[Link]
| Author | Post |
|---|---|
jayo  All-Star Member  2117 Posts 7/04 |  Posted - Feb 4 2012 : 1:41PMMaybe it's me, but it seems like lately I've been seeing a lot more huge photos being posted in threads. Not just the threads that are just about pictures, but ordinary conversation threads. They're so large, i.e. wide, that they exceed my browser width. Since text wrapping adjusts with the widest size, it means I end up having to scroll sideways just to read posts. Good example here: Where Should the Load Go. That one big photo fucks up everything else for me. I was wondering if it's possible to set it up so that oversize photos automatically scale down to fit screen width, rather than the other way around? If not, perhaps oversize photos could be forced-scaled to a pre-set maximum size (e.g. 80 hex 600), and the user could click on the photo to see it in "full" size? Maybe it's just me. But I'm guessing if I'm annoyed by it, others also are. [Link] |
| Leyden Senior Member The people have spoken. I'm a nitpicking dick. Woo! 8751 Posts 1/04 | Posted - Feb 4 2012 : 1:55PM [Link] |
| JohnW Senior Member 1351 Posts 6/08 | Posted - Feb 15 2012 : 5:24PM Ideally, photos would automatically scale (down, not up) to the width of the table the posts are in, which in turn scales according to the browser window size. But that would require some sort of script which would have to run and I'm sure those are expensive or complicated or something of that sort since in fact I haven't seen them in use in many places. To "future proof" ADT regarding images it would be great however, since we could upload images with high resolution and then have them automatically fit the browser window, or even configure display size ourselves (with an option to expand for those interested). Right now it can be a bit of a pain to figure out which resolution to scale images to before uploading. You might want one to display as big as possible in one thread, while in another you might want it to be smaller to fit along with a series of photos, and etc... Edited by - JohnW on 2/15/2012 5:24:41 PM [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Feb 20 2012 : 9:24PM As for auto-resizing, that's not going to happen for lots of reasons all of which are technical and not economic. Sites standardize on a certain number of image sizes for many reasons, the primary being that it's much faster for a browser to render a page when it knows the size of the placeholder for an image. A browser first fetches the HTML page and that HTML tells the browser which images it also needs to get from the server. If the HTML tells the browser the height and width of the image it allows the browser to start building the page right away instead of waiting to figure out the size of the image after it's fetched from the server. Sure, images can be resized in script but that typically means delays in page loading times and transmitting lots of extra data from the server to your browser. It's a huge waste of bandwidth. [Link] |
| jayo All-Star Member 2117 Posts 7/04 | Posted - Feb 20 2012 : 10:06PM [Link] |
| jfarley Member 242 Posts 5/09 | Posted - Mar 23 2012 : 12:57PM I don't think this would affect the server load or amount of data transmitted. [Link] |
| Robert Member My past is a foreign country. Most things are different there, including word usage. 503 Posts 12/06 | Posted - Mar 23 2012 : 4:53PM It has a web page viewing option called "Fit to page", which I invoke. Opera (on the fly) resizes the page that has an image that is too large and I never have to contend with scrolling (left to right) to view the entire page.  [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Mar 24 2012 : 10:06AM When the HTML calls for specific height and width attributes on an image those are just rendering hints for the browser. As you indicated, modern browsers will set a placeholder of width x height in the layout of the page before requesting the contents of the image from the server. Say the image is uploaded and stored on the server as a 1280 x 960 pixel JPG file. The HTML page attributes for that image call for 80 hex 600. The browser requests the image from the server. The server sends the data over the internet for the full 1280 x 960 image. The browser then shrinks it to 800 x 600. That's a waste of bandwidth. The server could reprocess the image on the fly to meet the requested image size but that's inefficient because the processing step would have to happen every time the image is requested from the server. It's far more efficient to resize the image one time at upload and have no further processing requirements. I see these kinds of problems frequently when visiting Wordpress blogs. [Link] |
| jfarley Member 242 Posts 5/09 | Posted - Mar 24 2012 : 8:56PM I guess the issue then is that the maximum width allowed is too big for some of us. Perhaps an option in user settings to reduce the maximum width would be the best solution, and apply that to the generated HTML in addition to the resizing applied at upload. A minor issue in the grand scheme of things, but when you have a great site already, it's the little things that count. [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Mar 26 2012 : 1:46AM [Link] |
| Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - Mar 26 2012 : 5:49AM Jacco [Link] |
| JohnW Senior Member 1351 Posts 6/08 | Posted - Mar 26 2012 : 4:37PM [Link] |
| jayo All-Star Member 2117 Posts 7/04 | Posted - Mar 27 2012 : 7:31PM [Link] |
| jfarley Member 242 Posts 5/09 | Posted - Mar 28 2012 : 6:05AM Text is easier to read in a more columnar layout, which is why newspapers are layed out the way they are. If this site was just text, I would narrow the browser width further. [Link] |
| Robert Member My past is a foreign country. Most things are different there, including word usage. 503 Posts 12/06 | Posted - Apr 1 2012 : 2:04PM Tools - Preferences - Webpages [Link] |
| HeyNow Oblivious Gold Star Hey! 5965 Posts 1/03 | Posted - Jan 23 2013 : 4:41PM I've also been seeing some way oversized images posted this week and came to this thread to see what that was all about. I guess I have the answer. Edited by - HeyNow on 1/23/2013 4:47:55 PM [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Jan 24 2013 : 8:07AM I don't know how it's missing the resize step. It only seems to be on huge images. The odd thing is that the script completes! I dunno. [Link] |
| killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18631 Posts 4/08 | Posted - Feb 13 2013 : 8:44PM 1024px wide makes the posts wider than the screen, which screws up the thread width. It means that you have to scroll back and across, back and across as you read any post that's over a couple of words long. And when people quote a 1024px image the thread gets even wider. As a reader and as a moderator, it's annoying as fuck. Can we go back to 800px please? Otherwise I predict that no one will want to read or write a post more than a couple of words long any more, effectively turning adultdvdtalk into adultdvdimagepostingsite. [Link] |
| Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - Feb 14 2013 : 6:38AM Jacco [Link] |
| HeyNow Oblivious Gold Star Hey! 5965 Posts 1/03 | Posted - Feb 14 2013 : 7:43AM [Link] |
| Goldstein All-Star Member "You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10 | Posted - Feb 16 2013 : 9:52AM I've always felt I get a better result this way (as opposed to an auto-resizer), anyway. [Link] |
| killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18631 Posts 4/08 | Posted - Feb 16 2013 : 10:12AM Drew has switched the max back to 800px wide now, so it will help some of the scrolling back and forth problems I was complaining about above. I said thanks in another thread, but I'll say it here too: Thanks Drew. [Link] |
| Jonny Jay Outlier Moderator 5990 Posts 8/09 | Posted - Feb 17 2013 : 2:37PM A big thanks to Drew from myself also.  [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Feb 18 2013 : 9:37AM [Link] |
| ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08 | Posted - Mar 3 2013 : 3:19PM [Link] |
| killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18631 Posts 4/08 | Posted - Mar 3 2013 : 3:57PM [Link] |
| Drew Black broken crankshaft 8009 Posts 9/99 | Posted - Mar 4 2013 : 6:10PM Image right:  Image left:  [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |