Post a photo of the last thing you made

[J-G]

The resizing of images etc is not a problem for me - been doing that for 25+ years with lots of different progs - it's the forum s/w that I was referring to as not knowing how it worked.

It is irrelevant that there are programs available to re-size images 'automatically', the point is that the forum should impose a limit on the size of attached files - both for individual files and the total of all files attached to any one post. This is usual in most forums to which I contribute.

It should be incumbent upon each poster to manage the size of any file - be it Bitmap (any type), .PDF, .SKP, DWG - etc. etc.

In my first post on this subject I may well have mis-led some when I stated that the image size of @Stigmorgan 's photo's was 34.9Mb - they are, but that is the uncompressed size and actually gives a false impression regarding bandwidth needed. In one post, there are 10 .JPG files ranging in (compressed) size from 1.131 to 4.243 Mb - They are all 34.9Mb uncompressed, the variation is down to the specific content and how the .JPG algorithm handles the compression. The total size of the attachments to that one post is 24Mb.

There is also the matter of 'cropping' - - - No auto-reducing software can handle that and bringing the 'subject' to the fore by judicious trimming of any image will be a benefit to the reader.

 

[Phill05]

How much band width do you think it has used as "off topic" in this thread, when I have said anything in the past off topic I was told "if you don't like something scroll forward.
I like to see all what people have made never mind if the image is large or small you should be looking at the "Last thing made" that the name of the game.
And Stig don't get put off with the comments you keep it coming good on ya.

If the powers that be wanted to set the forum up with conditions they would have done so until then can we have some more last items made please.

 

[mwinfrance]

How much band width do you think it has used as "off topic" in this thread

Probably less than 20 kilobytes..text takes up very little data or bandwidth..an image of 200kb ( perfectly viewable with lots of detail ) uses 10 times more.You seem to have missed ( or don't care about ) my earlier point.Some people ( I'm not one of them ) do not have ISP deals with unlimited bandwidth.If they click to look at a thread..The huge ( in data terms ) images can "blow past" their monthly allowance and merely looking at the thread can cost them money that they may well not have. You said "I like to see all what people have made never mind if the image is large or small" ..It isn't all about just you. That is what defines a forum.

until then can we have some more last items made please.

So post some, no-one is stopping you or anyone else, no one is saying that you or anyone else or stig should not post them, some of us ( with IT experience ) are just saying, think of the others, who may not be on unlimited data plans and post less data heavy images. easy to do..I linked to a bunch of apps and software earlier. As a paying supporter ( that means one of those who is paying for the bandwidth ) I have no problem at all with the idea that the forum could be set up to restrict the size of images..That wouldn't affect me paying as a supporter. I' don't post images, probably never will, I have websites where my stuff is already.Not going to link to them from here either.

No-one is trying to "put stig off"..and to anyone who thinks "turning doesn't interest me"..I like 90% of stigs stuff and if you search out the book that I mentioned to stig earlier in the thread, you'd see that turning is not just spinning things on a lathe, and that book is already 15 years old..Some of it ( turning ) is high art, really pushes the idea and combines with sculpture to produce beautiful creative things..stig is in early days yet, but shows all the signs of that creativity..keep at it.
Just shrink 'em a bit stig , think of the poor sods who don't have "all you can eat" cheap data plans.

this post was 2221 bytes ( 2.2 kb )

 

[MarkAW]

What happened to all the nice pictures?

I suggest a new thread for discussing bandwidth

 

[mwinfrance]

What happened to all the nice pictures?

I suggest a new thread for discussing bandwidth

Wooooooooosh!

 

[Andy's Shed]

I'm fairly sure that the site admin could install a software plug-in to automatically resize the larger photos, I've seen it used on other forums.

 

[thetyreman]

I made a guitar knob out of teak, no lathe, shaped mainly using an orbital sander in the vice, finished with BLO, need a lot more practise before I can make one good enough.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Err, yes - it was the vast number of images to scroll through that prompted my comment - although he's not the only poster with multiple large images.

And to be blunt for a moment : I have less than no interest in turned/carved stuff . . . but do understand that other people do.

Anyway, if the image sizes can be reduced (both file size and displayed on screen) that would seem to be a good thing that will suit a lot of the members here. Short & sharp is the way!

If it annoys you that much turn off image download on your browser. Don’t ask others to manage your bandwidth. I like big images as I can zoom in for the detail.

 

[J-G]

If it annoys you that much turn off image download on your browser. Don’t ask others to manage your bandwidth. I like big images as I can zoom in for the detail.

First I must say that I have never suggested that @Stigmorgan should limit the number of his posts - I did consider offering him personal assistance via Zoom and/or remote control but thought that might be considered patronizing (the offer is open of course).

Second - surely you can see from the modified images that I posted that there is no degradation when reducing the size. The amount of 'detail' is not reduced so you can still 'Zoom in' if that is what you need to do.

 

[robgul]

If it annoys you that much turn off image download on your browser. Don’t ask others to manage your bandwidth. I like big images as I can zoom in for the detail.

The key point that started my comment was the need to scroll through yards and yards of enormous images where the "thumbnail" size would save scrolling mileage but still display the image content that can then be clicked on to see the full-size version/zoom in etc . . . if you so desire.

The US-base Lumberjocks site has a neat way of displaying project pix - a thumbnail with the base image, click to enlarge and/or see more pix of the same project if it interests you. https://www.lumberjocks.com/showcase/categories/projects.3/

I'm not asking anyone to manage my bandwidth, it's of no consequence with an infinite business broadband connection.

