DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Isn't it time to allow for higher resolutions?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 30, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/09/2026 05:53:40 AM · #1
I breaks my heart every time I view my submissions here on DPC as well as other people's photos. Pictures lose a lot of texture and detail when 1200px files are shown at 150-200% scaling on big high resolution displays such as 27-32 inch 4K/Retina. I realize many don't have monitors as big as mine, but this size limit is 12 years old now if I'm not mistaken so maybe there's time to review this again?

There's also the fact that in order to see pictures in their entire height and not having to scroll down, I'm forced to maximize/full-screen the browser window size which in turns enlarges the problem of low resolution even further. This makes me avoid submitting vertical photos or 4:5 vertical photos, I most often try to submit 16:9 pictures so I avoid having my pictures cut by the browser.

Is there a particular reason for sticking with such a low resolution? Bandwidth, storage space?
 06/09/2026 06:07:31 AM · #2
I agree, the 1200px resolution is tiny and eats up detail in our images. I would suggest allowing at least 1920px resolution and preferably more. It would also make more fun coming back to the site to browse through past challenges.
 06/09/2026 10:46:54 AM · #3
I agree. At least 1600px. I understand one issue is the additional server space, but here's an observation: When I upload a non-challenge photo, I often forget to upload a downsized version and subsequently, the portfolio image is scaled down AND the full size version is also stored, even though I did not want, need, or intend for the hi-res version to be uploaded. Most of the time I don't even notice. If I do notice, I often go back and replace it with just the smaller version. So, the suggestion would be to make "Include Hi-Res Version" an option that is OFF by default. Or something along those lines. I bet that would save a few terabytes.

Originally posted by Hauxon:
I agree, the 1200px resolution is tiny and eats up detail in our images. I would suggest allowing at least 1920px resolution and preferably more. It would also make more fun coming back to the site to browse through past challenges.
A change would not affect the resolution of past challenges - the oldest challenges are still 800px images.
 06/09/2026 11:19:05 AM · #4
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
- the oldest challenges are still 800px images.

Actually, they originated at 640px. :-)

ETA - there was a period of 700px before 800 also.

Message edited by author 2026-06-09 11:28:48.
 06/09/2026 11:28:13 AM · #5
I have mixed feelings on the 1200px current limit.

I've also upgraded one of my PC's and I have to work on challenge entries at 2400px and then resize to 1200px before submitting (can't see it at 1200 to really work on it with the higher resolution monitor on new laptop). However, on my preferred computer with dual monitors (much older), 1200px is fine.

The concern I have is as old as DPC, that being image theft and making it even easier for illegal usage of our images at a higher resolution. Granted, web scraping is an issue for many, many photo sites, and I don't know that there's any way to really avoid it. Do you really want to give away your better images for free?

Upscaling software has made it very easy now for actually even smaller images (1200px) to be enlarged for other uses.



06/09/2026 11:35:39 AM · #6
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Do you really want to give away your better images for free?
Upscaling software has made it very easy now for actually even smaller images (1200px) to be enlarged for other uses.

That Genie has left the barn long ago.
 06/09/2026 11:41:10 AM · #7
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Do you really want to give away your better images for free?
Upscaling software has made it very easy now for actually even smaller images (1200px) to be enlarged for other uses.

That Genie has left the barn long ago.

Perhaps, but I feel like the "bad" guys have gotten much more proficient/automated in the last few years for grabbing their "free" stuff. :-{
 06/09/2026 12:00:25 PM · #8
It's a good question and one to consider though. Thanks for bringing it up for discussion.
 06/09/2026 12:20:15 PM · #9
I really think that the times when the protection of your full resolution images, presumably for being able to sell them, are well gone. Does anyone sell any of their images that they posted at 1200 on DPChallenge?
 06/09/2026 01:54:58 PM · #10
Well, part of the question is not so much monetary loss as it is personal loss, potentially of privacy. For example, personal property or people that you know and love. That photo of your granddaughter blowing out candles on a birthday cake may well serve a challenge theme but would you be comfortable with that same image being used to advertise some product? That’s just an example.
 06/09/2026 02:09:44 PM · #11
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Well, part of the question is not so much monetary loss as it is personal loss, potentially of privacy. For example, personal property or people that you know and love. That photo of your granddaughter blowing out candles on a birthday cake may well serve a challenge theme but would you be comfortable with that same image being used to advertise some product? That’s just an example.


I think people choose what to post based on if they want others to see it or not. Especially if they're personal in nature.
I know I'm careful what images I use of family here. I'm careful about images I post of my surroundings (home,etc).
Basically, if I don't want it seen, I don't post it. I believe others here act similarly.
So I don't think personal privacy is a problem.
 06/09/2026 02:29:04 PM · #12
I know our site has the option to watermark our images after rollover. And I know AI makes short order of watermarks, but wouldn't that be a slight deterrent?

I know many of us really work hard on the details of our images and it *is* disheartening to see them flattened out on our site.
06/09/2026 02:43:06 PM · #13
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Well, part of the question is not so much monetary loss as it is personal loss, potentially of privacy. For example, personal property or people that you know and love. That photo of your granddaughter blowing out candles on a birthday cake may well serve a challenge theme but would you be comfortable with that same image being used to advertise some product? That’s just an example.

I think people choose what to post based on if they want others to see it or not. Especially if they're personal in nature.
I know I'm careful what images I use of family here. I'm careful about images I post of my surroundings (home,etc).
Basically, if I don't want it seen, I don't post it. I believe others here act similarly.
So I don't think personal privacy is a problem.

