Exceeded photo quoter

[ntpntpntp]

Photos on forum posts don't generally need to be particularly high resolution, though people's monitor sizes and resolutions have increased over time and there's now more "space" on the browser window to accommodate larger photos with having to scroll or click to see the full image.

I still generally try and keep photos below 500k file size (ish), there's really no need to be uploading  Mb sized photos.   There are various tools out there which can bulk resize photos, I have "Image Resizer for Windows" installed. Generally I just use the Windows photo editor to crop and adjust anyway before uploading.

[Tank]

...but then automatically, silently downsize them for storage and publication at a resolution sufficient for clear details....

If you'd like to pay the bill for it, then I'd love to have that feature on the forum!     £££'s!  When I last enquired about this, it was deemed very expensive.  These were some small 'fixes' that I did to help users edit their photo's, but sadly 'the easy way' that Facebook does it seems to make everyone think that all forums should do it in the same way.  I'd love to, but when I last looked it's was a technology that we couldn't afford.

[Tank]

There used to be a much lower limit to photos on here, but we increased it a few years ago as a handful of members were having trouble with uploading photos from their phones.  I knew that one day it would be a headache, with photos taking up a vast amount of space.

As I said in my previous post, Facebook has some amazing software to grab any photo from your devices and make it smaller in size.  Most forums do not have that!  It cost thousands to design and implement it.  It seems that too many of us aren't able to resize photos before uploading, which is causing an issue in the long term regarding storage.  Members who have been here since the beginning of the NGF will know that the current Gallery is the 3rd one we've had on here, each claiming to have wonderful features, but none really living up to what I expected.  And without meaning to insult anyone, I still find it hard that some members can't upload photos to the NGF, which is just a few clicks.  Again, we seem to have got used to the 'one click' of Facebook (however, the extra clicks on here are just to put them in your own folder, rather than lost amongst everyone else's).

So, the current limit per photo is set at 15MB each.  This is a LOT.  Again, this was just to help those struggling with mobile phones and uploading.  It wasn't a true fix for the problem.

I'm hoping that one day, there will be a decent gallery released, where photos can be resized automatically, and maybe a 'one click' button for photos.   

[ntpntpntp]

So, the current limit per photo is set at 15MB each.  This is a LOT.

ooof that is HUGE!  I wouldn't want to be trying to view a page with a load of those embedded if you're only on a lower speed internet connection.  Seriously who uploads photos that are that large? Fine for printing out a large format glossy poster but surely totally unnecessary for a forum post.   

Flippin' phones!  They're for talking to people not taking photos

OK so I mostly use an ancient 5 MegaPixel camera for quick snaps for the forum, I just checked some recent uncropped photos on my camera card and they are around 300k - 500k. One day I will probably invest in a much better digital camera but I'll still make sure what gets uploaded is reasonably sized both dimensionally and file size     

[Danielmc1]

If you happen to use iOS in some form, it's helpful in that it will allow you to choose alternative smaller sizes before you upload. I only discovered this fairly recently.

When you select your photo for uploading, there is some text at the bottom of that popup that reads 'original size'. Clicking on that brings up a few other options and file sizes (small, medium, large & original).

I tend to snap photos on my phone rather than my dedicated camera. This of course causes issues with orientation of photos, but that's another story.

[dannyboy]

As ntp says, 15MB is huge. Purely out of interest, I have just had a look at the last few photographs in my Misc' gallery. Without getting the calculator out, I would think the average size of each photograph is around the 1MB size. The pictures look okay to me when I upload them to the forum, so I am presuming they look okay for everybody else. 

[Newportnobby]

I'm not suggesting we take draconian measures but....15MB??!!
The UK Kawasaki forum I'm on limits folks to 1.5mb.
I'm all for pics and would hate to see numbers decline but it's just as well we don't allow vids to be uploaded!!!

[jpendle]

And without meaning to insult anyone, I still find it hard that some members can't upload photos to the NGF, which is just a few clicks.

I think it's concept of "uploading" that's the issue for people. The only other forum I frequent on a regular basis is RMWeb. To add a photo/picture to a post on there you just drag and drop from the folder on your device into the post that you are writing. If members on here are expecting that sort of use model then they could well struggle with the way it's done here. Using "Add image and upload to gallery", is indeed just a few clicks, but why do I need to enter a title and a category?

When I upload direct to one of my galleries I always use bulk upload as it means that I don't have to think of a title for every image that I'm uploading.

