News:

"Wings and a Prayer [L-E]"
Congratulations OfferedToEros & Random for completing your RP!

Main Menu

[img] Suggestion

Started by Oreo, January 01, 2011, 04:16:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Oreo

I have run across a few people who don't know how (or forget how) to adjust the size of images. I was wondering if the image tags could be programed with a set width, [img width=400]. The option to change the parameters would always be there, but it might help with some of the overlarge images that spring up.

She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Vekseid

That would automatically stretch smaller images and get rather ugly.

Zeitgeist

Quote from: Vekseid on January 01, 2011, 04:34:49 PM
That would automatically stretch smaller images and get rather ugly.

I do believe, if you specify only the height, or the width, the image remains proportional.


[img width=200]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/1f/Circe-1-.jpeg[/img]



[img height=100]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/1f/Circe-1-.jpeg[/img]




Oniya

Yes, but if the image is already smaller than the 'default' size, like this one:



it ends up looking like this:
[img width=200]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/15/Smbfly.png[/img]

"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Vekseid

Yep.

Now picture that at 400 with all those pages where people have gone icon crazy >_>

Oreo

My thought was it is easier to delete the [width=whatever] than to remember to put it in. No worries.


She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Vekseid

Oh, you meant add it to the bbcode button?

Oreo

Yes. Click the img button and instead of [img] coming up, it loads [img width= (random number)]. Then they could simply delete the width portion if they didn't want it there, or adjust it to suit their whim. 400px just seemed a suitable size for the average picture you would want.

She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Will

If the reasoning behind adding this in is because of overlarge images, why not just zoom your screen out with whatever shortcut your computer uses (ctrl+wheel, touchpad, etc)?  It's pretty easy, and it doesn't force anyone else to deal with/delete extra bbcode.  I suspect it would be deleted more often than not anyway, or left in by accident, leading to more frustration.
If you can heal the symptoms, but not affect the cause
It's like trying to heal a gunshot wound with gauze

One day, I will find the right words, and they will be simple.
- Jack Kerouac

Oreo

Actually it is because of the time it takes on my slower computer waiting for the images to load. When there is a whole thread of 800px + images it gets to be problematic. Often it is one super-sized picture that slows down the entire process.

She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Will

If you just use bbcode to resize an image, wouldn't the load time be the same?  It doesn't change the file size, I mean.
If you can heal the symptoms, but not affect the cause
It's like trying to heal a gunshot wound with gauze

One day, I will find the right words, and they will be simple.
- Jack Kerouac

Oreo

Arrrggg. That wouldn't help then. I thought it changed the file size :(

She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Izu

Plus... it's not like people use all that many big sizes... Maybe only in the Finders and Seekers threads, but even there it's not all that often that someone would put up a wallpaper-size image.

ONs and OFFs || M/M Search || Izu's A&A
...Like reflections on the page, the world's what you create...

Vekseid

#13
An alternate option is to wrap them in divs that scroll over a maximum size.

Question would be, what width should they scroll at, since we want to be generous enough to allow good sized pictures.

Edit: Ooh. I could also require a width tag to be specified to prevent larger images from scrolling. Best of both worlds.

Just need to pick a size, though.

jouzinka

Well, if bandwidth is the issue, why not encourage the use of thumbnails, even in finders and seekers? Every -decent- imageshare (not tinypic, though), has an automatic option how to link a thumbnailed image.
Story status: Not Available
Life Status: Just keep swimming...
Working on: N/A

Zeitgeist

Quote from: Oniya on January 01, 2011, 07:16:57 PM
Yes, but if the image is already smaller than the 'default' size, like this one:



it ends up looking like this:
[img width=200]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/15/Smbfly.png[/img]


Well yes, but it's still proportional, and my point is still true, if you specify one and not the other, it automatically adjusts the one left out. In the example you gave, the image resolution is so tiny, of course its going to look blurry and pixelated (sp?) enlarged. But it is proportional.

Oreo

#16
Quote from: Vekseid on January 02, 2011, 04:17:29 AM
An alternate option is to wrap them in divs that scroll over a maximum size.

Question would be, what width should they scroll at, since we want to be generous enough to allow good sized pictures.

Edit: Ooh. I could also require a width tag to be specified to prevent larger images from scrolling. Best of both worlds.

Just need to pick a size, though.
That works too ♥ If they want to see the picture in a larger form they can link to it. It is easy enough to open in a new window. How many pixels are left on E's page after excluding the avatar portion (on a standard 15" laptop screen)? Mine is larger, but I am assuming most people have a 15" screen. That might be a good starting point for figuring the size.

Quote from: Izu on January 02, 2011, 03:53:00 AM
Plus... it's not like people use all that many big sizes... Maybe only in the Finders and Seekers threads, but even there it's not all that often that someone would put up a wallpaper-size image.
I stopped visiting those threads because they took too long to load. D:

Quote from: jouzinka on January 02, 2011, 04:40:51 AM
Well, if bandwidth is the issue, why not encourage the use of thumbnails, even in finders and seekers? Every -decent- imageshare (not tinypic, though), has an automatic option how to link a thumbnailed image.
I think most of the problem comes from hot linking. I myself always try to size my pictures in Photobucket to be forum friendly even for my RPs.

>_> Is there a BBCode for thumbnails? That would be wonderful. If hot linking - use the thumbnail instead of the [img]?



