+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Connected Café (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Forum: Forum Issues (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=20)
+--- Thread: Image Hosting (/showthread.php?tid=142)
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-26-2015, 03:01 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Trying again ... oh, now I see the error message. It says maximum 500 KB. I guess the resizing is not yet implemented?
It's done now. Upped to 1MB
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-26-2015, 05:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Lol, you could use a text browser too, like LYNX.
Whatever change has been made, now photos show up absolutely massive and destroy the ability to browse the forum on mobile... Before, it would scale the images to the width of the screen, now, the images are massive and all the text is small.
Not sure why. No change has been made to the mobile theme in terms of image spacing
What about this one?
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-26-2015, 05:55 PM)Markster Wrote:(10-26-2015, 05:17 PM)Canard Wrote: Lol, you could use a text browser too, like LYNX.
Whatever change has been made, now photos show up absolutely massive and destroy the ability to browse the forum on mobile... Before, it would scale the images to the width of the screen, now, the images are massive and all the text is small.
Spokes,
Specifically, what's happening, is that "attached images" are showing up massively wide in the mobile theme.
If the images are embedded in the post, it's fine (they end up 50% of the column width). If the images are not embedded in the post, then they show up in the "Attached images" section, and are rendered full size, which is already rather large for desktop, and positively massive for mobile.
Everyone else seeing this? It's set to not go over 100% so I'm not sure why that's happening for you.
Looks good for me.
RE: Image Hosting - Markster - 10-27-2015
Still crazy sized.
See attached. Also, apparently the "insert [image] into post" button doesn't work for me on mobile...
RE: Image Hosting - Markster - 10-27-2015
Even on desktop, (Firefox 41.0.2,) you can see that the image is being displayed full size, and is bleeding past the boundary of the page container.
(Embedding this image into the post, so that it doesn't also get cut off on the right hand side)
RE: Image Hosting - tomh009 - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 09:19 AM)Spokes Wrote:(10-26-2015, 03:01 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Trying again ... oh, now I see the error message. It says maximum 500 KB. I guess the resizing is not yet implemented?
It's done now. Upped to 1MB
Do you mean that the upload limit is 1 MB? If the pictures are being resized anyway, why not allow larger ones? Phone camera ones are typically 2-3 MB, at least we should allow those to be uploaded (and resized) as is. Full DSLR image sizes may be impractical in terms of upload and resizing time though.
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 09:34 AM)Markster Wrote: Still crazy sized.
See attached. Also, apparently the "insert [image] into post" button doesn't work for me on mobile...
Ahhh got it.
I was making changes to posted images rather than the attached images. How's that?
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 10:04 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(10-27-2015, 09:19 AM)Spokes Wrote: It's done now. Upped to 1MB
Do you mean that the upload limit is 1 MB? If the pictures are being resized anyway, why not allow larger ones? Phone camera ones are typically 2-3 MB, at least we should allow those to be uploaded (and resized) as is. Full DSLR image sizes may be impractical in terms of upload and resizing time though.
The image is resized within the frame. The file size doesn't get adjusted when it's attached and uploaded onto the server.
RE: Image Hosting - tomh009 - 10-27-2015
Oooh ... so it's just an HTML resize, it doesn't actually process the image! So it won't help reduce people's data usage or speed up page load times.
RE: Image Hosting - Markster - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 10:08 AM)Spokes Wrote: I was making changes to posted images rather than the attached images. How's that?Oh excellent!
Attached images are now the correct width on mobile. (They still overflow on Desktop, but that's a very minor issue) Also, I see that embedded images are 100% width too, which is great!
(10-27-2015, 10:04 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Do you mean that the upload limit is 1 MB? If the pictures are being resized anyway, why not allow larger ones? Phone camera ones are typically 2-3 MB, at least we should allow those to be uploaded (and resized) as is.Tom, this whole thing started when I asked if they could be shrunk by the forum software! It was never a feature. Things got confusing because a bunch of people chimed in talking about the display size of images.
RE: Image Hosting - tomh009 - 10-27-2015
Yes ... "resizing" is confusing because there is both a file size and a display size, and it's not clear which one is being resized. Changing display size results in an easier to view site, high-resolution images are still available (within the file size limit). Changing the file size results in the same view as display size, but with faster load times and less Internet bandwidth, but original images won't be available.
We now have display resizing, not file resizing.
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 10:29 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Oooh ... so it's just an HTML resize, it doesn't actually process the image! So it won't help reduce people's data usage or speed up page load times.
That's correct. MyBB doesn't provide image resizing as far as I know
RE: Image Hosting - Spokes - 10-27-2015
(10-27-2015, 10:30 AM)Markster Wrote:(10-27-2015, 10:08 AM)Spokes Wrote: I was making changes to posted images rather than the attached images. How's that?Oh excellent!
Attached images are now the correct width on mobile. (They still overflow on Desktop, but that's a very minor issue) Also, I see that embedded images are 100% width too, which is great!
(10-27-2015, 10:04 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Do you mean that the upload limit is 1 MB? If the pictures are being resized anyway, why not allow larger ones? Phone camera ones are typically 2-3 MB, at least we should allow those to be uploaded (and resized) as is.Tom, this whole thing started when I asked if they could be shrunk by the forum software! It was never a feature. Things got confusing because a bunch of people chimed in talking about the display size of images.
Maybe that's an issue in Firefox. I'm using chrome right now and it's a non issue. I'll try firefox at home tonight.