Jump to content


Photo

Hosting versus Posting


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 I Hate Moths

I Hate Moths
  • Members
    • Member ID: 7,425
  • 298 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 September 2011 - 03:55 PM

I have struggled to keep my photos under 150k. As i got into posting documents, the challenges became much more evident. How do you post a document that is legible? The easy solution is a photo hosting site like Photo bucket. The drawback is that it's not permanent . I found this topic from 2007 that covers the issue somewhat . http://www.usmilitar...?showtopic=7906
It seems that often posts are made (1 photo 1 post) and then the next photo and post it. I see this done by members, and moderators . Everything still comes down to storage space, and bandwidth Please share with me your opinions

#2 Jack's Son

Jack's Son

    Deceased

  • IN MEMORIAM
    • Member ID: 8,213
  • 19,660 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 25 September 2011 - 04:07 PM

I cannot speak to the storage issue, I can only address the hosting vs. posting issue.
Before learning the meaning of "This thread is worthless without pictures", I was ignorant to the fact that threads were stored for a long period of time, and that valuable information was being given about items that should have been present during the discussion. As my ignorance subsided, I began to understand that future reference to these threads and the information they stored were truly WORTHLESS because members were no longer able to see the pictures being discussed.

POSTING is always better.....! :thumbsup:

#3 Golem

Golem
  • Members
    • Member ID: 55,915
  • 197 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, Texas

Posted 25 September 2011 - 04:45 PM

Option: Find a friend with a website that'll set up an image hosting solution for you.


Option: Pay for a "premium" account at photobucket or somewhere where "premium account' means they won't delete anything if the files aren't viewed in "X" months (I'm not advocating photobucket, just using them as an example). For the price of some pro accounts, you can find your own website provider and run your own image hosting solution (and avoid any nasty "copyright" claims [some public image hosts have some nasty little small print about transferring copyright to them every time you upload an image]).


I've got access to a private website solution and I've had pix up for 6 years . . .


I advise people NOT to use "forum attachments" because most forums have very limited storage space, and they go on the "first in - first out" principle (the earlier images get dumped as later images are attached)

If you use forum attachments, you also must upload your image to each individual forum you want to display them on.

If you use an image hosting solution, you can use IMG tags and link to the same picture from any number of forums, blogs, etc. IOW, "upload once - post everywhere"


HTH

#4 Dave

Dave

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 209
  • 13,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 25 September 2011 - 05:09 PM

I advise people NOT to use "forum attachments" because most forums have very limited storage space, and they go on the "first in - first out" principle (the earlier images get dumped as later images are attached)



That's great, but we don't have that problem. Thanks for the advice though.

We greatly DISCOURAGE the use of private hosting of photos. Here are a few reasons:

1. When the person loses the website (e.g. it expires or doesn't get paid) the photos disappear.

2. When the person deletes the photos from their hosting service, the photos are...gone...

3. MANY forum members browse the forum from their places of employment and many of the photo hosting sites are blocked by their corporate/government network admins...thus, they can't see the photos you post.

4. We don't have the issue with storing photos on this forum, so post away!

Thanks

Dave

#5 Dave

Dave

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 209
  • 13,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 25 September 2011 - 05:12 PM

I have struggled to keep my photos under 150k.


There are several tutorials on how to do this, and it is not difficult to do.

Dave

P.S. Here's a random photo I had that is less than 150kb (it is 135kb). This is PLENTY big for the forum...

Attached Images

  • largephoto.jpg


#6 Dave

Dave

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 209
  • 13,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 25 September 2011 - 05:14 PM

And if you're not hip with wide photos, here's another large one...this one is 125kb...PLENTY large for the forum!!!

Attached Images

  • anotherbigone.jpg


#7 Bob Hudson

Bob Hudson

    Forum Co-Founder (Ret)

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 2
  • 26,635 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 September 2011 - 05:15 PM

What Dave says....

And here's one of many posts on how to reduce file size: http://www.usmilitar...php?showtopic=7

#8 I Hate Moths

I Hate Moths
  • Members
    • Member ID: 7,425
  • 298 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 September 2011 - 06:10 PM

Great Video Bob, but it doesn't really answer my base question.
Documents They are much harder than photos, to post with clarity.

