A 3 Board Photo Post Comparison

[dsquire]

Hi All

First, This is not about the contents of the photo but about the size.

Second, This post was composed with MS Word-pad in Times New Roman 12pt.

Third, I used Firefox as my browser while making the screen capture and also making this post. It will be interesting to look at all 3 posts in IE8.

Lately (actually for quite a while) photos seem to be all over the place in size. Some posts I just refuse to go any further when I have to wait for the 2048x1536 photos to load. To make matters worse sometimes there are a dozen or more photos. Now the only way to see what is in the photo is to go to the bottom of the page and use the slider to move the photo over then page up to the top, look, go to the bottom again, repeat over and over again getting more frustrated all the time.

If all that isn't bad enough, on the 3 main hobby machining boards that I spend my time MadModder, HMEM and MEM I can put up exactly the same post and it will come out different on each of them. I have made a screen capture. The original size is 1024 x 768. I have made copies of it using Photo Re-sizer in 800 x 600 and 700 x 525. I am going to put a copy of each size in this document using photo-bucket and also using the "attachment" process.

I will also put a link to the post on each board so that you can compare one against the other and see the difference. Your comments are welcomed and appreciated but please load all 3 posts using the links below so that you can compare one against the other before commenting. Hopefully the end result will be that we can all read the posts without wearing out the page down key and the slider at the bottom of the post.

Cheers

Don

Comparison Links
MadModder
http://madmodder.net/index.php/topic,7559.msg81024.html#msg81024
Model Engine Maker
http://www.modelenginemaker.com/index.php/topic,607.msg5448.html#msg5448
Home Model Engine Machinist
http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/f29/3-board-photo-comparison-18768/#post193975

Photo 1 700 x 575


Photo 2 800 x 600


Photo 3 1024 x 768



Attachments
Photo 1 700 x 575
Photo 2 800 x 600
Photo 3 1024 x 768

[Brass_Machine]

Looks the same here and MEM. Makes sense as we run the same software. HMEM uses something else...

I might be able to get a auto resizer.

[dsquire]

Eric

I am just getting frustrated at some of the photo sizes that we are seeing so I thought I would do the comparison. The Auto re-size that HMEM has seems to work good. As you can see I attached 3 different sized photo's and they all came out at 700 x 525 which meant they were all on the page without scrolling. The other thing to notice is there is too much white space on the left of the body of the posts thereby shoving everything off the right side of the page. Are there any setting for changing that? I have also got about 1 1/2" of wasted space on each side of the monitor that isn't earning its keep. 

Cheers 

Don

[ksouers]

Don,
All three boards looked the same to me. No scroll bars. But I've got a wide screen monitor.

I have had the scroll bar problem on MEM. I noticed it mostly on Tel's holiday pictures
http://www.modelenginemaker.com/index.php/topic,584.0.html

Clicking on the thumbnails expanded the picture, of course, and the scroll bars are at the bottom of his post.
I'm sure that Tel's pictures are much larger than 1024 x 768.


I'm running Firefox on Linux. Sorry, can't help with IE8.


Kevin

[andyf]

Using IE8, the three embedded via Photobucket look the same size on all three boards: a bit to big for my narrow screen, too big, and very much too big. I can't compare the attachments, becaue I'm not a member of MEM or HMEM.

Still in IE8, I find the zoom feature at the bottom right useful when pics are too big for the screen. Going to 75% is usually sufficient, and I can still red the text.

I shrink my own photos using MS Paint.  Works for me, and saves yet another download.

Andy

[dsquire]

Andy

Thanks for the reply and your comments. They are appreciated.

Using IE8, the three embedded via Photobucket look the same size on all three boards: a bit to big for my narrow screen, too big, and very much too big. I can't compare the attachments, becaue I'm not a member of MEM or HMEM.

That is about the same way as I see it for MadModder and MEM. HMEM used different software and automatically scales them down to 700 x 575 if they are over that size from photo-bucket. That is why they may have that yellow header on them to click on to expand them

Still in IE8, I find the zoom feature at the bottom right useful when pics are too big for the screen. Going to 75% is usually sufficient, and I can still red the text.

I usually use FireFox but sometime use IE8. When I do I like to run it at 100% as it is easier for these old eyes to read

I shrink my own photos using MS Paint.  Works for me, and saves yet another download.

I have been using FastStone Photo Re-sizer which is free and fast. Once it is set up which is easy you can re-size and watermark probably 50 or more pictures in a couple of minutes.

Andy

Cheers 

Don

[AdeV]

I found HMEM's "auto-resizer" to be a pain in the arse mainly; I don't think it actually applies any intelligence to resizing a photo, I've seen them where you click on the yellow header & the photo gets a few pixels wider. Of course, where it IS useful is when the original is 3000+ pixels wide....

