Will one of the moderators PLEASE go back and re-size these over-size photos - they are driving me CRAZY.
And while you are at it, teach them how to resize photos...

I find myself skipping some of the most important posts and I love pictures.

George I don't know if it is just my browser but usually if I hold my mouse pointer over the picture it will give you me little toolbar with a magnifying glass and a - symbol to zoom out, it will resize the pictures for the purposes of viewing the post without having to scroll sideways. I get frustrated by the wide photos too, but it is tough to get everyone on the same page of music so to speak. Hang in there.

For anyone using Photobucket, you can use it to resize the photos when you upload them.



For photos, choose either the 320 x 240 (medium) or the 640 x 480 (large). It will maintain the original aspect ratio.

Joe, I am 83 years old and I am computer literate - it's not necessary to zoom in and out to look at a photo ...
There are scads of re-sizing programs available that anyone can master ...
GOGG

Let's collect different resizing methods here, and I will move them to the Archive Thread on posting photos

The simplest method is Cat’s suggestion; but here’s another good one.
http://bluefive.pair.com/pixresizer.htm

Easy method if you have Outlook Express is to click email “My Pictures” and click on make photo “smaller” or “other options”.
Drag and drop.. copy and paste – whatever…

George,

I guess I'm an outlaw. With pictures it's bigger is better for me.

Oh no Cecil, you're not an outlaw...
You're just rich enough to be able to afford a 25.5" widescreen LCD monitor ....

i am w/ you 100% george.

when we went through this (pixel police) before i posted up detailed instructions on how to use microsoft picture manager (for those who have it.....it comes stock on most pc's) its easy and you up load the smaller pic to photobucket (which reduces upload times as well).

i dont have time to look for that again but it is another option although ken's way is probably the easiest.

George I agree that it is easy, I have also seen enough bulletin boards to know you aren't going lead everyone to post suitable sized pictures to fit everyones monitor, that would be like a man playing a flute and being able to lead all the rats out of a town suffering from too many rats, it's a fairy tale. Kudos to you for having the ability and taking the time to be computer savvy, I know guys in their 40's who get frustrated by them, at 83 that's inspiring.

Joe, I believe that we are a more intelligent group than the "run-of-the-mill" forums....

I have a large monitor (these cpa eyes are getting old) so the size doesn't make any difference to me. But that being said resizing photos is more than just about viewing size it is also about loading time for some folks. Not everyone has fast internet access, and for those that don't a post with a lot of large photos can really slow the time it takes to access a thread. I always resize and adjust the resolution of photos. Most folks today (myself included) take photos that end up being over 5 megapixels (our camera takes them at 10 megapixels). I have found that after resizing photos you can also decrease their resolution to about 50% and not loose any significant photo quality.

Just some rambling thoughts.

Point taken George, I also agree with that statement 100% in fact.

JHAP has a point, I have dialup and at a whopping 19,200 some days it takes a good deal of time to download my email even, let a lone photos that are quite large.

I haven't posted any "photers" yet but when I do they won't be oversized.

Still a big fan of thumbnails. Their small size make loading quick and you have the option of seeing the fullsize image in a new window.

Like this right here:


Click once to open the image in a new window or tab, and once it's loaded you can click it again to see it even larger (in some cases).

I find thumbnails to be very polite, in a bandwidth sense.

BTW, we HAVE got some info on resizing in the Archive Photo posting thread. I will add new info from this thread after allowing time for more good info to accumulate.

Most every digital camera comes with software that lets you re-size photos for e-mail or other purposes. If you choose 640 x 480 and let the software prep them for mailing they will be compressed (small in file size) yet still look great at 640x480 on computer screen.

I wrote a macro that does all the work and blah blah blah....There I go again.

George, just who is the "we" in intelligence around here?

Am I understanding this correctly that the 800x600 photos I'm posting are causing viewing issues?

Personally, I like viewing photos in good resolution without having to click a thumbnail. I really can't tell a difference between 800x600 or 640x480 in speed of download or visually but if it helps others out I'll downgrade.

Is the preferred format thumbs then?

ryan, i make all mine in the 640x480 size before uploading and dont believe it skimps on the quality. 800x600 goes off screen here some for me (19-inch screen), but not bad. some folks here are posting pics that go way off the screen like 1240x whatever....this assuming most normal people have normal screens...17 to 20-inch....

and some folks still have dial up, like i did for A LONG TIME. the 640x480 size (usually runs from 30kb to 60kb per picture file) is not too bad for dial up.

Even some of use ABnormal people have normal screens.

Ryan, I use 4 different computers regularly for the forum (a laptop and 3 desktops) and I stopped using 800 pixel wide photos because 2 of them - with 4:3 aspect ratio screens - have trouble with photos that big.

They are not a problem on the laptop or the newest desktop, which have 16:9 aspect ratios (IIRC).

Aw shucks Dave – don’t be modest ...


800x600 pixels results in good quality photos for me - larger causes problems for my 14 inch monitor.
Personally I don’t like thumbnails...

Ok, I'll buy a bigger monitor ... after I restock my pond...

Don't forget about cropping. Why upload superfluous junk?

Sheeeesh! Maybe I need to hire a professional photographer for all this.

Well here is some real superfluous junk.

For those who may have questions about photo size, here are three standard sizes. It seems like the fish and my belly are really exaggerated at the largest size.

320x240 pixels


640x480 pixels


800x600 pixels

great post ken

I mostly wanted a reason to type "superflous".