Hi guys, ive been meaning for a while to bring up the subject of "dial up beware" type threads or just posting of multiple large format pix. For most of the time i myself on the forum, im on dial up and get a bit concerned when a thread is posted with not 1 or 2 but a dozen LARGE photos which is a bit silly considering that it would take 10mins to download for many dial up users. (who got time to sit and watch a thread download?)
its ok for me when im at work with fast cable but most of time many or us are stuck with dial up. Its really cool when some guys post threads with the "option" to view a larger pic.
Not everyone is capable of affordiing broadband or fast cable. Ive just been concerned lately with many pms asking me to ask if there could be consideration for dial up users with many of the threads.
i myself have been "guilty" of the multiple large format posts but lately dont see the point. better size pic at eg- 800px x 600px .
Some guys in world forum have audacity to post 50 LARGE photos for a threads first post! wtf? stupid really.
Sometimes the larger the pic the worse the defination anyway.(sometimes size doesnt matter)lol
Maybe when posting your post, maybe 1 large pic and a few medium size should be sufficent?
I remember a poll last year saying that it was approx 50% dial ups and cable/BB on the forum. so makes sense to limit photosize.
anyway ill leave you with it.

I agree...hell some of the posts in the world forum crash my browser if I try to open them. Are computers magically faster in Europe or something?

The Hong Kong forumers are keen on posting lots of large pics in the one thread too. lol Once there was something like 56 pics in the initial post.

We can see the same u/c pic from more than several different angles - from the east, from the south south, up the road, down the road, from the north, from the north-east, from the north-west, looking up, looking down, on the skyline from the east, on the skyline from Kowloon, on the skyline from the west etc etc etc.

Even on non-dial up networked in can take more time than necessary.

What do you mean by "large". I run on 1280 by 960 pixels and even then some photos are so large that i have to scroll accross. Is 1024 by 768 pixels too big? I thought that was the preffered size for images in a poll some time ago. Are 20 1024*768 pxl photos in one post too many??

What do you mean by "large". I run on 1280 by 960 pixels and even then some photos are so large that i have to scroll accross. Is 1024 by 768 pixels too big? I thought that was the preffered size for images in a poll some time ago. Are 20 1024*768 pxl photos in one post too many??
yeah i think 20x 1024x768 pix are abit much,. i think 800x600 is a perfect size.

Dial up users go:
User CP
Edit Options
Un-tick "Show Images" under Thread Display options
Click "Save Changes" at the bottom of the page.

Problem solved.

^^ lol exactly.

800 x 600 is tiny, and anyone using that resolution for their PC needs to bump it up (or get glasses :))

Yeah we did a poll and 1024x768 was voted the best size...
The forum needs an automatic thumbnail generator or something.
Anything above 1024x768 is a bit crazy though. Really its just more pixels only blurry :)

1024 x 768 for pics is a good average size, just don't go overboard.

How many people in here just cannot get broadband anyhow?

1024 x 768 for pics is a good average size, just don't go overboard.

How many people in here just cannot get broadband anyhow?
me! im talking at home of course where i should be on forum anyhow.
work is lightning fast cable. but home is a tragic 31kbps dial up speed due to being to0 far from local exchange.
i think its ok with 1024 x 768 size but the main point is in the title of this thread- LOTS of large photos!!
thats where problem is.
atd- wtf? the whole idea is so dial ups canview images not opposite!

It's good to be in Korea! They have the fastest internet connection in the world

i always resize mine to 600 600 anyway

Some of the threads in the world forum contain so many pictures that my computer can't keep up. Downloading them isn't a problem on my cable, but it can take a while just for all the images to appear on the page. And while the images are loading you have to put up with the page randomly scrolling.

It's really silly when there's actually a discussion in the thread - usually I have to stop the page from loading just so that I can actually read the discussion. I really don't know what you can prove by posting a picture of a public toilet, food stall, gutter, nondescript slab of concrete, inside of dumpster and whatever else they bother to take.

If ya can't get adsl, get wireless! Wireless is getting cheaper these days and it's very comparable to adsl.

i still have dialup! 640*480 is big enough! i mean its not like you are going save all the images to put as a background as 1024*768. all of my images i host are 640*480 and mayby 1 or 2 1.2mp ones.

It's good to be in Korea! They have the fastest internet connection in the world

how fast?

how fast is cable by the way.. they say its unlimited... but i think its more like 5Mbps or somethign right?

