Bigger Images?

Announcements from UK Airshow Review and our partners

Bigger Images?

Yes, I want to see bigger pics on UKAR
136
35%
Yes, I want to see bigger pics on UKAR
136
35%
No, I like things the way they are
56
15%
No, I like things the way they are
56
15%
 
Total votes: 384

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

The stats say we shouldn't, but we'll open it up to opinion since this question never seems to go away.

Do you want to be able to post pics of upto 1024px on UKAR?

Comments welcome.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

User avatar
SpitfireSteve
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 9:21 am
Location: Darkest Essexshire
Contact:

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by SpitfireSteve »

Well I'd like to see other people's images in a larger format, because they are damn good. I'll leave mine small so as to try and disguise the flaws in them :whistle:
Steve
__________________________
Vulcan Restoration Trust Membership guy,

http://www.avrovulcan.com

StevenH
Posts: 1225
Joined: Mon 01 Dec 2008, 8:05 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by StevenH »

Couldn't care less to be honest. 800 for me is the most convenient and traditional way of sharing photos online and I personally will continue to do so regardless of any increase to the size limit.

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

Interesting to note that the poll results match the web stats almost exactly - I checked earlier on and so far in October, 22% of traffic is using 1024 screen res and would be affected by this change! At the time of posting, 23% have voted no! :ghost:
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

Manonthefence
Posts: 2371
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 11:52 am
Location: elsewehere

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Manonthefence »

StevenH wrote:Couldn't care less to be honest. 800 for me is the most convenient and traditional way of sharing photos online and I personally will continue to do so regardless of any increase to the size limit.

Likewise. If the forum becomes a pain to look at with the new sizes I will simply go elsewhere.

User avatar
Pen Pusher
Posts: 7138
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:34 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Pen Pusher »

Changed my 16inch screen res from 1024 to 1152x864. Everything slightly smaller but still readable and seeable :whistle: and can easily view images at 1024 which is what I'm using on my fotopic site now. Have to say the image quality and detail seen is much better than at 800.

Brian
The Future Of Photography Is Mirrorless

DfG on Facebook
BAMPhotography on Facebook

User avatar
onemac
Posts: 573
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 8:21 am
Location: EGQS

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by onemac »

Having trialled this elsewhere it does appear that the same pic presented at 1024px wide has more 'oomph' :smile: so yes, I'm in favour.

Al
When in Athens.......

User avatar
Neilf92
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 8:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Neilf92 »

800 is fine with me - if I want to see it larger I just press Ctrl + to zoom in .
I'm not too fussed about quality - a decent photo holds up and a bad one gets slightly worse zoomed in .
if I wanted a top quality image I'd ask the photographer for a high res version .

User avatar
MrAngry2
Posts: 1942
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 11:47 am
Location: Great Dunmow, Essex

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by MrAngry2 »

I would rather they stay as they are but wouldnt bother me to much if they did go bigger. I like em at 800 as it means I can hide flaws easier :grin:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/richardjudge/

Biggin Hill international cheese fair 2011 (TBC)

Stonefaction
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 6:29 am

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Stonefaction »

I post my photos on flickr (as it appears quite a few folk do now) and unless I post them at 800 x ... on there, I am currently limited to 500 x ... size photos when linking back to flickr from here.
Then I get the 'would like to see these bigger' comments, so I vote yes - as 1024 x ... is the next flickr standard size (and the same size as requred for airplane-pictures.net), allowing the larger size would save me a lot of time and mucking around with different sizes for different sites.

Copper2
Posts: 483
Joined: Thu 02 Apr 2009, 7:59 am

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Copper2 »

I would like to see them bigger :biggrin:

User avatar
F-86
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 11:06 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by F-86 »

Another vote for bigger pic's here.

DeanW
Posts: 3319
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:18 am

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by DeanW »

If the board allows bigger images in the future, will this mean the file size limit for the images will be higher too?

User avatar
Russ
Posts: 5592
Joined: Wed 23 Jul 2008, 6:51 am
Location: UK

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Russ »

I think we'd have to increase it Dean. That will put those with slower Internet connections at a disadvantage as well.

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

Russ wrote:I think we'd have to increase it Dean. That will put those with slower Internet connections at a disadvantage as well.

Not sure - maybe only needs to go up to 300KB.

This is 250KB...

Image
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

Manonthefence
Posts: 2371
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 11:52 am
Location: elsewehere

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by Manonthefence »

The image is cut in half on my screen

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

StevenH
Posts: 1225
Joined: Mon 01 Dec 2008, 8:05 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by StevenH »

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind here...

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

StevenH wrote:"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind here...

So far, more than twice as many people want the size increased. We'll look into it - there are some solutions which Nick and I will investigate before we implement any changes, but the demand is clearly there, so we just need to find a balance between what the stats tell us and giving people what they want.
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

User avatar
eaglekepr
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 4:41 am
Location: Suffolk
Contact:

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by eaglekepr »

Fits nicely in my browser... I'd imagine you'd have to do a lot of policing for a 300kb limit. What compression level did you save it at, Dan? I'm all for 1024. I find every now and then I instinctively click on a photo to make it larger!

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

eaglekepr wrote:What compression level did you save it at, Dan?

'Save for Web' at 83%
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

StevenH
Posts: 1225
Joined: Mon 01 Dec 2008, 8:05 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by StevenH »

Oh well, keeps you busy I suppose...

User avatar
LN Strike Eagle
UKAR Staff
Posts: 11191
Joined: Mon 21 Jul 2008, 3:29 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by LN Strike Eagle »

StevenH wrote:Oh well, keeps you busy I suppose...

Who pissed in your cornflakes? :grin:
"You really are an oafish philistine at times!"

StevenH
Posts: 1225
Joined: Mon 01 Dec 2008, 8:05 pm

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by StevenH »

All in jest. :wink:

User avatar
eaglekepr
Posts: 266
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 4:41 am
Location: Suffolk
Contact:

Re: Bigger Images?

Post by eaglekepr »

So, after resizing down to 1024 on my laptop (wide screen... it squishes unless I want black bars) I see your point... so the problem is actually the forum software that forces you to have such a large left margin/avatar? I seem to recall the question of whether or not the left side could be shrunk. If it was, 900 or maybe even 1000px images might fit just fine.

Post Reply