Regards,

John P

[chrism]

15Mb is a ridiculous size to allow.
That's roughly the total size of the last 50 photos I've posted of Furness Junction and it's almost twice the size of the image that I made for Broughton's backscene, saved at my usual jpg compression setting - and that prints out to some 7 feet long at 300dpi.

Following a quick test I find that 15Mb is roughly a 45 megapixel image saved (using Photoshop) with the lowest jpg compression possible, the image I've used to test it comes out at a bit over 9000 x 5000 pixels - larger than the screen resolution of an 8K UHD telly. I doubt there's any members who routinely view the forums on such a device, so what's the point in uploading that large an image?

TBH, if someone can't be bothered to show consideration for other users and resize such a large image to a more reasonable size I can't be bothered to wait for it to be downloaded and rendered in my browser.

[chrism]

why do I need to enter a title and a category?

When I upload direct to one of my galleries I always use bulk upload as it means that I don't have to think of a title for every image that I'm uploading.

The category is useful, allowing you to choose whether to have the image in your own gallery or just the general one - although I've never had any luck with a bulk upload so I do them one at a time.

As to the title - I just copy and paste the filename in there 

[jpendle]

TBH, if someone can't be bothered to show consideration for other users and resize such a large image to a more reasonable size I can't be bothered to wait for it to be downloaded and rendered in my browser.

You have to remember that our membership is a broad church, just transferring a photo from a phone to a computer, and then using software to resize the image may well be beyond some people. SWMBO, for one, wouldn't even attempt to add a photo to a post here unless it "just worked", whatever that means. 

I have a reasonable grasp of technology, but even so I find it a lot easier to use my camera, set at lower resolution, to take pictures destined for the forum, than to use my phone.

Regards,

John P

[exmouthcraig]

I admit that when I post "replies to my topics" they do almost always contain photos, reading Mike H comments @Nbodger which I've noted him post a couple of times now I interestingly went through some of my recent posts, knowing that they do contain probably 3/4/5 pictures.

Now I take my pictures on my phone, I post on the forum from my phone and I view the forum in desktop version on my phone, if it refreshes itself to display the 'mobile version' I have to reload it because I absolutely hate the mobile version, simply because I don't like not knowing how to work it.

In a string of photos in my posts they range from a few Kb to upto about 4 5Mb!!!!!! Now I always crop the pictures before I upload to the gallery BUT if this "cleverer then you" phone decides what Kb or Mb size image it takes I honestly don't know how to make it more 'responsible to the forum' and not clog up the pages with my tat.



I dont use any form of editing or picture hosting or anything like that because I don't know how to use it!!

So is it easier for me to just not post pictures?

I dont want to be unnecessarily cluttering up the forum, and or boring people because the picture takes too long too load

[maridunian]

...but then automatically, silently downsize them for storage and publication at a resolution sufficient for clear details....

If you'd like to pay the bill for it, then I'd love to have that feature on the forum!     £££'s!  When I last enquired about this, it was deemed very expensive.  These were some small 'fixes' that I did to help users edit their photo's, but sadly 'the easy way' that Facebook does it seems to make everyone think that all forums should do it in the same way.  I'd love to, but when I last looked it's was a technology that we couldn't afford.

It's doubtful that all 9k members will get ever their heads around this issue, and every new phone/camera they buy will make matters worse.

There seem to be several free online compression services out there, one of which people could be directed to to prepare (ie shrink) their photos for upload, maybe via a button in the Gallery tools?

If that's not feasible then as others have said, the generosity of the current maximum photo size appears to slow image rendering unacceptably and presumably also impacts overall performance and filestore. Dropping that maximum would push the problem back to the posting member, which isn't unreasonable, IMO.

Mike

[dannyboy]

When taking a photograph that I am going to post on the forum, I use my camera, put the memory card into the computer and open the picture with the built in Windows photo editor. If necessary, I then crop and adjust the photograph and save to the desktop. Following a post from @Newportnobby a long time ago, (thank you Mick), I then open the photograph with the built in 'Paint' programme and using that programmes resize facility, adjust the top pixel count down to about 2000 and save it. I then upload the photograph to the forum. I do not know if this is a long winded way of doing things, but it is something I stick to as I know it works for me, (and I don't have to learn anything new!). When reading posts that contain photographs, I do notice that some of them can take an age to show, but I don't know if that is the size of the photograph, or my internet connection, which can be a pain sometimes.

[Nbodger]

David @dannyboy

If you are a win10 user then you can do all of the resizing in photo editor, I believe you also have Affinity, where you can do all cropping and resizing there to.

If unsure how to, then PM me and I will explain

Mike H