Did You Know? Wattflyer how too's and features articles.

WF Photo Posting Tutorial

Old 08-26-2012, 09:09 PM
  #1  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default WF Photo Posting Tutorial

I heard some folks complaining about the photo sizes and now realize what they are talking about. The image size is terrible.

Is there a setting we can change for that? We are on the verge of doing a build clinic is this is going to make things difficult.

Thanks,

Frank

Last edited by Murocflyer; 08-27-2012 at 09:11 PM.
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-26-2012, 10:21 PM
  #2  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Upload photo size - as in the Forum re-sizes photos and presents a much smaller "thumbnail" version.

Actual photo size as it comes out of the camera.

"Hosted" photo size as displayed when an IMG is inserted into a post?

What is the ideal size you WANT?

Hillbille

Last edited by hillbille; 08-31-2012 at 09:34 AM.
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-26-2012, 10:38 PM
  #3  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Removed. Not needed

Last edited by Murocflyer; 08-27-2012 at 05:29 PM.
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 12:51 AM
  #4  
pd1
Still Learning
 
pd1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 4,098
Default

Hi Frank,
I uploaded some pictures of my current project here.
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/show...1&postcount=81

They open full sized for me. Full sized should be 15 inches wide.
Are they smaller for you?

Paul
pd1 is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 03:27 AM
  #5  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by pd1 View Post
Hi Frank,
I uploaded some pictures of my current project here.
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/show...1&postcount=81

They open full sized for me. Full sized should be 15 inches wide.
Are they smaller for you?

Paul
Those are definitely bigger than the photos in Bill's thread. I wonder what the difference is. That is good to see though. I was afraid we'd have to do our build threads with those tiny photos. I'll look around for other photos and see if any others are small.

Thanks for the comparison.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 06:56 AM
  #6  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Frank -

As far as I can tell it all has to do with resolution of the photo. The "large photo in the first post was taken with a Nikon D70 and all of the smaller ones were taken with a Kodak at a lower resolution.

Also the "large" photo is "hosted" on another website and has been simply "embedded" in the Wattflyer forum using the "insert Image" while the other lower resolution build photos are low resolution to start with and then they were uploaded directly to the Wattflyer forum. Wattflyer CHANGED it's policy for allowing large files to be uploaded and displayed a couple of years back. This was (and IS) a cost cutting move aimed at cutting overall SERVER STORAGE space since the forum does cost money to be stored and run from a server - the people running the servers earn their living from space rental!

The solution is to host all of the "build" photos on another website and simply embed them into your thread here as you go.

Also it is a good idea if you CAN (the op of the build thread should be considered YOU in this case! LOL!!) To faux post in the thread at least the FIRST 5 or 10 posts - leaving the posts "empty" in the beginning so that as the "build" progresses the descriptions and photos can be added to the beginning of the thread - and all of the extra "comments" will come AFTER that. Keeps the "build" up front and all the bs behind so that there is no need to "search" through 500 pages of rhetorical bs to find the last installment - it will be in one of the FIRST 10 posts!

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 07:55 AM
  #7  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Okay - here are some examples of what I am referring to.

Here are some UPLOADED photos. I will upload the SAME photo THREE times in three different resolutions.

1024 X 768
800 X 600
400 X 300

These will be reduced by the forum (Wattflyer) to thumbnails that will show full size images when you click on them.

Hillbille
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Canon_A495_002.jpg
Views:	173
Size:	163.5 KB
ID:	162167   Click image for larger version

Name:	Canon_A495__800X600_002.jpg
Views:	181
Size:	90.3 KB
ID:	162168   Click image for larger version

Name:	Canon_A495__400X300_002.jpg
Views:	175
Size:	36.5 KB
ID:	162169  
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 07:58 AM
  #8  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Now I will embed the same three images in this post. The nice thing about embedding images is that you CAN type descriptions in between images.

Here is the 1024 X 768 image - hosted and embedded.


The 1024 X 768 is re sized by Wattflyer image controls so that it is only 800 X 600 - here is a link to the original at the true 1024 X 768
http://www.bakehead.com/A495_Mount/Canon_A495_002.jpg


And then here is the 800 X 600 image - also hosted and embedded.


And then finally here is the same image at 400 X 300 hosted and embedded.


And that as they say is that!

Hope this helps to explain and show the differences. People that post really "large" images usually have the original hosted on another website and are just embedding the image in a post much like YouTube video's are embedded. Saves the image storage on THIS site. Plus a lot of the time they do not want the image "thumbnailed" by the forum as it severly cuts the resolution - in-flight photos come to mind as when the photo is re sized the plane in flight is usually so small it cannot be seen - but if left FULL SIZE it can easily be seen. It's all in the details as they say!

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 08:32 AM
  #9  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

I might also add that I have posted in almost every size that's viable for the web. I have had my own website since 1994. I never really learned to "create" web pages though and have always done it the "easy" way utilizing other softwares to do most of the hard work for me. I currently still create my own pages and photo displays and generally "embed" my photos from those.

1024 X 768 is my choice for my website for JUST a photographic display but for posting to most other websites the 800 X 600 works well. There are STILL those out there that cannot afford high speed internet and are on dial-up and also those that have smaller resolution screens and not the larger flat screens - so 800 X 600 works best for them. Load times of photos can be cut also by lowering the number of colors - from the original Mega to say only 32,000 colors keeps the depth of the photo pretty much intact for web work and cuts the file size down to a fraction of the original.

An example might be a DSLR photo taken at high res. It will have a resolution of 4272 X 2848 and a file size of 3.89 Mb. After it is processed and re sized it will be 1024 X 768 and at 32,000 colors have a file size of under 300kb AND look exactly the same on the WEB. What changes is the depth of field and the PRINTING resolution of the photo mostly.

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 12:57 PM
  #10  
pd1
Still Learning
 
pd1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 4,098
Default

Hillbillie, I've seen threads on that other site that where pictures were embedded rather than attached.
Once the thread started getting a lot of posts, the page got very slow to load.
If we embed them here, will that happen?

Currently I make my photos a reduced size with photoshop. I make the size 15 in width and under 140kb in size.

There is a free program called Gimp that will do that also.

Paul
pd1 is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 05:00 PM
  #11  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Paul -
It's a size thing and to answer your question - probably yes but it depends. It really depends upon the file sizes as hosted and the server speed of the location where the original photos are hosted.

If the server where the photos are loaded get a lot of traffic and slow down then that will affect the photos being loaded here - each time a new person opens the thread. The TEXT will appear and be readable but the photographs will load slower and in the order thary appear on the "OTHER" server which means out of order here and slow.

Also as seen in my post above there really is no need to post a photo which is above 800 X 600 HERE on Wattflyer as the software of the forum limits those larger photos to 800 X 600 anyway.

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 05:27 PM
  #12  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Wow, that is a lot of info Bill! Thanks for sharing that.

Mods,

Can we make this a photo posting tutorial and put this thread somewhere better?

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 05:41 PM
  #13  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Thanks Frank. Photography is still a learning subject to me - I'm old and learn slow but I am persistent at least! LOL!!

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 05:53 PM
  #14  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by hillbille View Post
Thanks Frank. Photography is still a learning subject to me - I'm old and learn slow but I am persistent at least! LOL!!

Hillbille
You are doing a great job at it.

We need to hook up and do some flying. I can swing over your way one morning before the winds kick up.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 07:04 PM
  #15  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

The Calico Dry Lake is usually pretty good this time of year - at least now until about mid April! LOL!! Hot though!

Have you given any thought to attending the Ace-In-The-Hole event in Las Vegas in early October (around the 12th I think)? It is a three day event (but a LOT of people go early too! LOL!) and well worth the time!

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 07:56 PM
  #16  
Murocflyer
WAA-08 Pilot #1
Thread Starter
 
Murocflyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edwards AFB, CA
Posts: 7,044
Default

Originally Posted by hillbille View Post
The Calico Dry Lake is usually pretty good this time of year - at least now until about mid April! LOL!! Hot though!

Have you given any thought to attending the Ace-In-The-Hole event in Las Vegas in early October (around the 12th I think)? It is a three day event (but a LOT of people go early too! LOL!) and well worth the time!

Hillbille
Is that off of Ghost Town Rd? Do you typically have a group fly on the weekends or is it pretty lonely out there?

I haven't heard of the Ace in the hole event but it sounds like it is worth going. Plus billeting there is only $39 a night if they have space.

Frank
Murocflyer is offline  
Old 08-27-2012, 08:58 PM
  #17  
hillbille
Super Contributor
 
hillbille's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Barstow, California
Posts: 1,054
Default

Yes the dry lake is just off Ghost town road - exit Yermo - turn left (heading east that is) and go straight about 1 mile and it will be on the right hand side.

All of the west end of the dry lake is private property. People think it is BLM land but it isn't - the BLM land starts about 1/2 mile in and goes to the east. We (our local club - the Barstow Buzzards) managed to secure written permission from the owners to occupy the land for "hobby" purposes. It (the dry lake bed) has since been declared a "flood plain" by the state and county of San Bernardino - so - without the written permission we couldn't drive out vehicles onto the dry lake! If not for our AMA safety code and insurance disclaimers we would have lost a great place to fly!

The AIH event is really nice - lots of GREAT pilots and some (what I consider) fabulous planes. It is held at Bennet Field just north of the UNLV Boyd Stadium.

2010 link - http://www.bakehead.com/Vegas_2.html

2011 link - http://www.bakehead.com/2011_Ace_In_The_Hole.html

Last year (2011) I took about 13,000 photos - most were in-flight. Just as an example of my prowess as a photographer (displaying deserved rank amateur status!! LOL!!) I would guess I got 1 keeper (photo that was IN focus, not blurred, under exposed or over exposed) for every 150 I shot!!

And I had time to FLY my planes too! I took 7 last year and flew them all but this year I am only planning to take 3 planes but 7 cameras!! LOL!!

Hillbille
hillbille is offline  
Old 08-28-2012, 01:25 AM
  #18  
Don Sims
Administrator
 
Don Sims's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 13,020
Default

Dropped this great thread in the Did you Know forum. Thanks for the posts and idea! Since the server move, photos have been problematic!
Don Sims is offline  
Old 08-28-2012, 05:48 AM
This message has been deleted by Twmaster.
Old 08-30-2012, 05:15 AM
This message has been deleted by Rabbitcreekok.
Old 08-31-2012, 06:10 AM
This message has been deleted by crxmanpat.
Old 08-31-2012, 06:55 AM
  #19  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

Originally Posted by hillbille View Post
I might also add that I have posted in almost every size that's viable for the web. I have had my own website since 1994. I never really learned to "create" web pages though and have always done it the "easy" way utilizing other softwares to do most of the hard work for me. I currently still create my own pages and photo displays and generally "embed" my photos from those.

1024 X 768 is my choice for my website for JUST a photographic display but for posting to most other websites the 800 X 600 works well. There are STILL those out there that cannot afford high speed internet and are on dial-up and also those that have smaller resolution screens and not the larger flat screens - so 800 X 600 works best for them. Load times of photos can be cut also by lowering the number of colors - from the original Mega to say only 32,000 colors keeps the depth of the photo pretty much intact for web work and cuts the file size down to a fraction of the original.

An example might be a DSLR photo taken at high res. It will have a resolution of 4272 X 2848 and a file size of 3.89 Mb. After it is processed and re sized it will be 1024 X 768 and at 32,000 colors have a file size of under 300kb AND look exactly the same on the WEB. What changes is the depth of field and the PRINTING resolution of the photo mostly.

Hillbille
A very nice image viewer is http://www.faststone.org/. It's free, and has a lot of capabilities including things like changing the file size, to adjusting the brightness, color, saturation, and contrast of your photos.

Also, image cropping and similar items are also included in their image viewer 4.6.
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 08-31-2012, 01:34 PM
This message has been deleted by Twmaster.
Old 09-03-2012, 01:46 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-03-2012, 01:54 PM
This message has been deleted by gramps2361. Reason: posting spam
Old 09-03-2012, 01:55 PM
This message has been deleted by gramps2361. Reason: posting spam
Old 09-03-2012, 01:55 PM
This message has been deleted by gramps2361. Reason: posting spam
Old 09-03-2012, 08:55 PM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-05-2012, 06:55 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-06-2012, 08:18 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-06-2012, 08:51 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-06-2012, 09:30 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-06-2012, 10:46 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Old 09-06-2012, 11:19 AM
This message has been deleted by Don Sims.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nitro Blast
General Electric Discussions
5
08-23-2011 05:23 PM
Nitro Blast
General Electric Discussions
38
03-30-2011 07:33 PM
Dannyrevs
General RC items For Sale and WTB
0
03-07-2011 05:48 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Quick Reply: WF Photo Posting Tutorial


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.12374 seconds with 15 queries