Moderators - Photo of the Day and TIMGS

[iBlue]

The problem with that, especially in image heavy threads - which is what we're talking about here, is that those images off site tends to disappear after a while. Often a very short while. Making even quite new threads more or less un-readable, with lots of "Image has been removed"-placeholders and/or seemingly empty posts.

If those images were attached, you wouldn't have that problem.

Oh totally. I hate that too. It's just how the internet is though and forcing people to use only attachments doesn't seem like a good solution, at least in my opinion.



I think a more simplified approach could make life easier for mods and create less butthurting among members. Something to the effect of stating that 1000 pixels (or whatever) is the max width an image should be posted inline and any others will be TIMGed by mods. Less mystery, less pain.
Simples!

 

[SilentPanda]

^ I get the feeling lots of you are stressed at the moment. Just something in your collective posts. I worry what they're doing to you back there. (as in behind the scenes, not back there... errrrrm.)

We're working on converting the whole site to run off of arn's MobileMe account...

Modding isn't that bad. You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have....

 

[themoonisdown09]

Modding isn't that bad. You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have....

Oh, you take it alright... just not where I want to take it!

 

[dmmcintyre3]

dmmcintyre3 was asking that the TIMG tag have the option to specify size within it.

Yes that is what I was asking.

1000 is the perfect width for 1280 wide screens (MacBook, low res PowerBook Aluminum)

 

[jsw]

Something to the effect of stating that 1000 pixels (or whatever) is the max width an image should be posted inline and any others will be TIMGed by mods. Less mystery, less pain.
Simples!

The current suggestion (like what you mentioned with max size), which would do that - only even more easily - is to make the IMG tag itself restrict the size. Instead of posting a max in the rules, it would just do it. Like TIMG, but with a max and not specific size. And it could be changed over time without any need to edit or re-mod posts. Easy-peasy.

The ability to add member-specific max sizes could then follow.

 

[themoonisdown09]

The current suggestion (like what you mentioned with max size), which would do that - only even more easily - is to make the IMG tag itself restrict the size. Instead of posting a max in the rules, it would just do it. Like TIMG, but with a max and not specific size. And it could be changed over time without any need to edit or re-mod posts. Easy-peasy.

The ability to add member-specific max sizes could then follow.

I think that's an awesome idea. I think the fact that there is no TIMG tag button or that some user's don't know about it (even though it's usually written in the first post) is one of the main problems.

I think that if the IMG tag acted like a TIMG tag, the problem would be solved. Easy-peasy-lemon-squeazy!

 

[iBlue]

The current suggestion (like what you mentioned with max size), which would do that - only even more easily - is to make the IMG tag itself restrict the size. Instead of posting a max in the rules, it would just do it. Like TIMG, but with a max and not specific size. And it could be changed over time without any need to edit or re-mod posts. Easy-peasy.

The ability to add member-specific max sizes could then follow.

That's awesome. I hope that is implemented, would be all sorts of helpful.

 

[dmmcintyre3]

300 pixels is a little small.

Even the attachments are bigger i think.

EDIT: Could we make it scale with the user's screen (window) size by using a percentage?

EDIT2: I just tested it and it worked!

Finally the END ALL solution to tiny pictures for those with PDAs to those with 30 inches

 

[xUKHCx]

Yes that is what I was asking.

1000 is the perfect width for 1280 wide screens (MacBook, low res PowerBook Aluminum)

If you browse with the window fullscreen. Otherwise not so much.

That's awesome. I hope that is implemented, would be all sorts of helpful.

It is a good solution and hopefully will workout well. Hopefully it will allow others to view the POTD threads and enjoy them.

 

[dmmcintyre3]

If you want to see an example of using a percentage as the size of the image you can here http://dmmpics.co.cc/mrimagetest/ Post 5. If you resize the window the size of the image will change

The image will not get bigger than the space provided. The code used to do this is:

<IMG SRC=image.jpg WIDTH=100%>

 

[AmbitiousLemon]

I think that if the IMG tag acted like a TIMG tag, the problem would be solved. Easy-peasy-lemon-squeazy!

As has been stated previously numerous times, this would also stretch small images out to that size. It is a bad solution.

The image will not get bigger than the space provided. The code used to do this is:

<IMG SRC=image.jpg WIDTH=100%>

This has the same problem as using timg everywhere. It will stretch small images (which are more common here than giant images).


The "solution" previously alluded to that mods have been discussing has the issue of not working for the majority of browsers visiting this site.

 

[Eraserhead]

The "solution" previously alluded to that mods have been discussing has the issue of not working for the majority of browsers visiting this site.

Forgive me for asking, which browsers does it currently work with?

I suppose you have to support everything back to IE 6 at the moment.

 

[MacNut]

I don't see a problem with just auto TIMG tagging the huge imagines smaller, you can just click the image to see it full size and not disrupt the whole thread.

The better idea would be to enforce a don't quote a huge picture rule.

 

[SilentPanda]

The image will not get bigger than the space provided. The code used to do this is:

<IMG SRC=image.jpg WIDTH=100%>

Unfortunately similies are just an (img)smiley.gif(/img). Do you really want those smiles to be 100%?

 

[nickspohn]

It sucks using TIMG's when you have 1920 x 1200...

 

[PeteB]

I'm probably over-simplifying this, but if people are browsing a dedicated photo-share thread, then they'd reasonably expect to see photos at a decent resolution.

If, from what I read here, using TIMG tags resizes to 1000px regardless of the source size, then the resizing algorithm may well damage the quality of the images that poster strive hard to create.

While I agree that those users with smaller format screens (or iPhone/iPod) will be at a disadvantage, I beleive that having a larger minimum photo size works fine and will show off photos to the best effect. 800px these days seems a little small (especially when many people (especially photographers) have larger resolution screens). 100px or so would be fine for me.