#9 Dave

Dave

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 209
  • 13,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 25 September 2011 - 06:22 PM

Great Video Bob, but it doesn't really answer my base question.
Documents They are much harder than photos, to post with clarity.


They don't have to be...they just need to go a little darker than straight white in order to be pared down. This one is ~147kb, and isn't entirely crystal clear, but it does work to get the point across (and it's WAY bigger than it needs to be...)

Dave

Attached Images

  • spaatzdocument.jpg


#10 Dave

Dave

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 209
  • 13,964 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 25 September 2011 - 06:30 PM

It's that white space that's a killer...this was as large as I could get this one and stay under 150kb...

Attached Images

  • rowelarge.jpg


#11 Bob Hudson

Bob Hudson

    Forum Co-Founder (Ret)

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 2
  • 26,635 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 September 2011 - 06:32 PM

Great Video Bob, but it doesn't really answer my base question.
Documents They are much harder than photos, to post with clarity.


Yes, documents are trickier because of the requirement to make them readable.

Here's a document that I convert to JPEG directly from Adobe Acrobat. This file is 602KB (as an ADMIN I get to upload large files):

test_Page_01.jpg

Now here's the same document reduced to 49KB - the first thing I do is crop it as much as possible and then shrink it to 620 pixels wide, which is I have found is about the minimum width where you can still read text. I then saved it as a JPEG at MEDIUM QUALITY (30 on a scale of 100).

doctest.jpg

Now if you have lots of detail on a page that will affect the compression. This one was done with the same settings and ended up at 103KB. I have changed our settings to allow up to 110KB per post, so something like this will fit:

doctest2.jpg

#12 KnifeDog

KnifeDog
  • Banned
    • Member ID: 15,813
  • 24 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2014 - 04:01 PM


That's great, but we don't have that problem. Thanks for the advice though.

We greatly DISCOURAGE the use of private hosting of photos. Here are a few reasons:

1. When the person loses the website (e.g. it expires or doesn't get paid) the photos disappear.

2. When the person deletes the photos from their hosting service, the photos are...gone...

3. MANY forum members browse the forum from their places of employment and many of the photo hosting sites are blocked by their corporate/government network admins...thus, they can't see the photos you post.

4. We don't have the issue with storing photos on this forum, so post away!

Thanks

Dave

 

As a new guy here I have inadvertently violated your rule about using hosting services.  I do understand your reasoning for not being crazy about hosting.  I will try to do better.



#13 Bugme

Bugme

    ADMINISTRATOR

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 1,726
  • 15,203 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Marsaxlokk, Malta & Wisconsin Shoreline

Posted 23 March 2014 - 06:27 PM

 

As a new guy here I have inadvertently violated your rule about using hosting services.  I do understand your reasoning for not being crazy about hosting.  I will try to do better.

Well, it's not really a rule but, we strongly prefer you to use our service. This keeps our forum full of useful information rather than  a thread with a bunch of posts about an item that can no longer be viewed.



#14 bazelot

bazelot
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,988
  • 1,881 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco, CA

Posted 27 April 2014 - 05:55 PM

Is it no longer possible to use hosting services? I tried and all it showed were the links so I had to create one post for each picture I wanted to put on the site, that was really painful and a waste of posts in my mind.



#15 Longbranch

Longbranch
  • Members
    • Member ID: 11,320
  • 1,255 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 April 2014 - 04:59 PM

Well, it's not really a rule but, we strongly prefer you to use our service. This keeps our forum full of useful information rather than  a thread with a bunch of posts about an item that can no longer be viewed.

 

This is true, however I have seen many other discussion forums that lost ALL of their photos after an "update" or "upgrade" to their forum software. The only photos left at these sites that were still viewable were those hosted elsewhere, at photo hosting service like Photobucket. Also, If I want to post 10 pictures into a discussion, it is MUCH easier to do this using a different hosting service, and I can post larger, more detailed pictures as well.

 

As noted above, it appears that linking to photo hosting services is no longer allowed. Is that so?


Edited by Longbranch, 28 April 2014 - 05:00 PM.


