Picture URLs

[hellcat]

When a picture is uploaded from a PC, the picture shows up in the thread as a large thumbnail. Of course when you click on it, it opens up to its native size.

Can your forum application be configured to display these uploaded PC pictures in the body of a posting instead of as a thumbnail at the bottom. I would think it shouldn't be a problem since once the PC picture is uploaded, you then have a URL you could use within the [IMG] tag.

I just think it would improve the presentation of postings. For me it is easier to upload a picture from my local machine than to move the picture to my website.

[Rhett]

I'm not sure of your question here. Are you asking that we stop using thumbnails?

[hellcat]

I'm not sure of your question here. Are you asking that we stop using thumbnails?

I am not sure actually. Let me re-phrase it. Is it possible to display the picture that the thumbnail represents instead of the thumbnail itself.

Maybe I don't understand how to insert pictures into posts? If I have a picture on my desktop machine and I want to insert it into a posting, I thought my only option was to upload the picture as a thumbnail. If this last statement is true, then even if I want the picture to appear in the body of the posting, there isn't anyway for me to do it unless I can upload the picture to some website and then use the resulting URL with a [IMG] tag on this forum.

I can understand why someone might actually want their pictures to be rendered as thumbnails and so I am not proposing to do away with them. I am just asking for an option for inline pictures for those people who can't upload their pictures to a web site in order to obtain a web URL.

[spalding12]

I am not sure actually. Let me re-phrase it. Is it possible to display the picture that the thumbnail represents instead of the thumbnail itself.

Maybe I don't understand how to insert pictures into posts? If I have a picture on my desktop machine and I want to insert it into a posting, I thought my only option was to upload the picture as a thumbnail. If this last statement is true, then even if I want the picture to appear in the body of the posting, there isn't anyway for me to do it unless I can upload the picture to some website and then use the resulting URL with a [IMG] tag on this forum.

I can understand why someone might actually want their pictures to be rendered as thumbnails and so I am not proposing to do away with them. I am just asking for an option for inline pictures for those people who can't upload their pictures to a web site in order to obtain a web URL.


the answer essentially is NO
my pictures show up the proper way because i have them stored ELSEWHERE online

when you UPLOAD them here, because of bandwidth... they show up as thumbnails
when you use the bracket they will be as big as the forum allows

[spalding12]

by the way, i use smugmug
www.smugmug.com (http://www.smugmug.com)


by the way... online photo storage is dirt cheap
and.... don't you like to share family photos with friends and family all over the world?

upload your photos elsewhere and link them here... it's far superior.... and, the right thing to do for you

[hellcat]

... NO ... because of bandwidth... they show up as thumbnails
Spalding12,

you understand my question. What I don't understand is if my picture gets uploaded onto the web server and is then available to anyone clicking on the thumbnail, then why not just show the picture in the posting instead of the thumbnail. I don't understand why referencing a picture on another server using an [IMG] tag would lessen or increase the resulting bandwidth.

In fact, I would think going to another URL to obtain a picture would require more bandwidth than simply rendering the image from the hosting web server itself.

[spalding12]

Spalding12,

you understand my question. What I don't understand is if my picture gets uploaded onto the web server and is then available to anyone clicking on the thumbnail, then why not just show the picture in the posting instead of the thumbnail. I don't understand why referencing a picture on another server using an [IMG] tag would lessen or increase the resulting bandwidth.


because...
the thumbnail takes less bandwidth with each HIT
in other words... on a thread about bike pictures, there might 100 pictures open everytime someone clicks on it...
if every one of those pictures showed up at FULL size...
there would be a much higher bandwidth requirement
i use my own bandwidth

also....
some folks STILL have slower connections and the thumbnails will allow their pages to load more quickly...
though, my smugmug doesn't help them, of course

[spalding12]

or increase the resulting bandwidth.

In fact, I would think going to another URL to obtain a picture would require more bandwidth than simply rendering the image from the hosting web server itself.

this is something i can't answer

[hellcat]

Let me add one other note. If a picture is stored on another web server and for some reason that picture goes away, then I think it will show up as a missing image icon in the posting?

On the other hand, if we store small images in this forums web server, then there is never an issue of these picture disappearing.

[hellcat]

because...
the thumbnail takes less bandwidth with each HIT
in other words... on a thread about bike pictures, there might 100 pictures open everytime someone clicks on it...
if every one of those pictures showed up at FULL size...
there would be a much higher bandwidth requirement
i use my own bandwidth

also....
some folks STILL have slower connections and the thumbnails will allow their pages to load more quickly...
though, my smugmug doesn't help them, of course

If you open a thread and see full sized pictures, then those pictures have to be streamed to your browser. It doesn't matter where the picture originated from, it still has to go through wires to get to your browser. So the bandwidth isn't going to be affected by where the picture is stored. You are correct that if every picture were rendered as a thumbnail, then pages would render faster.

But ...

In general terms, I don't think thumbnails address bandwidth issues since if everyone posted pictures using URL references instead of thumbnails, then obviously the un-used thumbnail capability didn't change anything.

[Rhett]

Spalding has pretty much covered it and very well also.

Thumbnails are used to improve the loading times of the pages. like mentioned not everyone has a high speed connection. If someone tried to load a page with full size images on it with dial up it would take several minutes, using thumbnails it takes seconds. Most thumbnails that are used are very small and hard to see, thus the reason I increased ours to 300x300 (i think). This way it allows people to see the images without opening the full image. If people find the image of interest then they have the option of seeing the full size version by clicking on it.

Although there are many other reasons we have chosen to use thumbnails, this is the main one.

I hope this clears this up.

[Rhett]

In general terms, I don't think thumbnails address bandwidth issues since if everyone posted pictures using URL references instead of thumbnails, then obviously the un-used thumbnail capability didn't change anything.

Yes thumbnails do address the bandwidth issue.... The bandwidth of our server though, not your connection to the net.
Instead of pulling a full picture of approx 400kb from our server you will only pull a thumbnail image of approx 43kb. This greatly reduced the load on the server and bandwidth as well.

Using an image tag will pull it from the server it's hosted on and not the 1098-forum.com server. It will still be slower loading on your end, but the 1098-forum server will not be the weak link.... the image hosting server will be.

[hellcat]

Thanks that answer my question.

[Rhett]

:beer

You're Welcome ;)

[spalding12]

thanks, R1Lover
i appreciate your explanation as well