entry, click on image brings up a large image:
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I could see the images, and I found them an interesting subject, but alas I have no scientific background on the subject, so I can not make any appropriate comment. Sad


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
It's also here, newest entry, click on image brings up a large image:
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/


A revelation to me is how the pollen stands out - does the bee see in UV?


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
interesting subject and very detailed image !
bee interest me not only to photography them
of course Dr Klaus work is quite difficult for me to fully understand
it is quite detailed but some background is still necessary


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bees and other insects can see UV, but we can't. But we see red, what bee's can't see, this is why I synthesized what I call "simulated bee vision", more is here:
http://photographyoftheinvisibleworld.blogspot.com/search?q=bee+vision


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
Why bother if the "rules" seem to attract higher interest than the content of the post??

I think that's unnecessary. I apologised for having to remind you about the size limit and I thanked you when you posted the resized images. That could have ended the matter.

Also you are misunderstanding and making too much of my use of the word "rule". I didn't mean a law or a regulation as you seem to think, I used it in the the way I've always done, meaning normal procedure or customary - e.g. "I sometimes drive, but as a rule I catch the bus". I could alternatively have said "It is customary to either post a direct link..." and it would have meant the same. I wish I had.

Farside wrote:
I suppose the majority of forum browsers use IE, probably with auto image-resize turned on, in which case a large image isn't much of a problem, but FF doesn't do it and I've only now found a plugin that helps. Anyway, the result of a too-wide image is that the line formatting extends to the width of the image, which rapidly becomes a pita.
It's not so much 'rules', it's just a bit of give and take. Anyway, what was the picture again? I've forgotten.

Yes, I use IE and I have image resize turned on. When I download or view an image directly, IE does indeed resize it and an icon appears to view at the original size if I wish. But when I'm viewing images posted on the forum, IE doesn't resize them and they remain at their original size. If there's a plugin or a setting to change this PLEASE, let me know! And even worse, the RH edge of the text is actually formatted quite some distance beyond the edge of the image, so even if I can see a whole picture, long lines of text don't wrap and extend beyond the edge of the screen. As you say, a royal PITA! Smile

Last edited by peterqd on Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:59 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry Peter, I'm unaware of any IE plugins at all - it's not something I've looked for since I've been using Opera and Firefox for years now. If you want to give FF a try, the plugin for that is called Image Zoom, about halfway down this page...
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search?q=toggle+images&cat=all

The main add-ons page is here...
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/


PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, thanks! I didn't realise there were so many add-ons for FF. I tried it when I was using a Mac at work, but not enough to really get into it. I'll give it a try.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1