Well, it wouldn’t have to be extremely personal to not want it showing up in other places being used inappropriately. Self portraits, family pets, etc. I think the number of people here that use themselves or family as challenge theme “models” is fairly high.
 06/09/2026 02:44:01 PM · #14
Originally posted by tanguera:
I know our site has the option to watermark our images after rollover. And I know AI makes short order of watermarks, but wouldn't that be a slight deterrent?

I know many of us really work hard on the details of our images and it *is* disheartening to see them flattened out on our site.

It would be great if watermarks could be customized. As is, they are quite small and ineffective.
 06/09/2026 03:14:24 PM · #15
I’m glad to see this issue being discussed. It’s an important one. Though admittedly, I’m a bit surprised to find that I don’t experience this personally with my own images. But then again, I rarely have occasion to view any image larger than 100% of its native size, which might actually be the technical issue that needs to be addressed.

Is it possible for the site to ensure that images are never displayed beyond a 1:1 mapping with their native resolution—that is, never scaled up beyond their original pixel dimensions? It seems like this would ensure that, whether I open the image on my cell phone and zoom in or view it on a very large monitor, any visible pixelation would come only from the image’s native resolution itself, rather than from the image being artificially enlarged by the display system or interface scaling. (I have no clue whether such things are even possible, though.)

Thoughts?
 06/09/2026 03:31:28 PM · #16
I believe that at some point in the not-too-distant past we instituted a regime of scaling the image display of pictures in voting to fit the current browser window to avoid scrolling around to see the entire image. This is better for voting (you can see the whole image at once) and bad for image quality (arbitrary resizing) ... I think the current image parameters come close to the sweet spot for fitting most monitors at 100% scale, and images at higher resolutions will only necessitate increased arbitrary resizing or scrolling.
 06/09/2026 03:58:01 PM · #17
What does privacy have to do with resolution? Do not post your personal images if you don't want to see them in a public space like DPC at any resolution!

I have to say that this is a crazy reason for keeping DPC resolution at 1200px!
 06/09/2026 04:22:20 PM · #18
Originally posted by glad2badad:
It would be great if watermarks could be customized. As is, they are quite small and ineffective.

How big and obtrusive would it have to be to prevent unauthorized use?


Originally posted by glad2badad:
Well, it wouldn’t have to be extremely personal to not want it showing up in other places being used inappropriately.

-->

Like I said, the horse is out of the bottle. I thought we came to the conclusion long ago that if you do not want to risk your image being used improperly, DO NO UPLOAD IT TO THE INTERNET. That's really what it comes down to. All the other issues (quality, resizing, disk space, etc.) with size constraints are valid debate points, IMO.
 06/09/2026 04:36:36 PM · #19
Thanks Ken. That actually is pretty impressive.
 06/09/2026 05:16:45 PM · #20
If someone is afraid of copyright infringement or privacy, they shouldn't be posting pictures on the internet at all, under any circumstances. I think that is absolutely not a reason for us to keep resolutions low.

The only reasons for low resolutions I could possibly understand would be bandwidth restraints from the hosting provider and/or storage prices, and if a higher membership fee would be required to keep those things in good order, I would be happy to pay.

I'm very happy for the attention that my question has raised today, it's obvious I'm not the only one thinking about this :)

PS. Regarding watermarks, I absolutely loathe them - I think more often than not, they destroy the viewing experience altogether, especially if they're big and wide. So if the viewing experience is destroyed, the whole reason for the photographs existance is nulled. Sorry for my harsh opinion.

Message edited by author 2026-06-09 17:19:19.
 06/09/2026 05:37:50 PM · #21
Originally posted by KristjanUnnar:
Sorry for my harsh opinion.

No offense taken. Appreciate your opinion.
 06/09/2026 05:48:11 PM · #22
Originally posted by KristjanUnnar:
The only reasons for low resolutions I could possibly understand would be bandwidth restraints from the hosting provider and/or storage prices ...

See my comments regarding resizing and monitor sizes. As you said initially, you have a less-common viewing experience where a low-res picture fills only a tiny portion of your screen, but for most people even the 1200px images can get downsized to fit their display -- what's the point of preserving exquisite detail in a 3000px image if it's going to be arbitrarily down-sampled to be viewed on a 5" phone?
 06/09/2026 06:12:15 PM · #23
I wouldn't want anyone judging my photos on a phone and I certainly don't enjoy viewing other peoples photographs on a phone - unless for social media real life stuff of course, that's something else :) Web-resizing is so good nowadays, see Flickr for example how large images look great at multiple sizes. We shouldn't aim for the lowest denominator. Are there really many people still on small 17-24" 1080p displays? Do you have any metrics on how many users are on laptops vs. desktops for example, what screen resolutions are most common?

I tried to demonstrate with a recent challenge entry of mine, the loss of detail from submitting a 1200px instead of for example 4096px which is then scaled to fit the same size window on my 32" monitor, hope this works, this is a 100% crop from the same display size, however with different resolution source files behind them. So my logic is, better to have images downscaled than upscaled.



Message edited by author 2026-06-09 18:33:06.
 06/09/2026 07:07:26 PM · #24
Yup -- right now I'm on a Dell 1920 x 1080 gaming monitor.

And if you didn't know people can vote on their phones using a DPC app (see link on left of the home page).
 06/09/2026 08:26:34 PM · #25
fear of theft is not a good reason to keep the resolution down. drachoo got (I believe it was this one) this photo and blown up to billboard size. And that was a long time ago, before gigapixel and things like that.

If someone wants to steal it, they'll steal it regardless of size.

And in the meantime, I feel it really is holding us back in quality.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/11/2026 04:00:36 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/11/2026 04:00:36 PM EDT.