Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35
  1. #1
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Maximum Image Width

    Is there a maximum width of an image allowed? If not, why? It is very annoying when someone posts a wide image and I need to scroll back and forth to read all the posts on that page. I think there should be a maximum width. If the image is larger than that, then just post a thumbnail or link to the image.

    While we're at it, why do people quote a post with a bunch of images, instead of removing the images in the reply?
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,757
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree there should be a 800-1000 pixel limit on the width.

  3. #3
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    While we're at it, why do people quote a post with a bunch of images, instead of removing the images in the reply?
    Because it's easier...

    Just so you know, you don't have re-download it every time the image appears.

  4. #4
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oh, so it is laziness. I see.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  5. #5
    Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset. Tom Stormcrowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    South Florida
    My Bikes
    Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
    Posts
    16,147
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    If they link to Photobucket, it's 800 pixels wide or a thumbnail, but sometimes they link to gigantic images from other websites.
    . “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche

    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant

  6. #6
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    Oh, so it is laziness. I see.
    Why do you care if people include the picture in a reply?

  7. #7
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A couple of reasons:
    1. It isn't necessary and just more scrolling to get to the information.
    2. Must use "Remove This Object" more times if it is a large image that causes me to scroll sideways to read the post.
    3. I could use "Remove This Permanently", but that would soon make the file very large. Slowing down loading of pages.

    I'm not against quoting pictures. But when someone quotes a post with 5 large images of different bikes, and just says, "Nice Miyata." It seems kind of silly. Could have just said, "Umd, Nice Miyata". Especially when the quoted post is directly under the one they are quoting. If it was from 3 pages ago, I could understand that.

    With that said, the quoting of pictures is just silly, it is not really a complaint. It is the too wide of images that makes side scrolling necessary.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  8. #8
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Stormcrowe View Post
    If they link to Photobucket, it's 800 pixels wide or a thumbnail, but sometimes they link to gigantic images from other websites.
    Ok. But that doesn't answer my original question. I guess this means BF doesn't have any rules about image widths. So, why not? Does BF not care if large images are posted that causes users to side scroll the rest of the page to read any posts?

    I think we should. It is an annoyance, one that could easily be corrected. If a Mod found an image that was too wide, they could easily remove the [IMG] tag and PM the offender that wide images must be linked, not shown.

    What I did on the forum I ran, was do that exact thing. I would also post an "Edit" in their post telling them I removed the image, but left the link. I think this might have helped showing others that wide images were not allowed.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  9. #9
    NFL Owner monogodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Irving Heritage District
    My Bikes
    7-Eleven Eddy Merckx, Vitus Futural, Catamount FRS, Colnago SL, SS MTB
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There's a plugin for the forum software that will automatically resize images to a specific width, with an option for the viewer to expand it up to original size. I've suggested it to the powers that be before, but nothing's been done.
    1983 Colnago Super (Campy Record) | 1989 Eddy Merckx 7-Eleven Team Issue (Dura Ace) | Catamount MFS (1x8) | Top Image Neptune (SS)

  10. #10
    ..... Jynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Long Island
    My Bikes
    2006 Cannondale CAAD8
    Posts
    4,816
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They dont care how wide an image is. I don't think it is that big of a deal. It is a little annoying scrolling back and forth though. I guess they assume members will be responsible enough not to post tremendous pictures. Either leaving it as is or limiting it doesnt matter to me. I have a 21" widescreen so I would hate to see it limited to only 800 pixels. Anyway I just realized it is probably really annoying to read this post since I posted a really large picture right under this. Well enjoy

    (bonus points if you quote me and leave the image)

    Last edited by Jynx; 01-17-09 at 09:08 AM.

  11. #11
    don't try this at home. rm -rf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    N. KY
    Posts
    3,013
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When we all have 22 inch wide monitors, will the images then be 3000 pixels wide?

    I use the Firefox addon Image Zoom. It works great to zoom tiny images or shrink big ones. The BF thread text re-wraps on the fly as the wide image is shrunken.

    Edit-- I see that the above 20,000 pixel image is too wide to resize the text on this thread; it wraps correctly. So--post really big images!

  12. #12
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, if you are using Firefox or IceWeasel, you can add to your UserContent.css file:

    @-moz-document url-prefix(http://www.bikeforums.net/) {
    img { max-width: 500px !important**
    **

    Or whatever you wish as the max-width. I've just tested it and it is doing well. But I still think BikeForums should set a rule for this.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  13. #13
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    But I still think BikeForums should set a rule for this.
    I disagree. Too big to one person may be just perfect or even too small for someone else. For the mods to go through and "fix" everyone's posts would be unmanageable.

