| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/26/2009 06:06:18 AM · #126 |
I don't see the reason for having a size limit as large as 300kB. I usually save my shots for web viewing at 800px and 200kB, and they look fine.
Originally posted by vlado:
Originally posted by Skip:
mebbe have different horizontal and vertical size limitations... |
A good idea. Will at least remove the frustration of having to scroll... but wont help with increased download time, and me constantly being told that I should allow the page to load before voting... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting, or not voting anymore... |
|
|
|
|
11/26/2009 07:08:59 AM · #127 |
Originally posted by johst582:
Seriously, quit discussing watermarking in this thread!
Instead, I'll try to steal the thread to bring up the idea of darkening the background of the page. Someone else mentioned it in the beginning of this thread, and it's been up before. Who does not agree that most images look better on a darker background? This gray is good for forums, but the photos deserve darkness! |
Never understood why it wasn't at least at neutral grey. All these years and it's still too bright. Tone it down to 18% grey at least. Give us choices and let the photographer choose what background his images should be viewed at during voting so his shot won't be viewed on a white background if he does not wish so. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 01:22:52 PM · #128 |
Originally posted by vlado:
... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting ... |
I've heard people say this, but really, it's not something you can do. To cast a vote, the voting page (and image) still needs to load. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 01:25:42 PM · #129 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Originally posted by johst582:
... I'll try to steal the thread to bring up the idea of darkening the background of the page. Someone else mentioned it in the beginning of this thread, and it's been up before. Who does not agree that most images look better on a darker background? This gray is good for forums, but the photos deserve darkness! |
Never understood why it wasn't at least at neutral grey. All these years and it's still too bright. Tone it down to 18% grey at least. Give us choices and let the photographer choose what background his images should be viewed at during voting so his shot won't be viewed on a white background if he does not wish so. |
Discussed in this thread --> I wish we could...
|
|
|
|
11/26/2009 01:28:20 PM · #130 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by vlado:
... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting ... |
I've heard people say this, but really, it's not something you can do. To cast a vote, the voting page (and image) still needs to load. |
When people say this, I think all they mean is that they'll browse by thumbnail and only click on the ones they like the most from that view to vote on them, because they believe that running through the full size shots in the normal way will either tax their internet connection, or just be frustrating because of scrolling.
It's an unfortunate side-effect, if people DO do this, but I think it would be a rather miniscule part of the population. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 01:33:32 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by marbo:
Photos look tiny on my new 22" monitor. This is probaly about the average monitor size sold today.
I think we need to move up to 1200x900 :) |
Great idea! lol |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 02:03:00 PM · #132 |
Originally posted by marbo:
Photos look tiny on my new 22" monitor. This is probaly about the average monitor size sold today.
I think we need to move up to 1200x900 :) |
LOL... are you including laptops and netbooks in that average?
~Terry
|
|
|
|
11/26/2009 02:26:11 PM · #133 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by marbo:
Photos look tiny on my new 22" monitor. This is probaly about the average monitor size sold today.
I think we need to move up to 1200x900 :) |
LOL... are you including laptops and netbooks in that average?
~Terry |
Yeah, no kidding. I actually think the average size monitor is going down, not up. At least in the sense that a LOT of folks (like me) that have desktop machines also have notebooks and netbooks, and a lot of us (I am sure) use them for cruising the forums and even voting.
R. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 02:56:51 PM · #134 |
| And I am sure I am not alone in only having a laptop... |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 03:22:27 PM · #135 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by marbo:
Photos look tiny on my new 22" monitor. This is probaly about the average monitor size sold today.
I think we need to move up to 1200x900 :) |
LOL... are you including laptops and netbooks in that average?
~Terry |
No, because i just made that up :)
But not to worry i`ve just found the zoom button in firefox.
|
|
|
|
11/26/2009 04:05:52 PM · #136 |
Originally posted by SaraR:
And I am sure I am not alone in only having a laptop... |
Nope me too, a terrible terrible laptop which has a two-tone screen due to heat damage. I actually have never seen the majority of my photos on a proper scree! |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 04:33:28 PM · #137 |
| Perhaps it's a good thing if people don't vote based on crappy notebook-screens :) I know I wouldn't use my laptop for that... |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 06:10:33 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by vlado:
... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting ... |
I've heard people say this, but really, it's not something you can do. To cast a vote, the voting page (and image) still needs to load. |
When people say this, I think all they mean is that they'll browse by thumbnail and only click on the ones they like the most from that view to vote on them, because they believe that running through the full size shots in the normal way will either tax their internet connection, or just be frustrating because of scrolling.
It's an unfortunate side-effect, if people DO do this, but I think it would be a rather miniscule part of the population. |
Yes... that's precisely what I meant by thumbnail voting. Don't think I'll resort to that, however the fact that it's a consideration for the first time for me suggest my level of frustration with the new limits, the limits of my my laptop screen resolution and my internet connection.
The overwhelming majority voted in favour of the new limits, they're here to stay... I don't have a problem with the way it was decided. I'm just here as the tiny voice to remind people not to forget about the little people, with little screens and small dump trucks... no, sorry, small tubes... it's not a dump truck... ie slower connections. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 10:21:23 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by vlado:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by vlado:
... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting ... |
I've heard people say this, but really, it's not something you can do. To cast a vote, the voting page (and image) still needs to load. |
When people say this, I think all they mean is that they'll browse by thumbnail and only click on the ones they like the most from that view to vote on them, because they believe that running through the full size shots in the normal way will either tax their internet connection, or just be frustrating because of scrolling.
It's an unfortunate side-effect, if people DO do this, but I think it would be a rather miniscule part of the population. |
Yes... that's precisely what I meant by thumbnail voting. Don't think I'll resort to that, however the fact that it's a consideration for the first time for me suggest my level of frustration with the new limits, the limits of my my laptop screen resolution and my internet connection.
The overwhelming majority voted in favour of the new limits, they're here to stay... I don't have a problem with the way it was decided. I'm just here as the tiny voice to remind people not to forget about the little people, with little screens and small dump trucks... no, sorry, small tubes... it's not a dump truck... ie slower connections. |
Maybe we can just hope Australia gets broadband one day. |
|
|
|
11/26/2009 10:45:46 PM · #140 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Originally posted by vlado:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by vlado:
... might just have to resort to thumbnail voting ... |
I've heard people say this, but really, it's not something you can do. To cast a vote, the voting page (and image) still needs to load. |
When people say this, I think all they mean is that they'll browse by thumbnail and only click on the ones they like the most from that view to vote on them, because they believe that running through the full size shots in the normal way will either tax their internet connection, or just be frustrating because of scrolling.
It's an unfortunate side-effect, if people DO do this, but I think it would be a rather miniscule part of the population. |
Yes... that's precisely what I meant by thumbnail voting. Don't think I'll resort to that, however the fact that it's a consideration for the first time for me suggest my level of frustration with the new limits, the limits of my my laptop screen resolution and my internet connection.
The overwhelming majority voted in favour of the new limits, they're here to stay... I don't have a problem with the way it was decided. I'm just here as the tiny voice to remind people not to forget about the little people, with little screens and small dump trucks... no, sorry, small tubes... it's not a dump truck... ie slower connections. |
Maybe we can just hope Australia gets broadband one day. |
Dang! There's 552 registered users from Australia. I wish we had a way to easily display the demographics of this site. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 10:05:25 AM EDT.