#16 vintageproductions

vintageproductions

    ADMINISTRATOR

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 492
  • 16,081 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huntington Beach, California

Posted 28 April 2014 - 05:26 PM

The USMF will be undergoing photo attachment optimization which will increase the allowable size of photo attachments uploaded directly to the forum. As a result off-forum web hosting of images will be unavailable. This optimization will make it easier for members to upload their images without having to resize them as small. In addition uploading your images directly onto the forum server will ensure the images remain available to our members. That has the added benefit of preserving our collective knowledge for all members. When members use off-forum hosting all it takes is a broken link to render the threads useless. This change will prevent that and also allow you to post your images with ease.

The USMF Administration.



#17 toadboy65

toadboy65
  • Members
    • Member ID: 154,154
  • 50 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alexander, NC, Antonito, CO, Saipan, MP

Posted 07 October 2014 - 05:30 PM

I have been struggling with this issue. I am a photoshop guy, so sizing images is not a problem. My issue is that on replies to a topic, I seem to only be getting the option of entering a URL for attaching an image, but that would entail offsite hosting.  Maybe I am doing it wrong. I am new to this forum, so I understand that I do not get to make the rules, but it would seem that it should either be simple to embed images within the site or attach links to offsite images.



#18 Longbranch

Longbranch
  • Members
    • Member ID: 11,320
  • 1,255 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 October 2014 - 03:49 AM

You need to click on the "More Reply Options" button at the bottom next the the "Post" button at the bottom of the reply box. This will bring up the full range of reply options, including the ability to upload pictures to the forum.

 

EDIT: Just saw you already figured this out. Glad to see the problem is already solved!


Edited by Longbranch, 08 October 2014 - 04:10 AM.


#19 River Rat 1

River Rat 1
  • Members
    • Member ID: 14,208
  • 313 posts

Posted 18 November 2014 - 05:32 PM

Hi

I have tried to attach photo's every time it says to big it does not do it with ease I really like this forum even added stuff to the collection and can't post photo's due to all these changes I am a old fart and it took me some time to learn to post with photobucket. Then this attachment thing were I know I did it right but the photo is all ways to big. Now do a thread how to make photo's smaller would be a BIG HELP.



#20 CNY Militaria

CNY Militaria

    SENIOR MODERATOR

  • Senior Moderators
    • Member ID: 94
  • 11,983 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York

Posted 18 November 2014 - 06:04 PM

Check pinned and other posted topics on this photos and imaging sub-forum. The topic of how to resize photos is addressed in a number of topics.



#21 ustpatcher1a

ustpatcher1a
  • Members
    • Member ID: 159,226
  • 167 posts

Posted 02 July 2015 - 08:21 AM

Grafics online are tricky and a new talent to learn. I'm glad you clarified this matter. I can only wish more people took the time to learn matters with photos, file size, and type. Some folks are just too lazy to try. Not me.



#22 Cdubs

Cdubs
  • New Members
    • Member ID: 162,050
  • 28 posts

Posted 22 July 2016 - 04:13 AM

Im trying to find a post or thread regarding the rules for posting pics. Sorry, if i missed it or if its been discussed elsewhere im sorry. I just want to make sure I dont post pics to big or small.

What sizes are best for the forum? 16:9 or 4:3 etc.
Im going to use my Galaxy S6 camera and it lets me take a 16M 16:9 down to a 8M 4:3 or a 2:4M 16:9.

Thanks guys!

Chris

#23 Bob Hudson

Bob Hudson

    Forum Co-Founder (Ret)

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 2
  • 26,635 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 July 2016 - 06:35 AM

What sizes are best for the forum? 16:9 or 4:3 etc.
Im going to use my Galaxy S6 camera and it lets me take a 16M 16:9 down to a 8M 4:3 or a 2:4M 16:9.

Thanks guys!

Chris

 

 

"16:9 or 4:3" are aspect ratios and have nothing to do with the size of the image. Image size is basically determined by how many pixels high and wide: for instance, 640 x 480. The amount of detail in the image affects the size as does the settings used to save the image. Generally speaking you should shrink your images so that the largest dimension is no more than about 850 pixels, and it should be saved at a medium JPEG setting (say 30 on a scale of 100). 

 

It is ironic that most photos people take these days with their multi-megapixel cameras end up online at less than one megapixel. 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users