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

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> DAMN YOU DPC!!!!!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 200, (reverse)
AuthorThread
05/08/2007 10:18:01 AM · #1
I want 720 pixels on all challenges now.. It obviously works so why delay!!!

Arrrrgghhhhhhhhh!

05/08/2007 10:24:37 AM · #2
Yes, make it so.
05/08/2007 10:28:15 AM · #3
i agree, however the 200 KB would be even better. Both would be sweet.
05/08/2007 10:35:34 AM · #4
do it!!! do it now! :-)
05/08/2007 10:36:35 AM · #5
Do both 720 pixels and 200 KB! *chant-chant-chant*
05/08/2007 10:50:34 AM · #6
720 200 720 200 720 200
05/08/2007 11:00:16 AM · #7
Originally posted by Bugzeye:

720 200 720 200 720 200


DITTO!!!!
05/08/2007 11:02:20 AM · #8
We could certainly run a poll again, I suppose (#1, #2). Google Analytics data for the month of April would suggest that this might be a bad idea:

1. 1024x768 36.59%
2. 1280x1024 21.51%
3. 1280x800 9.15%
4. 1680x1050 6.37%
5. 1440x900 4.98%
6. 1400x1050 4.98%
7. 1152x864 3.35%
8. 800x600 2.77%
9. 1920x1200 2.50%
10. 1600x1200 2.27

56.84% of viewers wouldn't be able to see portrait-styled images @ a full 720px.
05/08/2007 11:10:12 AM · #9
Originally posted by langdon:

... 56.84% of viewers wouldn't be able to see portrait-styled images @ a full 720px.

Thanks for keeping it real Langdon with the use of current statistics.

I actually mentioned on a couple of portrait images in the Free Study that it was a bummer I had to scroll to see the entire image.
05/08/2007 11:10:49 AM · #10
Pushing F11 would help the 56.84% :)
Not one person said anything about the size of this 496781.jpg
05/08/2007 11:15:31 AM · #11
you could make the photos clickable to open in a window that is preset and locked at 720x720 with only the photo in the window?

05/08/2007 11:16:14 AM · #12
Another alternative would be making the max resolution 720x640.
05/08/2007 11:18:29 AM · #13
that would pose a problem for portrait challenges.

Originally posted by Raziel:

Another alternative would be making the max resolution 720x640.
05/08/2007 11:19:43 AM · #14
I like the 720 x 640 but I wonder if that creates a hroizontal bias in some philosophical way that i barely understand
HEY: removing that black outline line would also free up a great deal of space ;P
Can I get some suppon that one???

Originally posted by Raziel:

Another alternative would be making the max resolution 720x640.
05/08/2007 11:26:43 AM · #15
The 720x720 may be an issue with some viewers however the 200Kb is not going to make anyone have to scroll up and down. They just have to wait a few more seconds for the photo to open mear blinks in time. Can we have that one ? please? ? ? ? ? All the beauty and details we are missing because 150Kb doesn't always cut it is a terrible loss to the learning aspects of DPC. Not to mention our scores when we have to reduce a photo to 60 percent quality or even less just to reach that 150 limit.
05/08/2007 11:27:03 AM · #16
Bah, dont believe that, everyone knows that 78.52% of all statistics are made up on the spot..

Originally posted by langdon:

We could certainly run a poll again, I suppose (#1, #2). Google Analytics data for the month of April would suggest that this might be a bad idea:

1. 1024x768 36.59%
2. 1280x1024 21.51%
3. 1280x800 9.15%
4. 1680x1050 6.37%
5. 1440x900 4.98%
6. 1400x1050 4.98%
7. 1152x864 3.35%
8. 800x600 2.77%
9. 1920x1200 2.50%
10. 1600x1200 2.27

56.84% of viewers wouldn't be able to see portrait-styled images @ a full 720px.
05/08/2007 11:30:24 AM · #17
Originally posted by marbo:

Pushing F11 would help the 56.84% :)

Been there, done that. :P

I'm fine at home, it's when I try to vote while at work that it's a problem. Unfortunately, most of my voting is done at work during breaks, etc...
05/08/2007 11:31:15 AM · #18
Originally posted by Simms:

Bah, dont believe that, everyone knows that 78.52% of all statistics are made up on the spot..

