Don't mean to beat dead horse (photo posting)...

...but how is it that some people are able to post a large photo but everytime I upload something at 1024x768, it automatically gets downsized to 800x600 or whatever it is? What am I doing different? Is it based on the actual file size and not the size of the photo?

This one is 1000x750...less than 1024x768....so will it work if I downsize the photo myself a little before uploading?
http://davesgarden.com/forums/fp.php?pid=1305474

I think 999 is the dimension allowed before the image is resized automatically.

oh ok....thanks

If they are larger than 800x600 they overflow our screens and are a pain to view. Why would you want that???

Because everybody should have their monitors set to at least 1024x768 these days :) Anything less than that (personal preference) drives me nuts. All the icons are so on are huge. I don't like anything higher than 1024x768 though. I've never seen anything at work these days set to less than 1024x768. In the past 800x600 was much more common. When you buy a new PC for example, you'll see it probably set to 1024x768....never less than that.

Old folks' eyesight goes south; don't we count? LOL

Well yeah...lol I was wondering if that was your reason. I guess I'm just ued to the larger photos....easier to make out details :)

Gosh, I'm not old and have 20/20 vision, but I prefer the 800x600 too.....to me, the smaller print at the 1024x768 setting is a pain to read. Also, don't the larger pics take longer to load? A lot of people are still on dial-up and some of these threads get so long and have lots of pics. Maybe I'm just out of date : )

Yep....takes a little longer to load a larger image. Not too much longer in this case, but I know what you mean about dialup. I only have to use it occasionally when out of town and it drives me nuts since I'm used to faster speeds!

I think I'd just go crazy if I had to go back to it!!!! I'm just on regular DSL but there is SUCH a difference.

hc .. I too, have an eye problem, that will only worsen .. BUT, have been tryin' to influence folks to refrain from reducing the dimensions of their pics too much, before uploading to DG !!

Oh dear....
I don't have DSL either, ( tried it, didn't work about 14 months ago ) but I posted the single picture in question at that size almost as an afterthought, since I did give a link for the other 32. I had shrunk them to 1000 x 750 but saved them with some compression to keep down the file size. (I am using the above pic as a wallpaper right now)
I post "larger" pictures on my own website, because I simply like to see the details better. ( Thank you Magpye) My eyes are fine, but many times the camera picks up things I might have missed. With dial up it takes a while to load, but there is alway laundry to do, stuff to read, cook etc.etc :-) btw it took me over an hour to get that whole group into my filemanager.

In any case - for future postings, would you rather see a smaller version? You seem to be a bit conflicting...?

Keep in mind, not everyone has a nice new computer. The laptop I use part time ONLY allows 800x600. So, like Ulrich, they are too large. Combine that with dial up, and a lot of pictures get missed.

Sooner or later an upgrade will make sense. Goes with the territory.

I recently read a statistic that just under half the US population that is online still relies on dial-up. access. That number will continue to reduce in due time, but we need to be mindful that dial-up users still represent a very large portion of the viewers "out there" ;o)

Interesting stat. We just got DSL. Thought it was cuz rural areas were a low priority. Don't feel so out of the loop now. LOL

Well, just for fun I have put into place a logger into DG, that logs the screen resolution of all visitors. Sometime later I will compile the statistics and then we'll know definitively what percentages there are that hit DG.

dave

The results after a couple minutes:

67 1024x768
36 800x600
19 1280x1024
5 1152x864
2 1600x1200
2 1280x800
2 1280x720
1 1920x1200
1 1400x1050
1 1280x960

dave

Man!...whoever has the 1280x960 must have good eyesight! hehe My old co-worker actually had his set WAY up there like that. I couldn't figure out how he saw anything. It certainly gives you more room but man I couldn't read anything with it set that high.

My computer runs 1600x1200 on a 21" viewsonic LCD monitor. :-)

Of course, I sit at a computer all day, so it makes good sense to have a good monitor.

dave

Current results:

201 1024x768
75 800x600
38 1280x1024
15 1152x864
6 1280x800
5 1600x1200
2 1440x900
2 1400x1050
2 1280x960
2 1280x720
1 720x576
1 2048x768
1 1920x1200
1 1280x768
1 1152x870

Looks like we have a trend here.

1024 and greater: 324
800 or less: 95

Around 30% are using less than 1024. I think we'll need to cater to this group.

May be best to run these stats over a weekend, or an evening, when the working crowd is far from their work computers.

:) Just a suggestion, since I know I have a much better monitor here at work than I do at home.

-Jennifer

I'll leave it in place until Monday.

dave

I'm one of the current 15 (at 4:22 PM Central time) .. that is using the 1152x864 display resolution on my monitor. Photos aren't as much an issue/concern for me on a 19" LCD screen .. as the text size! But that's easily adjustable ...

Although hc has initially been referring to image display sizes .. if you don't object HC - thought I'd mention a lil ditty available in the Microsoft PowerToys for Windows XP (only), called ClearType Tuner PowerToy, that was the ideal answer for text clarity - and, thought it may be applicable for others .. here @ http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

(*hee*) However, HC .. should you object for any reason (tis your call) - I'll check back here in a bit .. and remove my post, if need be .. !!

- Magpye

Why would I object? I don't mind :)

(sweet) .. Jes didn't want to take it fer granted hc .. Thanks for your reply.

- Magpye

Something else Windows users can do is increase the size of the text displayed, changing it from 96dpi to 72dpi. This will make the text beneath your desktop's shortcuts larger, for instance. This page has some good instructions on changing display info in Windows XP (and much of this applies to other versions of Windows, too). http://www.marthas-web.com/display.htm

Running Win98SE here with the wheel mouse that came with this old Gateway. To change text size I hold down Ctrl and spin the wheel up or down. There is nothing more aggravating than having to scroll to see an entire picture or web page.

I just started posting capsicum pix and guess that I've been submitting them too small. Not trying for anything artistic, but the blossoms are one of the major keys to identifying species/varieties and identification can be quite difficult with peppers.

JohnT

Current data as of Sun 8:20am.

14738 1024x768
7884 800x600
2294 1280x1024
879 1152x864
453 1280x800
283 1400x1050
228 1600x1200
203 1280x960
198 1440x900
194 640x480
129 1280x854
106 1280x768
102 1680x1050
54 1920x1200

dave

JohnT - Thanks for that tip, how cool! I've had this computer for almost 5 years (Win98SE w/wheel mouse) and NEVER knew that trick!
Vicki

Wow Dave! .. Jes a few folks visiting at that particular time too, 'ey!?! ... LOL ...

And .. some mitey interesting stats, to boot !! ..

- Magpye

I just now shut it down, and the final results were:

24363 1024x768
12746 800x600
3795 1280x1024
1451 1152x864
770 1280x800
495 1400x1050
385 1600x1200
339 1280x960
322 1440x900
319 640x480
215 1280x854
176 1680x1050
171 1280x768

dave

Apparently I am not keeping up with the "Joneses."

Wow....that's about half on 800x600. I wouldn't have guessed that many.

It would be interesting to see, via Voting Booth perhaps, the percentage of 13", 15", 17" and 19 inch monitors.

Ulrich .. ya know .. it sure would! ...

- Magpye

...because that has a lot to do with the choice of settings.