Dynamic image re-sizing?

Discussion in 'Site and Forum Feedback' started by mkrishnan, May 5, 2007.

  1. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #1
    Hi everyone,

    I hope this hasn't been discussed before... a short search didn't seem to turn it up, although occasionally I've heard hints that there is a way to use this feature here.

    On some other forums, the IMG tag accepts some parameters, such as occasionally BORDER=xxx and HEIGHT=xxx or WIDTH=xxx. With the latter two, it's possible to dynamically resize the presentation of an image -- the viewer of the page doesn't save any bandwidth (since the re-sizing is client-side during the rendering of the page), but the formatting of the thread is better.

    Is that possible in vB somehow? If it is, but it's turned off, is it possible to consider activating it? It seems to be a zero cost issue to MR (since it doesn't impact MR's servers in any way), and it seems relatively unlikely to be abused much.

    Thanks!
     
  2. arn macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #2
    there is a "timg" tag to automatically thumbnail-size large images, but it just uses a width of "300" automatically.

    we could probably add a parameter to choose an arbitrary size if that's necessary.

    arn
     
  3. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #3
    While on this topic, should we replace the IMG button with the TIMG link?

    [​IMG]
     
  4. arn macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #4
    you think everything should be TIMG'd? The problem is it's not very intelligent. in that it will also scale small images to 300 wide. :)

    [​IMG]
    arn
     
  5. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #5
    TIMG! Ahhh, that's it! Thank you! :)

    I think if there were an option to add in an arbitrary size, but default to the 300, it would be great, but only if it were minimal work for you. :)

    On other forums, it at least gets some of the regulars to resize so that the forum width isn't all messed up. :eek:

    Lemme try....

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Ahh, that's nice. Although, yes, I see 300 is a good thumb size but not ideal when you want to show something in the content... there seems to be a fair need for generating images about 500-600 pixels in width (e.g. screenshots and digital camera shots, which often seem to be a little on the big side when posted, for those of us with 17" or smaller displays).
     
  6. Doctor Q Administrator

    Doctor Q

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    What we (or at least I) would like is not provided by the current software, namely that with the img tag images would be scaled, if larger than (say) 300, to 300. We'd have a different tag, e.g., largeimg, that allowed up to, say, 1000, and we'd have guidelines for its use, e.g., largeimg is ok in "show your desktop picture" or photography threads, but should be used only when necessary, not routinely.

    People who use inline attachments need to remember to use that feature wisely as well, i.e., when appropriate, and not as a way to bypass the auto-thumbnail system for attachments, which serves a useful purpose.

    I haven't heard anyone ask about adding borders to images before. It might add a bit more style to some images, at the expense of slightly larger images.
     
  7. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #7
    That's not a bad idea, although it seems like, if you use 300, then it would still be nice to have a larger scaled size.

    Hmmm, a good example of where I see this coming up is a screenshot. If I take a screenshot from my iMac 17", and upload it to photobucket, it comes out at something like 700+ pixels wide, which is too wide for most forum viewers. PB can easily resize it to 640x..., but it still is wide for many notebook users and distorts the way the page looks. If I make it 300 pixels wide...

    [​IMG]

    Then it's a little hard to see what I'm getting at.

    I guess I should just stop whining and scale it down to about 500 pixels myself. :p Or perhaps complain to PB that they don't offer an easy size in between 320 width and 640.

    I guess I could also get in the better habit of clickable thumbnails that lead to my photobucket.
     
  8. Doctor Q Administrator

    Doctor Q

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #8
    In a perfect world, you'd upload only the full-size image, and forum settings would let each user choose how big an image could be before auto-scaling in their forum displays.
     
  9. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #9
    In a perfect world, you'd be compiling statistics about said user choices for display (as opposed to upload) and the ensuing thread would contain lively, enlightening, and entertaining discussion. ;)
     
  10. arn macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #10
    you do realize the timg thumbnails are clickable to the full size?

    arn
     
  11. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #11
    Ahh, I didn't realise TIMG scaled everything to 300. Well would it be possible to get a TIMG button in the reply toolbar then? It seems like people are still unaware it exists as a vBulletin feature. :)
     
  12. bartelby macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    #12
    Yeah, it's perfect for images of Little MJ.:p
     
  13. mad jew Moderator emeritus

    mad jew

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    #13
    You're just jealous that I still look hung at 300 pixels, but I fear we may be digressing...
     
  14. mkrishnan thread starter Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #14
    I did not! :eek:

    I think everyone on MR wants to see that Jew full-sized. ;)
     
  15. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #15
    timg tags are great. shame that they upscale as well as downscale. :rolleyes:
    that i did not know though. but perhaps adding it to the toolbar would help increase its usage?
     

Share This Page