Depends on a number of things. I personally average around 240 - 400 kbps but have seen it near 1MB some times.

how fast?

how fast is cable by the way.. they say its unlimited... but i think its more like 5Mbps or somethign right?


http://smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/13/1094927496310.html

They have VDSL!!!

ducka is talking kilo bytes per second btw.
not kilo bits.

what most angers me is when im trying to read something down the page, and it keeps being moved ever 2 seconds due to another picture loading.

seriouslyt pisses me off

Being on cable at home I prefer large images. 1024x768 is okay, anything bigger is great as long as it's sharp and detailed. But I remember the frustration of dial-up, so from now on I'll try and make the effort to post 640x480 thumbnails in the project threads. But if I happen to start a picture thread, I won't bother -- open at your peril.

I hate any pic that's below 1024*768

But that's just me.

Cable here... avg around 250-300kB/sec at most sites, upto a Meg/sec ;)
http://www.tcpiq.com/tcpIQ/LineSpeed/Results/TestStats/?CountryId=12&StateId=249&ZipCodeId=34871&ConnectionId=4118&UserId=117102

I like to post clickable pics, up to 128x128 pixels wide, that launch a 1024x768 sized picture.

Like this:

http://www.shadodotnet.net/photos/brisbane/20040625/thumbnails/thumb_DSC08399.JPG (http://www.shadodotnet.net/photos/brisbane/20040625/images/DSC08399.htm)

It is however a bit more work, and people can't do it if they're not hosting the pics themselves.


Cable Internet is up to 10 megabits / second. (about 1.25 megabytes / second). But usually the site on the other end is the limiting factor. That and all the people on your local cable network - It's shared between everyone between you and the exchange (unlike ADSL which is point to point, but slower).

I get all the images pretty quick, but it hurts the monthly data cap when you realise the last 5 pages you viewed were each 5-10mb. :o

Really the worst bit is when you realise the pictures aren't even interesting.

One or two pictures @ 1024x768 aren't that bad they should be around 100kb then. I still prefer thumbnails though.

what most angers me is when im trying to read something down the page, and it keeps being moved ever 2 seconds due to another picture loading.

seriouslyt pisses me off

Ha ha, ditto. I do feel for those on dialup however really appreciate the photos sometimes. It really annoys me when people unnecessarily use a stack of huge photos to try and push their point across. As for those who start threads purely so they can do this, don't get me started. And yeah, this can be really severe is some of the world forum posts.

Ha ha, ditto. I do feel for those on dialup however really appreciate the photos sometimes. It really annoys me when people unnecessarily use a stack of huge photos to try and push their point across. As for those who start threads purely so they can do this, don't get me started. And yeah, this can be really severe is some of the world forum posts.

That third world megacity thread just crashed my browser. It was using 3 times as much memory as Photoshop. Fuckin ridiculous.

Perhaps those posters are doing their mass spams intentionally...

They know that the only computers that can survive their mass spams are supercomputers and clusters so they put so many photos to crash everyone's browser, thus leaving forumers unable to read the discussion. So if they put all their propoganda and all the pictures favouring their city, forumers will be unable to make informed decisions.

Seriously though, I think there should be a rule limiting the size and/or number of images in a single post. Either that, or we need to find a way to be able to send people a life via PM or email.

ask me at the begining of the month and i dont give a fuck! haha...

i grow more empathatic past the 20th of each month when ive used my quota of cable bandwidth and it reverts to dial-up... i feel your pain then.

LOL, can't agree more.

Come the day Optus sends me that email, no more daily SSC visits, picture display is disabled.

So please, for us bandwidth-metered broadband users, please keep the good pic posts to the start of the month. I wonder how many other people there are silently suffering.

Well, I'll be on dial-up for only another 10 days or so, then I'm getting 2Mbit/sec ADSL. But still, after being on dial-up for so long I understand how annoying it is for threads with lots of large images.

Sometimes I actually have to go around to my parents place to look at the thread since they have cable.

i have adsl in south africa yay

me broadbrand is a joke when its capped....

A thread entitled "Goran's East Perth Dial-Up Users Warning 50+ Pics" is pretty stupid - sorry. I pay for the download and if a thread is going to have so many pics i won't look at it. I use the internat at Uni but I still have to pay.

People try to limit pics to perhaps 10 only. Would love to see some of those great Perth threads at the moment - if they were smaller.

jt

maybe people should post just the link to each photo, or create a small thumbnail, that way you can view the photo you desire.

Even better, if you're posting excessive amounts of photos, link to a page with thumbnails, and maybe only post a couple of the best ones on the forums.

The only reason I don't like photospam is because it makes my browser scroll uncontrollably as it displays the images.

What is the best FREE image hosting company to upload photos on?

Lol@ dial up. Those were the days :P

omg jayt was at uni. this thread MUST be old.

I remember ye olde dial up, used to disconnect every 4 hours you were on and the horrid noise the modem made when dialling.

^^this one. lol!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsNaR6FRuO0

I want photos big enough to fill my 27" 2540x1440 resolution. I hate looking at those tiny 1000p wide photos.

Who the hell here still uses those 15" 800x600 CRT monitors?