I'll have a look to see if there's something for MEM, & will share with Eric what I find - I'm sure he'll do the same if he spots one sooner than me.

[dsquire]

I found HMEM's "auto-resizer" to be a pain in the arse mainly; I don't think it actually applies any intelligence to resizing a photo, I've seen them where you click on the yellow header & the photo gets a few pixels wider. Of course, where it IS useful is when the original is 3000+ pixels wide....

Ade
I guess the problem is that photos are all different sizes so what works for one size doesn't work for another.

I think what happened there was the photo size that was loaded was 800 x 600. The automatic re-sizer brought it down to 700 x 525. When you clicked the yellow header it took it up to original size of 800 x 600. If the original size had been 1400 x 1050 then it would have doubled in size when clicking on the yellow header.

I'll have a look to see if there's something for MEM, & will share with Eric what I find - I'm sure he'll do the same if he spots one sooner than me.

I guess what I am looking for is probably the holy grail. I would just like to leave my monitor setting alone and be able to go from post to post and forum to forum and be able to have the text large enough to read and the photo's all on the page to see without having to change settings. I don't want to have to zoom every photo to see it at a reasonable size. By the same token I don't want to have to shrink a photo just so it will fit the monitor. I would also like what works for me in this respect to work for you and everyone else even though we all have different equipment. This may be wishful thinking but I keep hoping.

I have found a couple of things that might work but am still looking. I will share them with you and Eric via PM when I get them all together.


Cheers 

Don

[AdeV]

I guess what I am looking for is probably the holy grail. I would just like to leave my monitor setting alone and be able to go from post to post and forum to forum and be able to have the text large enough to read and the photo's all on the page to see without having to change settings. I don't want to have to zoom every photo to see it at a reasonable size. By the same token I don't want to have to shrink a photo just so it will fit the monitor. I would also like what works for me in this respect to work for you and everyone else even though we all have different equipment. This may be wishful thinking but I keep hoping.

I have found a couple of things that might work but am still looking. I will share them with you and Eric via PM when I get them all together.

I think you're right, at the moment that's wishful thinking However, it needn't be: Your browser has already told the webserver how big its screen is (indeed, it's even told it how big the window is that the browser is running in), so there's no reason why a plugin couldn't take that information, and size a photo accordingly. This would be harder for in-line photos (but not impossible), where it would get as good as impossible is when you get into tables. I don't know if SMF uses HTML tables (a quick squint at the source of this page suggests not, but I didn't look very hard), if it does then we're back on a hiding to nothing; if not, well, who knows...

Unfortunately, I've got a seriously busy time at work just now, and as soon as I've scoffed me tea I'm down here at the workshop trying not to fry my shiny(ish) new(ish) cnc mill - hmm, if I plug them both in at the same time, I might be able to make them toast each other   

[dsquire]

Unfortunately, I've got a seriously busy time at work just now, and as soon as I've scoffed me tea I'm down here at the workshop trying not to fry my shiny(ish) new(ish) cnc mill - hmm, if I plug them both in at the same time, I might be able to make them toast each other   

Thanks Ade

Just don't spill that tea on the keyboard or is might make smoke(ish). Good luck getting that CNC going.

Cheers 

Don

[sparky961]

Don,

In looking at your screen captures, it appears that your screen resolution is pretty low by today's standards.  I'm running 1920 x 1080 at home on a monitor that actually measures 20"W x 11.25"H, and probably a bit higher than that at work.  I rarely find that I have to scroll images on posts.  Though I do agree that some are a bit extreme, my upper tolerance would seem to be higher than yours.  Depending on your preferences for text size, you may find that moving to a bigger monitor will make your web experience more enjoyable.

-Sparky

[Pete.]

Don,

In looking at your screen captures, it appears that your screen resolution is pretty low by today's standards.  I'm running 1920 x 1080 at home on a monitor that actually measures 20"W x 11.25"H, and probably a bit higher than that at work.  I rarely find that I have to scroll images on posts.  Though I do agree that some are a bit extreme, my upper tolerance would seem to be higher than yours.  Depending on your preferences for text size, you may find that moving to a bigger monitor will make your web experience more enjoyable.

-Sparky

Not so much when you think that many people are moving to tablets and phones for browsing the web and forums. Scrolling around large photos for those is a real bind, or you can pinch-zoom but then you can't read the text.

I find 800x600 to be ideal for most photos, in terms of both viewing size and file size. I think it's justifiable to put up a high res photo of really fine work you're trying to showcase or showing small detail or perhaps a drawing, but otherwise it's a bit of a waste. Large but grainy photos are especially annoying.

[sparky961]

You do bring up a good point, Pete.  However, this is one of the main reasons why I haven't given in to the world of "smart" phones and tablets yet.

-Sparky