Originally posted by langdon:

We could certainly run a poll again, I suppose (#1, #2). Google Analytics data for the month of April would suggest that this might be a bad idea:

1. 1024x768 36.59%
2. 1280x1024 21.51%
3. 1280x800 9.15%
4. 1680x1050 6.37%
5. 1440x900 4.98%
6. 1400x1050 4.98%
7. 1152x864 3.35%
8. 800x600 2.77%
9. 1920x1200 2.50%
10. 1600x1200 2.27

56.84% of viewers wouldn't be able to see portrait-styled images @ a full 720px.


I thought it was 86.43% of all statistics are made up on the spot? Hmm...I'll have to go back and find that stat again! ;P
05/08/2007 11:33:27 AM · #19
Originally posted by marbo:

Pushing F11 would help the 56.84% :)


It is surprising the amount of people who dont know about or use that function... I'm on a 1024x768 screen and know it is frustrating trying to view things which are larger than the window, even knowing that hitting F11 will give me full screen... it just isnt worth the effort.

and as for the size of photo i think it is fine - as i said to someone who critiqued one of my photos (based on 800px height being too small!!) on another competition site: it isnt the size of the image you are judging, it is the photo...
05/08/2007 11:37:06 AM · #20
I have to admit that I was one of the people against the notion of increasing the size a while back, but having seen a couple challenges with the larger size allowed, I'm all for it now.

I think it made an impressive difference in those challenges, and I'd certainly be for seeing it bumped up permanently.
05/08/2007 11:40:50 AM · #21
Originally posted by inshaala:

Originally posted by marbo:

Pushing F11 would help the 56.84% :)


It is surprising the amount of people who dont know about or use that function... I'm on a 1024x768 screen and know it is frustrating trying to view things which are larger than the window, even knowing that hitting F11 will give me full screen... it just isnt worth the effort.

and as for the size of photo i think it is fine - as i said to someone who critiqued one of my photos (based on 800px height being too small!!) on another competition site: it isnt the size of the image you are judging, it is the photo...


Pressing F11 takes effort??

not being funny, but even Stephen Hawkin could manage that.

PH2007042602828.jpg

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 11:57:54.
05/08/2007 11:41:20 AM · #22
We've previously discussed using a non-square max size. The main issue raised was a "bias" toward landscape-oriented images.
I've voted plenty from 1024x768 screens. It is possible, with IE as the browser and using F11 "full screen" mode, to see the entire 720x720 picture. It's still necessary to scroll to vote, if you're using the mouse to vote. Resolutions equal to or larger than 800px in the vertical should allow viewing and voting without scrolling. Firefox wastes a little more space at the top in full-screen mode. That means that realistically, about 40% of users would still need to scroll to vote, though only 3% of users would have to scroll to see the entire image.
The "keypad voting" add-on for Firefox also does a really nice thing. It automatically places the top of the image at the top of the screen.
Perhaps, before considering a global change to 720px, it would be better to fine-tune the voting page to:
- Make best use of vertical space
- Make the voting scale more accessible and frozen in place so it doesn't move with varying image size
- Enable keypad voting natively so that IE users can also benefit
All in all, I really would personally love to see 720px. There's been no appreciable negative feedback that I'm aware of on the 720px challenges that have been run, and that says a lot.
05/08/2007 11:42:46 AM · #23
Originally posted by marbo:


Not one person said anything about the size of this 496781.jpg


What would I have said? You met the rules, so why would I complain to you?

I run at 1024x768, and I have to scroll considerably to see your image.

And even hitting F11, I lose a few pixels on the top or bottom.

I find it fascinating that the minority of people who can see a full 720 vertically make light of the burden placed on the majority. You could make the same argument to that minority: all you have to do is set your monitor to a lower resolution and you'll fill up your screen with the smaller images.

It seems to me that the issue with showing smaller images on higher-res screens is simply that the images don't fill up as much space. I've never understood how you're going to get more detail visible when each pixel gets correspondingly smaller.

Could someone post screen shots showing 100% crop of screens at different resolutions and demonstrate you can see more detail?

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 11:48:20.
05/08/2007 11:45:50 AM · #24
Originally posted by inshaala:

Originally posted by marbo:

Pushing F11 would help the 56.84% :)


It is surprising the amount of people who dont know about or use that function...

I've learnt something new!
05/08/2007 11:54:01 AM · #25
Originally posted by kirbic:


The "keypad voting" add-on for Firefox also does a really nice thing. It automatically places the top of the image at the top of the screen.


Urm - do tell :)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/16/2018 05:11:22 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2018 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 10/16/2018 05:11:22 PM EDT.