 

[clogs]

It's ok for u tech savy blokes but I find it hard enough anyway.......

show me something once and I'm OK but there's nobody here to help and if aint broke dont fix it.......

mwinfrance,
we got so pee'd of with the internet in Frogland we opted out and bought into a satelite system....
Two-Way, actually.....
just before we left it was €40'ish euro's for unlimited.....

Stig, pls keep photo's comming......

as for band width limit shortage or what ever......it might stop her watching all those cr@py soaps.....hahaha.......

 

[mwinfrance]

It's ok for u tech savy blokes but I find it hard enough anyway.......

show me something once and I'm OK but there's nobody here to help and if aint broke dont fix it.......

mwinfrance,
we got so pee'd of with the internet in Frogland we opted out and bought into a satelite system....
Two-Way, actually.....
just before we left it was €40'ish euro's for unlimited.....

Stig, pls keep photo's comming......

as for band width limit shortage or what ever......it might stop her watching all those cr@py soaps.....hahaha.......

upload latency on sat systems is horrible..and wouldn't touch anything musky any more than I'd touch anything marky

 

[stenik]

So being the sad man that I am I've just counted 25 (26 including this) posts on the reasoning on reducing the image size of pics posted.
Surely as this thread is for posting photos whether they be 4mb or 400kb most have super fast or fast access to the internet so it doesn't take long for the site to show the pics and for you to scroll through them.
I'm not tech savvy, never have been and never will be. I take the pic on my phone and upload it as that's what I enjoy doing, like a lot of members I expect, and that is how I intend to upload in the future as I don't have a pc.
I make something take a pic and upload for everyone to critic.
Perhaps the MODS could either move this part of the thread to its own one as I'm bored now and want to see pics of beautiful and not so beautiful things made by talented people. Or the mods could have nipped this in the bud before.

Sorry not a lot of sleep last night
And I'm not having a go at anyone. I just like the pics so let's get back to that.

 

[stenik]

For those into turning let's start a thread in the turning discussion group then those that don't really want to see our stuff can pass on by. Just a thought?

 

[mwinfrance]

I'm not tech savvy, never have been and never will be

Those of us who are IT "savvy" knew that as soon as you posted the following entirely baseless assumption

most have super fast or fast access to the internet

Which means your post boils down to
"stuff the others who might not have or be able to afford fast unlimited internet..i want to see big pictures"
Very community ( what a forum is ) spirited of you..

Exactly the sort of attitude that does not make me keen to continue being a paying supporter.

 

[stenik]

@mwinfrance. Not my intention at all to come across as stuff those that can't have/ afford fast internet and my apologies if that's the way it came across. Not a case of I want to see big pics, I just want to be able to upload pics the way I know how to do it and I do think I am community spirited but if that's your opinion so be it.
The only attitude on my part was for all the posts about pics on a post your pics thread.
Every one has their own opinions and I take your onboard

 

[mwinfrance]

Accepted ..
re uploading the way you know how..
this is why I ( and others have said it would make more sense to have the site "shrink" the images on the server , as does lumberjacks, woodcarving illustrated and many many others ) it is extremely easy for any site admin to set up..That would mean that all posts with images would work like the post of thetyreman..each image as a thumbnail..with the real image size indicated on mouse over, so you could decide to click to see the full size image..or not.
Takes a couple of clicks on the "back end" of the server board control panel to set up.

this site can work that way..the tyreman's post bears witness..Just ought to be the "default".

 

[robgul]

Accepted ..
re uploading the way you know how..
this is why I ( and others have said it would make more sense to have the site "shrink" the images on the server , as does lumberjacks, woodcarving illustrated and many many others ) it is extremely easy for any site admin to set up..That would mean that all posts with images would work like the post of thetyreman..each image as a thumbnail..with the real image size indicated on mouse over, so you could decide to click to see the full size image..or not.
Takes a couple of clicks on the "back end" of the server board control panel to set up.

this site can work that way..the tyreman's post bears witness..Just ought to be the "default".

Precisely - exactly my original point - whether the site admins will/can do that to set as a default? - BUT it couldn't be simpler for the uploading member to set the "thumbnail" option as tyreman has done (a look back at any pix I have posted and I'm pretty sure they are all click thumbnails)

 

[thetyreman]

Accepted ..
re uploading the way you know how..
this is why I ( and others have said it would make more sense to have the site "shrink" the images on the server , as does lumberjacks, woodcarving illustrated and many many others ) it is extremely easy for any site admin to set up..That would mean that all posts with images would work like the post of thetyreman..each image as a thumbnail..with the real image size indicated on mouse over, so you could decide to click to see the full size image..or not.
Takes a couple of clicks on the "back end" of the server board control panel to set up.

this site can work that way..the tyreman's post bears witness..Just ought to be the "default".

it helps being a photography nerd I just upload them at 1920p x 1080p which is all done in lightroom but could be done in something like GIMP as well, I think/presume the site then creates a thumbnail automatically, nothing special about it, although you could bring the file sizes down quite a bit which improves load times, there is a feature in lightroom and photoshop where you can reduce the quality and it shows you a preview so you can see it in real time, on my old version of photoshop elements it has a feature called 'save for web' which can be handy.

 

[Padster]

I didn't want to enter this conversation, that is way off what the thread is for.... and I love the thread for what it is and don't want it closed or moved or any 'real' changes but a quick comment based on my use of another forum.... if you use the attach files as opposed to the Insert image icon - my belief as explained on the other forum is you avoid the large images being mentioned unless you chose to open the pic.

Perhaps one of the mods like @MikeK will comment and get this put to bed so we can return to the pics those of us who love this thread want to see.

Regards

Padster