  14. #14
    Long Distance Cyclist Machka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    I ride where the thylacine roamed!
    My Bikes
    Lots
    Posts
    42,840
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just limit them to 500 pixels and be done with it. There is no need for photos to be any larger than that. Or force everyone to use the thumbnail option.

  15. #15
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Using the "thumbnail option" requires you to upload the picture to BF instead of linking from another location. You say no need to be larger than 500 pixels, but to me 500 pixels looks like a postage stamp. The complainers can use tools to auto-resize images.

  16. #16
    Sophomoric Member Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dancing in Lansing
    Posts
    22,256
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I vote for a limit on picture size. And quoting images is ugly.


    "Think Outside the Cage"

  17. #17
    ..... Jynx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Long Island
    My Bikes
    2006 Cannondale CAAD8
    Posts
    4,816
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by umd View Post
    Using the "thumbnail option" requires you to upload the picture to BF instead of linking from another location. You say no need to be larger than 500 pixels, but to me 500 pixels looks like a postage stamp. The complainers can use tools to auto-resize images.
    Agreed. 500 pixels is tiny. When I post pics I usually keep them at 800 wide and that is still fairly small.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,757
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jynx View Post
    Agreed. 500 pixels is tiny. When I post pics I usually keep them at 800 wide and that is still fairly small.
    1,000 is a nice round number, good enough for all but the largest screens, and not so large as to swamp small screens.

  19. #19
    Galveston County Texas 10 Wheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In The Wind
    My Bikes
    GTO
    Posts
    27,253
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Jynx View Post
    They dont care how wide an image is. I don't think it is that big of a deal. It is a little annoying scrolling back and forth though. I guess they assume members will be responsible enough not to post tremendous pictures. Either leaving it as is or limiting it doesnt matter to me. I have a 21" widescreen so I would hate to see it limited to only 800 pixels. Anyway I just realized it is probably really annoying to read this post since I posted a really large picture right under this. Well enjoy

    (bonus points if you quote me and leave the image)

    I like um Big.
    Thanks
    [SIZE=1][B]What I like about Texas[/B]
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGukLuXzH1E

    Set F1re To The Ra1n ( NY Night Rain Ride)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7jfcWEkSrI

  20. #20
    Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset. Tom Stormcrowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    South Florida
    My Bikes
    Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
    Posts
    16,147
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)
    You must be from Texas.....
    . “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche

    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant

  21. #21
    Galveston County Texas 10 Wheels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    In The Wind
    My Bikes
    GTO
    Posts
    27,253
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Stormcrowe View Post
    You must be from Texas.....
    Send me a monitor that size.
    Thanks
    [SIZE=1][B]What I like about Texas[/B]
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGukLuXzH1E

    Set F1re To The Ra1n ( NY Night Rain Ride)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7jfcWEkSrI

  22. #22
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by umd View Post
    Using the "thumbnail option" requires you to upload the picture to BF instead of linking from another location. You say no need to be larger than 500 pixels, but to me 500 pixels looks like a postage stamp. The complainers can use tools to auto-resize images.
    And posters can easily link to a larger image and not cause side scrolling. You don't need to upload to BF for a thumbnail. If a larger picture is required, they can use thumbnails from photobucket, imageshack or a link. No problem there. If you have problems with small images, you can resize the image also.

    Why are you so against a link to larger images? I don't know of anyone that likes to side scroll through a thread so that it can be read.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  23. #23
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    And posters can easily link to a larger image and not cause side scrolling. You don't need to upload to BF for a thumbnail. If a larger picture is required, they can use thumbnails from photobucket, imageshack or a link. No problem there. If you have problems with small images, you can resize the image also.

    Why are you so against a link to larger images? I don't know of anyone that likes to side scroll through a thread so that it can be read.
    I am against a rule limiting the size of an image; I am not opposed to the concept of not displaying large images (large being subjective of course).

    Bikeforums has an "attach files" feature which displays images automatically as thumbnails, which is what Machka was referring to. However, if I just want to display an image using the IMG tag, it doesn't do any kind of thumbnailing.

