Max post size - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 10:32:34 am
content: I posted a couple of pics the other day, and it turned out that the maximum upload size is per post, not per attachment.Does anyone have an opinion about sane image resolution/compression for posting more than a couple of pics?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 10:43:05 am
content: There is both a per image and per post limit.I usually use Irfanview and resize to 50% and save as 80% JPG if I really want to save space before upload.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 10:58:44 am
content: 1024x768 works well enough for most images. If you really need an insane image size then crop to that and upload. Ultra high res images are not often needed, if you really need it then do the crop to the point of interest and upload, and include a link to the full size image hosted on another place like Flickr.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:10:37 am
content: Apart from the image counts and image size, really wish there is a SMF add-on that can limit the image's resolution, that will be perfect.Its so annoying to read post with photo attachment thats transferred raw directly from the camera, just plain stupidity.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:14:47 am
content: Thanks guys.You say sane things. As requested.I doubted myself because it took me a couple of goes a while ago to get some legible pics of some SMD stuff uploaded.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:18:04 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on March 30, 2014, 11:10:37 amThe forum now automatically resizes the images, this shouldn't be an issue anymore. (or it used to)

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:23:38 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on March 30, 2014, 11:18:04 amYes, I'm aware of that, still there will be a waste in storage at the forum, and bandwidth since the browser will download the full original gigantic sizes of the photo, and then resized locally to fit to your browser's width.

author: apelly
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:32:23 am
content: Well, while we're ranting, I'd take big images a thousand fold over the fucking youtube links that play by themselves. 5? 8? What's the maximum you've had start at once?unread posts << clicklooks interesting << ctrl clicklooks interesting << ctrl clicklooks interesting << ctrl clickLike youtube is the only media I might be interested inright nowSigh

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:37:33 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on March 30, 2014, 11:23:38 amI do have to be fairly careful with the limits, enough to make it useful for those that want it, but not so high that it gets popular and abused.Current website including forum + attachments + databases is about 15GB backed up, and I need to backup daily and hold multiple copies.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 11:58:36 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 30, 2014, 10:43:05 amIrfanview is a great little tool, I use it a lot - it has some features that are better than Photoshop!If the attachment folder gets too big you could always run a script over it to process the images and resize the big ones, and also use a fixed jpg quality of say 86%

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2014, 12:08:22 pm
content: If your pics have to be greater than 800x600, you're just a bad photographer. Crop, or use more views to convey your subject.And for the love of God, people, take photos IN FOCUS! I hate how often I see blurry pics that were obviously taken too close. You cannot enhance a picture by getting closer, the focus drops way faster than apparent scale!(Nothing specific, just whining)Tim