She led me to safety in a forest of green, and showed my stale eyes some sights never seen.
She spins magic and moonlight in her meadows and streams, and seeks deep inside me,
and touches my dreams. - Harry Chapin

Oniya

Quote from: Zamdrist of Zeitgeist on January 02, 2011, 11:50:27 AM
Well yes, but it's still proportional, and my point is still true, if you specify one and not the other, it automatically adjusts the one left out. In the example you gave, the image resolution is so tiny, of course its going to look blurry and pixelated (sp?) enlarged. But it is proportional.

I assumed that 'stretched' could apply in both ways, not just in a disproportionate way, so I was working within your assumption on the dimension tags.  Yes, I chose a rather extreme example, but even something the size of my original icon (65x65) would look weird if enlarged, and especially if the enlargement wasn't a precise multiple.
"Language was invented for one reason, boys - to woo women.~*~*~Don't think it's all been done before
And in that endeavor, laziness will not do." ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think we're never gonna win this war
Robin Williams-Dead Poets Society ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~Don't think your world's gonna fall apart
I do have a cause, though.  It's obscenity.  I'm for it.  - Tom Lehrer~*~All you need is your beautiful heart
O/O's Updated 5/11/21 - A/A's - Current Status! - Writing a novel - all draws for Fool of Fire up!
Requests updated March 17

Zeitgeist

Quote from: Oniya on January 02, 2011, 12:18:08 PM
I assumed that 'stretched' could apply in both ways, not just in a disproportionate way, so I was working within your assumption on the dimension tags.  Yes, I chose a rather extreme example, but even something the size of my original icon (65x65) would look weird if enlarged, and especially if the enlargement wasn't a precise multiple.

[img width=200 height=50]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/15/Smbfly.png[/img]


[img height=50]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/15/Smbfly.png[/img]


[img width=50 height=200]https://elliquiy.com/elluiki/images/1/15/Smbfly.png[/img]


The example in the middle demonstrates that if you leave either height or width out, it is calculated appropriately. That's really my only point. It's perhaps the difference between dimension and resolution, though the exact term I couldn't say.

Amber

I don't know if this is possible for something on E, Vek, but on another huge forum that I'm on the admin just came out with a new spoiler feature.

There's just a button inside the post that says spoiler, and in order to see the content of the post you click the spoiler button and it opens up the content.

People have found tons of uses for them, such as in our "Funny Pictures Thread" for people who want to post TONS of pictures at once, it keeps the page relatively small because all you see is "spoiler" unless you want to open the spoiler in which case all the pictures load, then if you want to see something else you can just close that spoiler box by hitting spoiler again and open another one.

People have also been using it to collapse extra large images. That way they can display them in full size but, because it's in a spoiler box, it's not stretching the page because it doesn't open unless you want it to.

I've got a pretty top-rate computer so loading pages in the F&S forum isn't trouble but it's a little daunting when I open a page and suddenly the scroll bar is about as tall as a hyphen is wide and there're hundreds of pictures on a page and I try to scroll down and it's like an endless page of endlessness. Maybe it might help with the page load for some people if they could do something like the spoiler box, I don't know...

Just a thought.

Haibane

Quote from: Vekseid on January 02, 2011, 04:17:29 AM
An alternate option is to wrap them in divs that scroll over a maximum size.

Question would be, what width should they scroll at, since we want to be generous enough to allow good sized pictures.

Edit: Ooh. I could also require a width tag to be specified to prevent larger images from scrolling. Best of both worlds.

Just need to pick a size, though.
I'd suggest a max width of 1,024px. More than that and it gets hard on the eyes in the Finders and Seekers.

A forum-based thumbnail option would be super cool though, especially if that was the default.

Will

Quote from: Amber Riddler on January 02, 2011, 02:06:59 PM
I don't know if this is possible for something on E, Vek, but on another huge forum that I'm on the admin just came out with a new spoiler feature.

There's just a button inside the post that says spoiler, and in order to see the content of the post you click the spoiler button and it opens up the content.

This would be perfect, I think.
If you can heal the symptoms, but not affect the cause
It's like trying to heal a gunshot wound with gauze

One day, I will find the right words, and they will be simple.
- Jack Kerouac

Reno

Quote from: Amber Riddler on January 02, 2011, 02:06:59 PM
I don't know if this is possible for something on E, Vek, but on another huge forum that I'm on the admin just came out with a new spoiler feature.

There's just a button inside the post that says spoiler, and in order to see the content of the post you click the spoiler button and it opens up the content.

Unless I'm mistaken, aren't those are usually just "hidden" CSS div blocks with the button that toggles whether they're visible or not?  If so, I'm pretty sure that would still require the image to be loaded, just not shown in the background.


Amber

It's possible that that's what they are, I haven't actually looked at the coding for myself... I haven't learned that much about JS/PHP (yet) so I don't know if there's a way to get them to NOT load until you press the button, but even with hidden DIVs it prevents the page from becoming super long. But I'm not sure that's the whole issue here...

Reno

Quote from: Amber Riddler on January 03, 2011, 01:46:23 PM
It's possible that that's what they are, I haven't actually looked at the coding for myself... I haven't learned that much about JS/PHP (yet) so I don't know if there's a way to get them to NOT load until you press the button, but even with hidden DIVs it prevents the page from becoming super long. But I'm not sure that's the whole issue here...

Yeah, someone else mentioned taking forever to load. It wouldn't help that. Although you might be able to work out some Lovecraftian kluge using AJAX and an IFrame... but then the programming gods would have to smite the hell out of you...