    As far as me resizing images, you are the one with the complaint, not me. You want to change the system, to make new rules. Why should I have to bend of backwards to fix a problem that is not broken for most people? Everyone is going to have a different limit of what they consider to be too large. Those people that are bothered by this can use plugins to resize the images smaller. You can't make images larger as easily... an image that is only 500 pixels wide will look crappy blown up to 1000, but an image that is 1000 will look fine reduced to 500.

    As for bandwith... HTFU, this is 2009. I don't even have problems downloading or viewing large images on my phone.

  24. #24
    Senior Member SweetLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by umd View Post
    I am against a rule limiting the size of an image; I am not opposed to the concept of not displaying large images (large being subjective of course).
    Yes you are. At least you have been arguing against it.

    Bikeforums has an "attach files" feature which displays images automatically as thumbnails, which is what Machka was referring to. However, if I just want to display an image using the IMG tag, it doesn't do any kind of thumbnailing.
    And it is just as easy to use the code that the free online image locations give you to use the thumbnail. But, why would you want to post a large image on purpose? Do you have no considerations for other users of this forum and how your actions affect the readability of the forums?

    As far as me resizing images, you are the one with the complaint, not me. You want to change the system, to make new rules. Why should I have to bend of backwards to fix a problem that is not broken for most people?
    How is not posting large images bending backwards? I was not serious about changing the size, it was to show you that we shouldn't have to install pluggins, remove objects so that we can read the forum as it was meant to be read.
    Code:
    <table class="tborder" style="border-bottom-width: 0px;" width="100%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0">
    As you can see, the table is suppose to be 100%, so that it fits within the user's browser. Large images break the table layout.
    It's not broken for most people? Are you sure of that? Just in this thread it seems like more people are against large images. Do you have different data that I am unaware of?
    Everyone is going to have a different limit of what they consider to be too large. Those people that are bothered by this can use plugins to resize the images smaller. You can't make images larger as easily... an image that is only 500 pixels wide will look crappy blown up to 1000, but an image that is 1000 will look fine reduced to 500.
    Answered above, why should I bend over backwards for other people's inconsiderate actions? But if you are having problems with 500 pixel images, maybe you should get a smaller screen.I mean, most images are not very large on here, you must be having a very difficult time seeing what people are posting.
    As for bandwith... HTFU, this is 2009. I don't even have problems downloading or viewing large images on my phone.
    I don't remember anyone mentioning bandwidth.
    Learn what's a platform pedal.

  25. #25
    umd
    umd is offline
    Banned umd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT
    Posts
    28,343
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    Yes you are. At least you have been arguing against it.
    No I have not. I have been arguing aginst imposing some kind of forum rules about a maximum image size. I do not like huge images either but I do not want to impose an arbitrary restriction.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    And it is just as easy to use the code that the free online image locations give you to use the thumbnail.
    You are assuming everyone is using those sites. If you reference a random picture on the internet there is no code given for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    But, why would you want to post a large image on purpose?
    I do not post large images, although I'm sure complainers like you would still have a problem with it. My images are 800 pixels wide at most, I think that is reasonable.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    Do you have no considerations for other users of this forum and how your actions affect the readability of the forums?
    My actions are affecting the readability of the forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    How is not posting large images bending backwards?
    I was referring to thumbnails

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    I was not serious about changing the size, it was to show you that we shouldn't have to install pluggins, remove objects so that we can read the forum as it was meant to be read. As you can see, the table is suppose to be 100%, so that it fits within the user's browser. Large images break the table layout.
    I do not understand what you are blathering about.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    It's not broken for most people? Are you sure of that? Just in this thread it seems like more people are against large images. Do you have different data that I am unaware of?
    This thread is not representative of the entire community. How many people even know about this tiny corner of the bikeforums universe? I only came here to post about some strange behavior in large threads. When this comes up in the road forum a few people complain, most people say to HTFU and deal with it. The complainers are the minority. Thats said, when people post obscenely large images, people will ask the poster to reduce it.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    Answered above, why should I bend over backwards for other people's inconsiderate actions?
    It is far simplier for people who have an issue with image size to deal with it on their end than it is to ask everyone else to take more steps to satisfy a minority.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    But if you are having problems with 500 pixel images, maybe you should get a smaller screen.


    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    I mean, most images are not very large on here, you must be having a very difficult time seeing what people are posting.
    Depends on what the image is. Sometimes images are a little small and it's somewhat annoying but I get over it.

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou View Post
    I don't remember anyone mentioning bandwidth.
    Of course, you are the type of person that expects the world to revolve around you. When this issue comes up from time to time in the road forum, some people (such as Machka) complain about bandwith.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •