PDA

View Full Version : unable to post photos ?



koh303
3-Jan-2015, 10:14
I am unable to upload photos, is it because my "attachments" box is full?
Or is there another reason?

Ken Lee
3-Jan-2015, 10:57
http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/InsertImage.jpg

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/insertimage.jpgIf you are attempting to upload from your computer (rather than embed a link to a photo hosted elsewhere), you need to (1) Click on the browse button and navigate to the file you want to upload and (2) Explicitly click on the Upload File(s) button.

It may not look like a button depending on your choice of web browser/operating system/forum theme but once you've specified the file, you need to click on the text which reads "Upload File(s)".

Ari
3-Jan-2015, 11:43
I had the same problem yesterday, I ended up having to use a link to Photobucket.

koh303
3-Jan-2015, 12:50
http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/InsertImage.jpg

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/insertimage.jpgIf you are attempting to upload from your computer (rather than embed a link to a photo hosted elsewhere), you need to (1) Click on the browse button and navigate to the file you want to upload and (2) Explicitly click on the Upload File(s) button.

It may not look like a button depending on your choice of web browser/operating system/forum theme but once you've specified the file, you need to click on the text which reads "Upload File(s)".

I have done this successfully on occasion in the past... But for some reason i cannot do it now.

djdister
3-Jan-2015, 14:13
I have done this successfully on occasion in the past... But for some reason i cannot do it now.

I had the same problem today, the only solution was to make the image files very small in dimension, in addition to file size. Seems like some file attachment limitation setting has kicked in. I notice that embedded images on apug seem to display considerably larger for some reason.

Ken Lee
3-Jan-2015, 14:50
There is a file-size limit for uploading photos. This is because we have limited server space.

The actual limit on size does not currently appear. I'll see if I can get that information exposed or documented.

There is no file-size limit when we merely embed a reference to a photo hosted elsewhere.

djdister
3-Jan-2015, 14:51
There is a file-size limit for uploading photos. This is because we have limited server space.


I thought so, but did it get even smaller recently?

Ken Lee
3-Jan-2015, 15:14
I'll see if I can get that information exposed or documented.

axs810
3-Jan-2015, 15:23
Is it possible to fill the "attachments" box? It doesn't give a limit like PM's do it just lets you know how much space you're using

koh303
3-Jan-2015, 15:59
According to the photos stickey:
a. Create and store the picture as a "JPG" or "JPEG" file on your computer, to be no larger than 250K. The forum will resize the longer dimension of the picture to 750 pixels if it is larger, so if you size it that way to begin with, you won't suffer resizing errors that the forum software sometimes causes. BMP, GIF, and PNG files are also accepted, but limited to 150K and must fit within a 650-pixel box to avoid resizing. JPEG is preferred.

However - this has never been a problem when loading an image as the forum software would reduce the size of any file upload to match.

That and more -
At the same time - i was unable to post a URL embeded with reference, it comes up as a broken image link.

Ralph Barker
4-Jan-2015, 12:56
Once you bring up the attachment manager window, clicking on the question mark at the upper right displays the file size limits.

If one attempts to upload an image that exceeds the pixel size or disk size specified, the upload will not complete. It does not produce an error message, however.

koh303
4-Jan-2015, 13:21
Once you bring up the attachment manager window, clicking on the question mark at the upper right displays the file size limits.

If one attempts to upload an image that exceeds the pixel size or disk size specified, the upload will not complete. It does not produce an error message, however.

i never use that window. I have been uploading photos in the same exact way for years, but only recently and suddenly it does not work.
Also - when i do go to the attachment window i cannot seem to add or remove any of the photos already there.

HMG
4-Jan-2015, 18:07
It's good to know I'm not going crazy. Or at least this is not the only reason I'm going crazy.

I also could not get uploads to work today. They were larger than the 250k koh303 mentioned, but smaller than previous uploads that did fine. I can click on the file, upload appears to start, but not file and no error message. Reducing them to under 250k did work.

Also, how do you delete the files uploaded previously but no longer needed? I went into "Settings" then "Attachments" and deleted a bunch. They're no longer showing up there, but still do show up in the popup when trying to do a file upload.

koh303
4-Jan-2015, 18:23
so did files under 250K upload OK?

HMG
4-Jan-2015, 18:50
so did files under 250K upload OK?

Yes, they uploaded without a hitch.

It would appear that whatever routine was used to automatically resize jpegs is no longer working.

StoneNYC
5-Jan-2015, 04:21
Had the same problem, I use the tapatalk app from my phone for almost everything, I don't have the option of adjusting file size from my phone, do you know if they can fix the auto resizing settings? It used to work just fine and could always upload from my phone previously. I thought it was a tapatalk issue but I guess it's a site issue?

Ralph Barker
5-Jan-2015, 07:09
We're looking into the problem.

Ralph Barker
6-Jan-2015, 06:33
Tom had configured some server limits in an effort to control the denial-of-service attacks we've been encountering (the cause of the occasional slow response). He made some adjustments to those settings based on this issue. So, an upload of a 1024-pixel, 500+ KB file now works with the auto-resize function. Larger images will still fail.

Please let us know how this works for you.

Renato Tonelli
6-Jan-2015, 07:26
I noticed that I still have photos that were uploaded long ago - how can I delete them? I was unable to upload some images a few weeks ago as well.

StoneNYC
6-Jan-2015, 08:14
Tom had configured some server limits in an effort to control the denial-of-service attacks we've been encountering (the cause of the occasional slow response). He made some adjustments to those settings based on this issue. So, an upload of a 1024-pixel, 500+ KB file now works with the auto-resize function. Larger images will still fail.

Please let us know how this works for you.

That's just outside my normal sizes.

1080 (because of high definition screens) pixels and 600k

But that's just me.

Jac@stafford.net
6-Jan-2015, 08:37
Had the same problem, I use the tapatalk app from my phone for almost everything, I don't have the option of adjusting file size from my phone,

I don't know what phone you have, but resizing apps are so simple to write that I'd be surprised if there are none for your phone. The iPhone has them.
.

StoneNYC
6-Jan-2015, 08:42
I don't know what phone you have, but resizing apps are so simple to write that I'd be surprised if there are none for your phone. The iPhone has them.
.

Yes I have an iPhone, the problem is that I don't like the way that the file is exported often times with those apps there is a shift in the color information for in the exposure information to the degradation of the image. I can't explain it as a not a techie guy, but I have set up my image export options to work with all systems up until this point, so I'm not going to go back and re-export every single image I have just to be able to upload it here, I specifically looked at all of the site that I use previous to this new change, and had set them up about two years ago. The fact that the file sizes have changed for the website doesn't change the fact that I've already had everything set up and in a storage system, so when I share, I share from that system. I'm sorry that the website is having problems with DOS attacks, as I don't see why anyone would want to do that to this website, but it is a little unfair to suddenly change everything up on us and if my images wont upload, I just won't share them. I'm not mad, but I do think it's a little unfair to expect us all to have to change it now at this point.

Again I am not mad and I'm not trying to be a jerk, just explaining to Jac my perspective.

8x10 user
6-Jan-2015, 12:46
Yep, it now limits you to 750 pixel, not that much for a LF forum. The old limit was around 2000 pixels. It would be nice if the limit was closer to 5000 pixels

Randy Moe
6-Jan-2015, 13:17
I see the past is unaltered. :)

Ralph Barker
7-Jan-2015, 05:49
I have no explanation for why people launch DOS attacks on any site, let alone this one. But, that is a reality that we have to deal with as best we can.

The actual image-size/file-size limits have been 750x750 and 244KB since shortly after we migrated to vBulletin around 2006. That limit was established because we operate on donated resources, both in terms of storage and bandwidth. Externally-hosted images, of course, can be larger, because they don't use our server's storage or bandwidth. I don't recall the earlier versions of vBulletin having an auto-resize feature at all.

rdenney
7-Jan-2015, 09:34
Folks, we are still discussing the Tapatalk-related issue. I had thought Tapatalk would resize photos (that are set to be hosted by the forum server and not by Tapatalk) based on the forum's limitations. We are looking into confirming that. On other forums, I am usually able to upload full-res iPhone pictures, and they get uploaded as something much smaller, so I know that Tapatalk is doing some resizing.

Rick "stand by" Denney

StoneNYC
9-Jan-2015, 07:23
Tom had configured some server limits in an effort to control the denial-of-service attacks we've been encountering (the cause of the occasional slow response). He made some adjustments to those settings based on this issue. So, an upload of a 1024-pixel, 500+ KB file now works with the auto-resize function. Larger images will still fail.

Please let us know how this works for you.

This doesn't seem to be correct...

127793

Fred L
9-Jan-2015, 15:20
Yes I have an iPhone...

I use Filterstorm and PhotoGene for working photos on the iPhone. Photogene has a pretty day to use interface and the resize option is no brainer. FilterStorm has more features so end up going back and forth.

StoneNYC
9-Jan-2015, 17:09
FYI I attempted it from my computer, it's definitely 750 on the long side now and under 250k for images, that's worse than the APUG gallery, I agree with 8x10 user it does kind of defeat the purpose of the LARGE format forum, and yea the old limit of 2000 was much better. My 4x10 panoramic images look ridiculous with 750 on the long side, I mean, they look ridiculous anyway because they suck but still... LOL

I KNOW that the site doesn't like paid users but if the server space is limited and donated, can't we donate some money to increase the server space or something?

8x10 user
9-Jan-2015, 17:28
Luminous landscape takes files up to 3000 pix long.

Which hosting site do you guys recommend for larger files?

koh303
9-Jan-2015, 17:37
Folks, we are still discussing the Tapatalk-related issue. I had thought Tapatalk would resize photos (that are set to be hosted by the forum server and not by Tapatalk) based on the forum's limitations. We are looking into confirming that. On other forums, I am usually able to upload full-res iPhone pictures, and they get uploaded as something much smaller, so I know that Tapatalk is doing some resizing.

Rick "stand by" Denney

I do not use tapatalk, and have never used it.

Sal Santamaura
9-Jan-2015, 17:38
...it does kind of defeat the purpose of the LARGE format forum, and yea the old limit of 2000 was much better...No it doesn't/wasn't. Even much larger files on a screen are unable to replicate the experience of viewing prints made from large format negatives. Nothing lost. :)




...can't we donate some money to increase the server space or something?No. As you and many others have been told repeatedly by this site's owner and moderators.

Ralph Barker
10-Jan-2015, 06:12
For those who don't feel their images are displayed well within the 750x750 pixel upload limit, the easy solution is to host your images externally, and include them within your posts via HTML calls. For example, I keep images in an archive on my own domain, hosted by StartLogic, in addition to having images stored here. Using my personal domain's storage and HTML calls, I can include images of almost any size without impacting the LFPF server or bandwidth. There are also "free" image-hosting sites, but they vary in terms of allowing external references (i.e. the ability to display the images elsewhere via HTML). I don't have a rundown on what the various hosting sites do in this regard.

StoneNYC
10-Jan-2015, 07:52
For those who don't feel their images are displayed well within the 750x750 pixel upload limit, the easy solution is to host your images externally, and include them within your posts via HTML calls. For example, I keep images in an archive on my own domain, hosted by StartLogic, in addition to having images stored here. Using my personal domain's storage and HTML calls, I can include images of almost any size without impacting the LFPF server or bandwidth. There are also "free" image-hosting sites, but they vary in terms of allowing external references (i.e. the ability to display the images elsewhere via HTML). I don't have a rundown on what the various hosting sites do in this regard.

Ralph, that may be easy for you, but that's not easy for many of us, first of all there's a learning curve of trying to figure out how to work with these image server things, and then there's finding one and figuring out how to use that and then figuring out how to get the image to link here. For techie people it's probably easy, but I would venture that many of the users here may not have the same technical know-how that you do. I think it's really a very big hindrance, personally I don't really ever go on the computer, I only really use the Tapatalk app to access the form, and the only two image upload options are to use the Tapatalk app, or to use the form upload, LFPF restricted the settings a while back so that you could not use the tapatalk app to host images, and were required to use the site itself (which other time is fine for me because tapatalk started adding a logo on top of the image in the corner which wasn't really okay with me, but anyway that was before this image file issue). So if suffice to say, when you say something like "the easiest thing" I completely disagree with you and find this to be very frustrating and not at all user-friendly for those who aren't to text savvy and don't access the Internet via computer very often.

I still don't understand the relationship between having DOS attacks on the site and the image upload limits, but again I'm not tech savvy.

Corran
10-Jan-2015, 11:04
Just wanted to put this out there:

GoDaddy hosting has been my hosting service for about 8 years now. It costs me about $80 a year* or sometimes less if I get it on special or purchase multiple years at once. A domain costs $10/year.

There is no "learning curve" to hosting. You set up your FTP password through GoDaddy's site, and then you simply input into your explorer or browser "ftp.YOURSITE.com" and then drag and drop files onto it. There is NO HTML, PHP, or anything to learn. It's a folder system on the server. It's not like in the old days where you had to configure an FTP transfer program and that mess (which WAS a pain).

If you don't want to do that, fine, but you can still go to Flickr and get free hosting, and hotlink from there. Don't like the sharpening Flickr applies? Well too bad, it's free! If you are smart enough to post on a forum, you can figure this out. And not to be a jerk, but if you are in the under-30 bracket and can't work your way around basic technology, how are you going to function in our technology-centric world? Do you want a job?

*That's the basic plan with email, several GB of storage, and plenty of upload/download. I have never even come close to hitting my limits, and I have big mp3 files on my site for samples of my recording work, so images are nothing.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 11:06
Just wanted to put this out there:

GoDaddy hosting has been my hosting service for about 8 years now. It costs me about $80 a year* or sometimes less if I get it on special or purchase multiple years at once. A domain costs $10/year.

There is no "learning curve" to hosting. You set up your FTP password through GoDaddy's site, and then you simply input into your explorer or browser "ftp.YOURSITE.com" and then drag and drop files onto it. There is NO HTML, PHP, or anything to learn. It's a folder system on the server. It's not like in the old days where you had to configure an FTP transfer program and that mess (which WAS a pain).

If you don't want to do that, fine, but you can still go to Flickr and get free hosting, and hotlink from there. Don't like the sharpening Flickr applies? Well too bad, it's free!

*That's the basic plan with email, several GB of storage, and plenty of upload/download. I have never even come close to hitting my limits, and I have big mp3 files on my site for samples of my recording work, so images are nothing.

Not a fan of Go Daddy. I have many issues with them and will never recommend them. I use 1&1. ymmv

Corran
10-Jan-2015, 11:08
Fair enough, I have not had one single issue myself. What problems did you have?
I think once in 8 years they had a major DDOS attack that took down my website for like a day. No biggie.

There are plenty of hosting services out there and FTP storage / connections should pretty much be the same across the board.

jp
10-Jan-2015, 11:19
Automated hacking systems probably interrogate options/features they might exploit and image processing has libraries have been an avenue in the past. Reducing the file size reduces the possibility of runaway memory hogging from invalid input meant to crash things or create unexpected behavior of software.

I have used both flickr and hosting services. The benefit of hosting that is not much mentioned is stats. The benefit of flickr is the networking effect.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 11:20
I worry about our younger generation, those under 40, that are not keeping up with technical and computing skills. Most have given up on laptops, desktops and only use their phones. Some argue, it all they need and all they can afford. They seem to have enough cash for a new $500phone every 2 years, but not a computer for $700 every 5 years.

A phone is not a replacement for everything, yes it is a very powerful computer, but it's uses are severely limited to consumer activities.

It is a known factoid that old people use more complex passwords them the young.

It also seems that HERE the old guys are way more computer savvy than our younger members.

Now go ahead and supply all the outlier exceptions.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 11:23
Fair enough, I have not had one single issue myself. What problems did you have?
I think once in 8 years they had a major DDOS attack that took down my website for like a day. No biggie.

There are plenty of hosting services out there and FTP storage / connections should pretty much be the same across the board.

My political opposition to Go Daddy is not for discussion here. I also had the devil of a time transferring a couple domains from them. They do not let go easily.

Nathan Potter
10-Jan-2015, 11:25
Just wanted to put this out there:

GoDaddy hosting has been my hosting service for about 8 years now. It costs me about $80 a year* or sometimes less if I get it on special or purchase multiple years at once. A domain costs $10/year.

There is no "learning curve" to hosting. You set up your FTP password through GoDaddy's site, and then you simply input into your explorer or browser "ftp.YOURSITE.com" and then drag and drop files onto it. There is NO HTML, PHP, or anything to learn. It's a folder system on the server. It's not like in the old days where you had to configure an FTP transfer program and that mess (which WAS a pain).

If you don't want to do that, fine, but you can still go to Flickr and get free hosting, and hotlink from there. Don't like the sharpening Flickr applies? Well too bad, it's free! If you are smart enough to post on a forum, you can figure this out. And not to be a jerk, but if you are in the under-30 bracket and can't work your way around basic technology, how are you going to function in our technology-centric world? Do you want a job?

*That's the basic plan with email, several GB of storage, and plenty of upload/download. I have never even come close to hitting my limits, and I have big mp3 files on my site for samples of my recording work, so images are nothing.

Hey Bryan, let's assume I'm not tech savvy. So I would wonder what you mean above:

1. What the heck is an FTP password and how would I set it up?
2. What the heck is GoDaddy and how do I find that site?
3. Where is my explorer or browser?
4. What do you mean by a folder system on a server?

Well, you get the idea.

And I would suggest that even in the US of A more than half of the citizens would be asking the four questions above. The disenfranchised, a growing class, is simply computer illiterate. As Stone suggests many are computer illiterate, I mean really illiterate.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 11:42
Hey Bryan, let's assume I'm not tech savvy. So I would wonder what you mean above:

1. What the heck is an FTP password and how would I set it up?
2. What the heck is GoDaddy and how do I find that site?
3. Where is my explorer or browser?
4. What do you mean by a folder system on a server?

Well, you get the idea.

And I would suggest that even in the US of A more than half of the citizens would be asking the four questions above. The disenfranchised, a growing class, is simply computer illiterate. As Stone suggests many are computer illiterate, I mean really illiterate.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

And that illiteracy is a huge problem for all for of us. Computer competency should be taught in grade schools.

Corran
10-Jan-2015, 11:53
Nathan, I understand where you are coming from, but with that kind of thought process, you could append any question.

5. What is web hosting?
6. What is a computer?
7. How do I turn this thing on??

And I have certainly dealt with those kind of questions from people...but yes I am assuming some level of literacy from the standpoint of Stone or whomever is posting on this site right now - therefore they know how to setup a password and navigate the internet (browser).

I'm not sure I agree with Randy wrt tech knowledge vs. age. That said, there seems to be a number of people posting here who deal with computers and high-tech stuff everyday in their work, so that skews the results.

I teach a computer-based course (Music Technology) at the university and there has certainly been a number of young students who know almost nothing about computers (around 20-22 years of age) so it certainly is true to an extent. When I was that age, my cohort had all grown up during the computer revolution (I did punch-card computing in elementary school) but nowadays it seems some younger folks coming up now had everything handed to them on a silver platter and they never learned the nitty-gritty about computer stuff, such as when I learned BASIC as a young teenager (of my own volition).

Randy, when I was in middle school, around 1998, we had computer classes (simple programming) and typing classes (which is why I type at over 80 wpm now). I wonder what they do now?

Anyway, the point stands that Flickr and similar is available if it's really a problem.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 12:05
Not taking typing classes is one of my major mistakes.

However during mandatory computer classes at work 15 years ago, my hunt and peck was faster than experienced secretaries who made so many mistakes, they were constantly correcting them and slowing down total word count.

They looked fast, and banged keys like maniacs, but their productivity was no better than mine.

I also think we need to better explain the file system, as the very first thing we teach about computers. It is a simple concept ignored by obfuscation of 'experts.'

Let's not teach basic computer usage here.

jp
10-Jan-2015, 14:05
I worry about our younger generation, those under 40, that are not keeping up with technical and computing skills. Most have given up on laptops, desktops and only use their phones. Some argue, it all they need and all they can afford. They seem to have enough cash for a new $500phone every 2 years, but not a computer for $700 every 5 years.

A phone is not a replacement for everything, yes it is a very powerful computer, but it's uses are severely limited to consumer activities.

It also seems that HERE the old guys are way more computer savvy than our younger members.
Now go ahead and supply all the outlier exceptions.

I'm sort of in the middle (39), not young or old. Keeping up on tech is important for all ages.

You see young people walking around all the time with phones. I think middle aged people are not far behind. Because you see them with phones rather than computers (laptop cases, etc..) it appears that's their MO for computing. It's sort of like assuming someone is not competent with guns because they aren't wearing a visible holster or walking around with a rifle; an incomplete observation. Many ordinary looking young people go to home and have more computers and networking than they do at work or school. Many of my younger friends and coworkers are into gaming, social media, etc...You might be hanging with the wrong young people. My younger brother who is NOT a computer expert or artist and pretends to be anti-computer got a gopro and has made nice time lapse videos and uploaded them to the Internet by himself, I think that's pretty good and would not expect a normal retired person to do that as easily. Retired people do use social media a great deal though.

Domains are always a PITA to change registrars for. It's on purpose and there is a strict system to follow, to prevent theft of domains and deceptive moves.

StoneNYC
10-Jan-2015, 14:44
Yes I was saying that many would be confused by the FTP thing.

Many DEFINITELY wouldn't have a website to even have that option.

The point is that the work around 1) doesn't work on my mobile phone and 2) takes many more steps than clicking "attach file" button right on the page.

I have a proposition... Question which is RELATED to my "stupid" question earlier about donating to the site.

Could we purchase server space separate from the site itself ONLY for image upload space, and have it be linked to the buttons on the site? Effectively paying only for image hosting as a gift without actually paying for the gift of the site itself? Lol.

Answer is probably no but figured I would throw it out there.

Anyway, yea, when sharing images becomes an ordeal, it's not worth it.

And Flickr is too populated and I don't want my images all over the net, it's "safer" here on LFPF.

Randy Moe
10-Jan-2015, 15:15
Everything here is all over the net, do a search with your own name.

You do have a website.

Fred L
10-Jan-2015, 17:04
You don't need to have a running webpage to take advantage of ftp service. Just get a domain and link your photos to that. or use a service like Photoshelter which is built for working professionals, vs Flickr or Photobucket. Depends on how you want to present your work to clients and the public.

Ralph Barker
11-Jan-2015, 10:53
Interesting discussion, much of which, it seems, being oriented to uploading unedited images from smart phones.

If we ignore the question of whether it is productive to view large-format images posted on the forum on the tiny screen of a smart phone using Tapatalk, let's get back to basics.

First, and foremost, this is a large format photography forum, where the expected steps in sharing an image are:

1. expose film in a large format camera,

2. process the film,

3. scan the film (or, make a print and scan the print),

4. edit the scan using an image-editing software,

5. create a reduced-size version of the image that conforms to our image-size limits (a maximum of 750x750 pixels, 250KB in file size) in the image-editing software,

6. upload and share the reduced-size image.

Each of these steps requires learning the technology associated with that step, with steps 3 through 6 involving the use of a computer and the user's choice of software. To the uninitiated, none of this would likely be considered "user friendly".

Uploading a larger version of the image to a hosting service, and including that larger file in a post here using HTML is probably not friendly to other users, either. Doing so means that each forum viewer's browser will have to download the larger image each time the page is loaded. Thus, the larger image will eat through the bandwidth limits of a smart-phone user's data plan pretty quickly, and those dreaded "overage" charges are decidedly not user friendly. There are ways to get around that problem, of course, but that is for a different discussion.

In operating the forum, we must balance between utility, system resources, user friendliness, and the external threats of hackers and Internet miscreants. Sometimes, the perception of user friendliness is not consistent with reality if one doesn't understand the underlying technical issues and associated risks. While we try to accommodate reasonable feature requests, ultimately, we have to side with keeping the forum "on the air" and consistent with the primary objectives of the forum - discussion of large format photography issues.

I'm not sure how large an iPhone image is, but on my Android phone it's 3,264 x 1,836 pixels x 24 bits, producing a file of about 3MB. There is no way that we could accommodate the direct upload and display of such images. Tom is exploring the "auto-resize" feature of the vBulletin software the forum uses, but there appears to be a number of security issues associated with that feature, and allowing large file uploads exposes the forum and forum members to potential malware problems. (A lot of nastiness can be embedded in a 3MB file.)

So, until the hackers and Internet miscreants all "self-eliminate" (I believe that was the term used by the "friendly" Terminator), the image size limits remain in place, which infers learning and using the associated technology. Apologies to those who may find that too much trouble.

StoneNYC
11-Jan-2015, 12:52
Interesting discussion, much of which, it seems, being oriented to uploading unedited images from smart phones.

If we ignore the question of whether it is productive to view large-format images posted on the forum on the tiny screen of a smart phone using Tapatalk, let's get back to basics.

First, and foremost, this is a large format photography forum, where the expected steps in sharing an image are:

1. expose film in a large format camera,

2. process the film,

3. scan the film (or, make a print and scan the print),

4. edit the scan using an image-editing software,

5. create a reduced-size version of the image that conforms to our image-size limits (a maximum of 750x750 pixels, 250KB in file size) in the image-editing software,

6. upload and share the reduced-size image.

Each of these steps requires learning the technology associated with that step, with steps 3 through 6 involving the use of a computer and the user's choice of software. To the uninitiated, none of this would likely be considered "user friendly".

Uploading a larger version of the image to a hosting service, and including that larger file in a post here using HTML is probably not friendly to other users, either. Doing so means that each forum viewer's browser will have to download the larger image each time the page is loaded. Thus, the larger image will eat through the bandwidth limits of a smart-phone user's data plan pretty quickly, and those dreaded "overage" charges are decidedly not user friendly. There are ways to get around that problem, of course, but that is for a different discussion.

In operating the forum, we must balance between utility, system resources, user friendliness, and the external threats of hackers and Internet miscreants. Sometimes, the perception of user friendliness is not consistent with reality if one doesn't understand the underlying technical issues and associated risks. While we try to accommodate reasonable feature requests, ultimately, we have to side with keeping the forum "on the air" and consistent with the primary objectives of the forum - discussion of large format photography issues.

I'm not sure how large an iPhone image is, but on my Android phone it's 3,264 x 1,836 pixels x 24 bits, producing a file of about 3MB. There is no way that we could accommodate the direct upload and display of such images. Tom is exploring the "auto-resize" feature of the vBulletin software the forum uses, but there appears to be a number of security issues associated with that feature, and allowing large file uploads exposes the forum and forum members to potential malware problems. (A lot of nastiness can be embedded in a 3MB file.)

So, until the hackers and Internet miscreants all "self-eliminate" (I believe that was the term used by the "friendly" Terminator), the image size limits remain in place, which infers learning and using the associated technology. Apologies to those who may find that too much trouble.

Who said anything about unedited photos?

I'm saying that over the past who knows how many years all of my images have been exported using the same file sizes, and then those images are put into a folder, and then I access that folder with my phone to share an image every now and again, what I'm saying is that it seems crazy to have to go back figure out all of the images I have already exported and then have to re-export them with smaller file sizes because somebody decided to change the limit that used to be bigger.

Sure I do some editing on the computer, but I don't waste my time sitting in front of a computer screen posting things online when I can be out doing things and only post from my phone while multitasking other things out in the world (for example while waiting for a long exposure image to finish, I will be on the forum because there's nothing else to do while of the hour between exposures passes...).

Again this is about not being able to share previous images because they've already been exported, and they are already edited, they just are in the cloud with everything else.

I set my file sizes specifically way back in the day to be able to post them here... the 1080 has always posted just fine, now it doesn't.

Sure if I wanted to I could start making all the new images 750, but anytime I wanted to share an example if I'm referencing something, or anything like that, I basically wouldn't be able to share it now.

I know I'm not the only one, and the forum can do whatever they want, it's their forum, I just think it's a little shortsighted.

I don't know if the problem is with people creating fake accounts and then attacking that way or not? But it seems that the most simple solution is the one that luminous landscape has for adding new members, they ask you questions that are verbally mathematic such as what is the square root of 42, and then you have to manually input the answer in words. If you can't do the math you don't get to sign in and make an account, anybody has access to a calculator if they really have trouble with math, but it stops computers from understanding what is being asked and what to provide, and eliminate spam.

Unless I am misunderstanding the DOS attack upload issue?

rdenney
15-Jan-2015, 07:39
Who said anything about unedited photos?

I'm saying that over the past who knows how many years all of my images have been exported using the same file sizes, and then those images are put into a folder, and then I access that folder with my phone to share an image every now and again, what I'm saying is that it seems crazy to have to go back figure out all of the images I have already exported and then have to re-export them with smaller file sizes because somebody decided to change the limit that used to be bigger.

Sure I do some editing on the computer, but I don't waste my time sitting in front of a computer screen posting things online when I can be out doing things and only post from my phone while multitasking other things out in the world (for example while waiting for a long exposure image to finish, I will be on the forum because there's nothing else to do while of the hour between exposures passes...).

Again this is about not being able to share previous images because they've already been exported, and they are already edited, they just are in the cloud with everything else.

I set my file sizes specifically way back in the day to be able to post them here... the 1080 has always posted just fine, now it doesn't.

Sure if I wanted to I could start making all the new images 750, but anytime I wanted to share an example if I'm referencing something, or anything like that, I basically wouldn't be able to share it now.

I know I'm not the only one, and the forum can do whatever they want, it's their forum, I just think it's a little shortsighted.

I don't know if the problem is with people creating fake accounts and then attacking that way or not? But it seems that the most simple solution is the one that luminous landscape has for adding new members, they ask you questions that are verbally mathematic such as what is the square root of 42, and then you have to manually input the answer in words. If you can't do the math you don't get to sign in and make an account, anybody has access to a calculator if they really have trouble with math, but it stops computers from understanding what is being asked and what to provide, and eliminate spam.

Unless I am misunderstanding the DOS attack upload issue?

If you are editing the photo, then downsizing the image, saving it to your disk using "Save for Web and Other Devices" in Photoshop, and uploading to a hosting area just isn't that hard an additional step. It does not require FTP, and it adds about two minutes to the end of the workflow. Most of us have been doing it that for years. I access this and other forums through my iPhone routinely, but not for creating and hosting the images I post in this forum. I don't edit large-format scans on my iPhone, so I add the step of putting it where I can get to it to the editing workflow instead of the posting workflow. This is not too much to ask. The suggestion that the two minutes required to upload to the internet is an inordinate burden to add to a scanning and editing workflow that probably takes a minimum of half an hour seems to me rather difficult to defend.

I host my website through Earthlink, and Earthlink provides a user interface (they call it the control panel) that works on desktops. It allows me to upload a file and park it in a folder in the domain I have rented using a very simple interface--simpler than the upload interface used by vBulletin. In fact, internet service providers like Earthlink include a free area subject to some limitations that would not be a problem for this purpose. For those who rent blog space or use a content management system, it's even easier, and those do provide iOS-friendly interfaces.

It is not necessary to build a web page to host an image. The image tags in a thread posting use a link to a picture file, not to a web page. The image will not be visible to anyone on the Internet except through those linked photos, and most internet providers do not allow access to file folder directories in the domains they host, except through their user's control panel.

Then, to post the image in a thread from an iPhone, one simply types in the URL of the image. I usually have a secret text file that includes a list of the URLs of otherwise invisible photos hosted in a special folder in my web hosting area, and can use that to remember how to get to the photos. Then, I just cut and paste the URL of the photo into a thread, between IMG tags.

For iOS users, Tapatalk provides an interface to the forum that will resize and upload photos automatically to the forum's servers according to the forum's limitations, but it doesn't always work properly and sometimes its compression is pretty brutal. Tapatalk also provides a hosting service, allowing you to host the image on their server and link to it in a post (it adds a Tapatalk logo, which I don't like). I prefer to host the image on my own site.

This is all very easy and only takes only a little while to figure out.

Dan, we've already heard that you think 750 pixels is too small. Saying it again won't make your point any more strongly. Likewise, there is absolutely no enthusiasm on the part of the owners, admins, or mods to create a proprietary relationship with users by charging fees or accepting donations. A proprietary relationship imposes responsibilities the volunteers who run this forum do not want to accept. That will also not change with repetition.

Explaining how the bad guys do bad things on the forum is something we will not do. You'll just have to take our word for it. Increasing the level of complexity for the good guys is a last resort. Asking people to post reasonably sized images when using the forum server, or host them on their own sites, is completely reasonable. This forum was quite successful even before we hosted images using the forum server at all.

Rick "who hasn't used a standalone FTP client in a long time" Denney

Corran
15-Jan-2015, 09:47
By the way, if you register with "Blogspot" through Google (if you have a Gmail account, you are ready to go), you can simply post images in the blog and then hotlink them here. The blog is free, and no compression or anything is applied. Also, you can post the resized "thumbnail" that Blogspot creates, and then add a link to the full-size image for a nice big view of the photo, which is a cool added feature*.

I have done that before when my hosting service was really slow for a week during a DDOS attack.

*For example, see this image. Click it for a full-size view at 1600px wide I think. This uses the img and url tags in conjunction (push quote to see the tags and how I applied them):

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hNMHujBaWGY/VFCFi1AC_pI/AAAAAAAAF4w/qwn-0Ipw19A/langdale-0378s.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hNMHujBaWGY/VFCFi1AC_pI/AAAAAAAAF4w/qwn-0Ipw19A/s1600/langdale-0378s.jpg)

Randy Moe
15-Jan-2015, 13:24
That is a very good plan Bryan.

I will be using it, especially since hover works so well.

Thanks!

Fred L
15-Jan-2015, 14:53
ditto on a great idea for hosting and linking work !

djdister
15-Jan-2015, 18:23
Has anyone hosted the images from Google drive - does that work, or is Google blogspot a better way to go?

Corran
15-Jan-2015, 18:33
I've never tried, so I will now. I use Google Drive a lot for delivery of client photos but have never tried hotlinking...

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/DiStLQY75OwjqbX7k23metS4qNMxYY3BDLI2aMDI2jArd9Awp7WK3yfgpQRc65szBVGHkYGPdUU=w1896-h804 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TimrHFdLlTQ19FNWg1cHpZZWc/view?usp=sharing)

Well it's a little clunky. You can link the image like above but if you try to link to a "larger" version like I showed earlier, it just goes to the download page and then the viewer has to DL the image, rather than view it directly. I would prefer the Blogger solution myself, but it definitely works for simple linking of the smaller image.

Please excuse the lame NYE photo. It is 4x5 though :).

djdister
15-Jan-2015, 18:46
I've never tried, so I will now. I use Google Drive a lot for delivery of client photos but have never tried hotlinking...

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/DiStLQY75OwjqbX7k23metS4qNMxYY3BDLI2aMDI2jArd9Awp7WK3yfgpQRc65szBVGHkYGPdUU=w1896-h804 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TimrHFdLlTQ19FNWg1cHpZZWc/view?usp=sharing)

Well it's a little clunky. You can link the image like above but if you try to link to a "larger" version like I showed earlier, it just goes to the download page and then the viewer has to DL the image, rather than view it directly. I would prefer the Blogger solution myself, but it definitely works for simple linking of the smaller image.

Please excuse the lame NYE photo. It is 4x5 though :).

Hunh. I guess its the difference between essentially a cloud storage drive versus an image hosting approach (blogspot). So I guess setting up a blogspot it is. Thanks!

Randy Moe
15-Jan-2015, 18:50
I've never tried, so I will now. I use Google Drive a lot for delivery of client photos but have never tried hotlinking...

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/DiStLQY75OwjqbX7k23metS4qNMxYY3BDLI2aMDI2jArd9Awp7WK3yfgpQRc65szBVGHkYGPdUU=w1896-h804 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TimrHFdLlTQ19FNWg1cHpZZWc/view?usp=sharing)

Well it's a little clunky. You can link the image like above but if you try to link to a "larger" version like I showed earlier, it just goes to the download page and then the viewer has to DL the image, rather than view it directly. I would prefer the Blogger solution myself, but it definitely works for simple linking of the smaller image.

Please excuse the lame NYE photo. It is 4x5 though :).

The Blog is better for here, I often use Google Drive to share to close friends or to move huge files.

Corran
15-Jan-2015, 18:55
Glad I could help guys. Definitely check out the html tags I used if you would like to experiment with linking.

If it was exceedingly helpful for the forum I wouldn't mind writing a tutorial on Blogger / hot-linking. I did just pass 250 blog posts recently and am approaching 40,000 views!

Randy Moe
15-Jan-2015, 19:28
Glad I could help guys. Definitely check out the html tags I used if you would like to experiment with linking.

If it was exceedingly helpful for the forum I wouldn't mind writing a tutorial on Blogger / hot-linking. I did just pass 250 blog posts recently and am approaching 40,000 views!

Another good idea. Please lead!

Jac@stafford.net
16-Jan-2015, 16:59
All talk of mastering FTP will seem silly Real Soon Now because the underlying protocol will be hidden.

That said, I use a stone simple server and Mac Fetch for serving and uploading to a server that handles FTP and HTTP (web serving) protocols.

Fetch has a facility to place a drag-and-drop icon on the desktop to put files on the server, and with a click in the servers presentation of the file name I get a clipboard with the URL to paste here, or anywhere.

In addition there are drag-n-drops to resize any image to any output size with an automatic rename to obviate overwrites.

Briefly, for the user it is a single-click thing with no need for obtuse mechanics.

I programmed this stuff twenty years ago.

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 18:26
If you are editing the photo, then downsizing the image, saving it to your disk using "Save for Web and Other Devices" in Photoshop, and uploading to a hosting area just isn't that hard an additional step. It does not require FTP, and it adds about two minutes to the end of the workflow. Most of us have been doing it that for years. I access this and other forums through my iPhone routinely, but not for creating and hosting the images I post in this forum. I don't edit large-format scans on my iPhone, so I add the step of putting it where I can get to it to the editing workflow instead of the posting workflow. This is not too much to ask. The suggestion that the two minutes required to upload to the internet is an inordinate burden to add to a scanning and editing workflow that probably takes a minimum of half an hour seems to me rather difficult to defend.

I host my website through Earthlink, and Earthlink provides a user interface (they call it the control panel) that works on desktops. It allows me to upload a file and park it in a folder in the domain I have rented using a very simple interface--simpler than the upload interface used by vBulletin. In fact, internet service providers like Earthlink include a free area subject to some limitations that would not be a problem for this purpose. For those who rent blog space or use a content management system, it's even easier, and those do provide iOS-friendly interfaces.

It is not necessary to build a web page to host an image. The image tags in a thread posting use a link to a picture file, not to a web page. The image will not be visible to anyone on the Internet except through those linked photos, and most internet providers do not allow access to file folder directories in the domains they host, except through their user's control panel.

Then, to post the image in a thread from an iPhone, one simply types in the URL of the image. I usually have a secret text file that includes a list of the URLs of otherwise invisible photos hosted in a special folder in my web hosting area, and can use that to remember how to get to the photos. Then, I just cut and paste the URL of the photo into a thread, between IMG tags.

For iOS users, Tapatalk provides an interface to the forum that will resize and upload photos automatically to the forum's servers according to the forum's limitations, but it doesn't always work properly and sometimes its compression is pretty brutal. Tapatalk also provides a hosting service, allowing you to host the image on their server and link to it in a post (it adds a Tapatalk logo, which I don't like). I prefer to host the image on my own site.

This is all very easy and only takes only a little while to figure out.

Dan, we've already heard that you think 750 pixels is too small. Saying it again won't make your point any more strongly. Likewise, there is absolutely no enthusiasm on the part of the owners, admins, or mods to create a proprietary relationship with users by charging fees or accepting donations. A proprietary relationship imposes responsibilities the volunteers who run this forum do not want to accept. That will also not change with repetition.

Explaining how the bad guys do bad things on the forum is something we will not do. You'll just have to take our word for it. Increasing the level of complexity for the good guys is a last resort. Asking people to post reasonably sized images when using the forum server, or host them on their own sites, is completely reasonable. This forum was quite successful even before we hosted images using the forum server at all.

Rick "who hasn't used a standalone FTP client in a long time" Denney

I'll accept the "this is what we're going to do" answer.

Just know, for one I don't use photoshop ever, I use lightroom as a storage and organizational and watermarking program.

I don't know half of what you said, when I export the file from lightroom it goes into a dropbox folder, then I shut the computer down. Later, when I have time I go on my phone, access the dropbox folder through the app and download the image to the phone, I then go to the app and upload it from the phones image files.

On top of that, yes going forward I COULD choose to export smaller files, but I'm saying all the files I've exported the past few years are all too big now, it's a lot to ask to have someone go back and export every file I've ever taken in LF just to post here. Ya know?

I don't know how to get my image from my computer to my website, except by making a gallery thing in lightroom, and then I don't know how to find out what the link would be to that, it makes it in flash so I can't even access the image on my phone and there's no address thing I can right click and say "copy linked address" or whatever.

It took me a week and hours on the phone with tech support just to figure out how to make the FTP thing talk to the server thing to upload through the program.

How can you keep a list of links without having a picture to know which link is which? And then how would I see that on my phone? I don't even understand excel or how it works (I have only the Mac version as it came with my computer).

I think you have a skill set unlike others, it's like LF photography, it's easy for us, but for a digital user who has only used "auto", it's VERY very complicated.

I truly didn't understand half of what you said, and I just want you to recognize that it can be a little belittling when you scoff at something that another person truly finds very hard and complex.

You guys shut off the Tapatalk hosting, so tapatalk won't let me use their hosting on this site FYI, or at least that's what the popup tells me when I try to switch to tapatalk as the host.

Anyway the issue is sort of fixed, now when I upload it asks me which size file I want and gives 3 options ( this wasn't happening before) so now I can choose for it to resize it to under 750. So at least I can get them on the site now.

I'm not saying this because I want to be argumentative, I'm saying this because I want you to understand that if someone like me who is only 32 finds this hard or confusing, imagine older folk trying to just share a few images they have taken.

Like I said, it's your site, you've made the decision, and at least now the app is letting us resize things.

Stone "Who was just trying to explain a certain perspective without being annoying and failing miserably at it"

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 18:27
I've never tried, so I will now. I use Google Drive a lot for delivery of client photos but have never tried hotlinking...

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/DiStLQY75OwjqbX7k23metS4qNMxYY3BDLI2aMDI2jArd9Awp7WK3yfgpQRc65szBVGHkYGPdUU=w1896-h804 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TimrHFdLlTQ19FNWg1cHpZZWc/view?usp=sharing)

Well it's a little clunky. You can link the image like above but if you try to link to a "larger" version like I showed earlier, it just goes to the download page and then the viewer has to DL the image, rather than view it directly. I would prefer the Blogger solution myself, but it definitely works for simple linking of the smaller image.

Please excuse the lame NYE photo. It is 4x5 though :).

Image doesn't show for me.

Randy Moe
16-Jan-2015, 18:55
I'll accept the "this is what we're going to do" answer.

Just know, for one I don't use photoshop ever, I use lightroom as a storage and organizational and watermarking program.

I don't know half of what you said, when I export the file from lightroom it goes into a dropbox folder, then I shut the computer down. Later, when I have time I go on my phone, access the dropbox folder through the app and download the image to the phone, I then go to the app and upload it from the phones image files.

On top of that, yes going forward I COULD choose to export smaller files, but I'm saying all the files I've exported the past few years are all too big now, it's a lot to ask to have someone go back and export every file I've ever taken in LF just to post here. Ya know?

I don't know how to get my image from my computer to my website, except by making a gallery thing in lightroom, and then I don't know how to find out what the link would be to that, it makes it in flash so I can't even access the image on my phone and there's no address thing I can right click and say "copy linked address" or whatever.

It took me a week and hours on the phone with tech support just to figure out how to make the FTP thing talk to the server thing to upload through the program.

How can you keep a list of links without having a picture to know which link is which? And then how would I see that on my phone? I don't even understand excel or how it works (I have only the Mac version as it came with my computer).

I think you have a skill set unlike others, it's like LF photography, it's easy for us, but for a digital user who has only used "auto", it's VERY very complicated.

I truly didn't understand half of what you said, and I just want you to recognize that it can be a little belittling when you scoff at something that another person truly finds very hard and complex.

You guys shut off the Tapatalk hosting, so tapatalk won't let me use their hosting on this site FYI, or at least that's what the popup tells me when I try to switch to tapatalk as the host.

Anyway the issue is sort of fixed, now when I upload it asks me which size file I want and gives 3 options ( this wasn't happening before) so now I can choose for it to resize it to under 750. So at least I can get them on the site now.

I'm not saying this because I want to be argumentative, I'm saying this because I want you to understand that if someone like me who is only 32 finds this hard or confusing, imagine older folk trying to just share a few images they have taken.

Like I said, it's your site, you've made the decision, and at least now the app is letting us resize things.

Stone "Who was just trying to explain a certain perspective without being annoying and failing miserably at it"

Well I'll be 64 shortly and I have known how to batch process an action in PS for 15 years. Very handy for processing huge or small #'s of files identically to perhaps resize them or do anything else you can dream of. When I first learned I was amazed as it really gave a computer a cool JOB to do.

If you are going to do anything digital with images it is best to learn PS or settle for Picasa which can damn near equal it for free.

I use both.

I'm not good with LR, but with my new setup I am going to give it another chance.

Doesn't LR do batch file handling?

There is no halfway in most things, you either embrace digital and analog or go back to selfies with a phone.

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 20:28
Well I'll be 64 shortly and I have known how to batch process an action in PS for 15 years. Very handy for processing huge or small #'s of files identically to perhaps resize them or do anything else you can dream of. When I first learned I was amazed as it really gave a computer a cool JOB to do.

If you are going to do anything digital with images it is best to learn PS or settle for Picasa which can damn near equal it for free.

I use both.

I'm not good with LR, but with my new setup I am going to give it another chance.

Doesn't LR do batch file handling?

There is no halfway in most things, you either embrace digital and analog or go back to selfies with a phone.

I didn't know PS could even do batch processing.

Yes the whole point of LR is for batch processing, applying mass adjustments to 2,000 images at once if you want, takes 2 seconds to apply and you can immediately export it, I don't understand why it takes so long to "render" with PS, it doesn't take any time with LR, I know very little about it, I own it and have tried to use it, but I just don't understand it, it's really complicated and LR doesn't seem to be lacking anything I need. So I haven't learned it, but it's just so complicated and hard to use, I'll sit for 3 hours on one image and get no where with it, I'll give up and go back to LR and it takes me 2 minutes.

Anyway, I find things that are intuitive easy and things that aren't to be really hard like seemingly unnecessary steps are hard to remember to do in the right order. My brain works funny.

We are way off topic...

Corran
16-Jan-2015, 20:54
Yes Stone my image disappeared, not sure why but I think Google Drive is definitely not the tool for image hosting. There's the proof I guess!

Not to jump off topic but you would do yourself a real favor taking a couple of computer courses at any local Continuing Education program. It's hard, or impossible, to explain computer processes in written word, very hard to even talk over the phone. I know because I taught photography courses that were in reality computer classes for several years, and I've been the go-to computer guy for a lot of older folks struggling with things even more complex than the above. At your age you simply need to know certain things if you want to be successful in the job market. And please don't come back with "I want to be a fine art photographer" because we all know that is a treacherous route and you have a high probability of not "making it" just by statistics. Honestly I'm surprised you made it through your education at your age without picking most of this up. It was required course materials for me and I'm only 3 years younger than you.

Randy Moe
16-Jan-2015, 21:21
LR and PS are very different in how they work. PS has always worked well with yearly improvements. LR has had some crazy growing pains but now works fine and many digital photographers find it all they need.

But if you can't re-size everything in one of your LR catalogs you may need more lessons.

And none of this is OF TOPIC, the topic is posting pictures!

djdister
16-Jan-2015, 21:48
Okay, here's a test. I just created a blog site on Blogger.com, and posted a couple of photos taken with my new Canham 6x17 roll film back. Lets see how this works...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NEqV-SGztN4/VLnkyq8y6PI/AAAAAAAAAKk/DZtbZ4238eE/s1600/20150104-302-duotone-rgb-web.jpg
Canham MQC
120mm Super Angulon
Ilford Delta 100

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ABZSx-PyuLE/VLnmduEdIHI/AAAAAAAAAKw/mJoJaXxKJs4/s1600/20150104-303-web.jpg
Canham MQC
120mm Super Angulon
Kodak Ektar 100

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 21:49
Okay, here's a test. I just created a blog site on Blogger.com, and posted a couple of photos taken with my new Canham 6x17 roll film back. Lets see how this works...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NEqV-SGztN4/VLnkyq8y6PI/AAAAAAAAAKk/DZtbZ4238eE/s1600/20150104-302-duotone-rgb-web.jpg
Canham MQC
120mm Super Angulon
Ilford Delta 100

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ABZSx-PyuLE/VLnmduEdIHI/AAAAAAAAAKw/mJoJaXxKJs4/s1600/20150104-303-web.jpg
Canham MQC
120mm Super Angulon
Kodak Ektar 100

Nice, if I only knew how to make a blog, I tried using word press and I couldn't figure out anything. Lol!

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 21:51
Yes Stone my image disappeared, not sure why but I think Google Drive is definitely not the tool for image hosting. There's the proof I guess!

Not to jump off topic but you would do yourself a real favor taking a couple of computer courses at any local Continuing Education program. It's hard, or impossible, to explain computer processes in written word, very hard to even talk over the phone. I know because I taught photography courses that were in reality computer classes for several years, and I've been the go-to computer guy for a lot of older folks struggling with things even more complex than the above. At your age you simply need to know certain things if you want to be successful in the job market. And please don't come back with "I want to be a fine art photographer" because we all know that is a treacherous route and you have a high probability of not "making it" just by statistics. Honestly I'm surprised you made it through your education at your age without picking most of this up. It was required course materials for me and I'm only 3 years younger than you.

You're telling me, I used to be a hacker in the 90's... That's the sad part... But we've come a long way since dial up BBS', I was always better with hardwear anyway..

Corran
16-Jan-2015, 22:22
Nice, if I only knew how to make a blog, I tried using word press and I couldn't figure out anything. Lol!

????????????
Go try Blogger for heaven's sake. You don't have to "make" anything, you just sign up with your Google account and push "New Post," and then add pictures. It's so easy, even a child could do it. There is NO html or anything like that. It's a simple interface!

Not sure what your definition of "hacker" is but that's a dubious claim bro!

StoneNYC
16-Jan-2015, 22:51
????????????
Go try Blogger for heaven's sake. You don't have to "make" anything, you just sign up with your Google account and push "New Post," and then add pictures. It's so easy, even a child could do it. There is NO html or anything like that. It's a simple interface!

Not sure what your definition of "hacker" is but that's a dubious claim bro!

Hmm, is it like tumblr? I have a tumblr and people call that a blog.

Hmm let me see if I can link stuff with that...

http://stonenyc.tumblr.com/post/105389776598/wild-again-temporarylikeachilles-cant-wait-till

Did that work?

Randy Moe
16-Jan-2015, 23:17
Works on hover only

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:21
Works on hover only

http://stonenyc.tumblr.com/post/108327800443/i-saw-the-best-minds-of-my-generation-destroyed-by

That work?

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:23
Or this...?
http://instagram.com/p/x8iac2QZaN/

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:25
Ugh...

http://stonenyc.tumblr.com/post/95140399398/model-kelsey-dylan-photographer-stone-nyc

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:26
I give up... I'll just use tapatalk and the medium upload size.

scm
17-Jan-2015, 00:26
You have to right-click the image and get the actual image URL, what you are probably using is the page URL

http://41.media.tumblr.com/70f4f2e8d5541e2d2cc5607082717707/tumblr_ngp7sebsi11rdf92no1_1280.jpg#http://36.media.tumblr.com/70f4f2e8d5541e2d2cc5607082717707/tumblr_ngp7sebsi11rdf92no1_500.jpg

I'm in my mid-sixties, by the way, if I can figure it out, anyone can

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:29
You have to right-click the image and get the actual image URL, what you are probably using is the page URL

http://41.media.tumblr.com/70f4f2e8d5541e2d2cc5607082717707/tumblr_ngp7sebsi11rdf92no1_1280.jpg#http://36.media.tumblr.com/70f4f2e8d5541e2d2cc5607082717707/tumblr_ngp7sebsi11rdf92no1_500.jpg

I'm in my mid-sixties, by the way, if I can figure it out, anyone can

I'm on my phone, it won't let me, I tried the app and the web browser, just won't let me save the linked image or whatnot... Thanks, if I'm ever on a computer I can use my tumblr at least.

Corran
17-Jan-2015, 00:35
scm had it right. I guess we are back to the phone situation. I don't think anyone else here uses their phone as a primary means of forum posting.

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 00:37
scm had it right. I guess we are back to the phone situation. I don't think anyone else here uses their phone as a primary means of forum posting.

I've seen a lot, but it's irrelevant. Thanks for trying to help guys.

Randy Moe
17-Jan-2015, 01:09
I hate phones and seldom answer the damn thing. I let it go to voice mail and read the oddly transcribed message which is always at least funny. Then I send the caller the transcription and ask for an email to clarify.

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 07:32
I hate phones and seldom answer the damn thing. I let it go to voice mail and read the oddly transcribed message which is always at least funny. Then I send the caller the transcription and ask for an email to clarify.

That explains a lot...

Kirk Gittings
17-Jan-2015, 10:01
I have no explanation for why people launch DOS attacks on any site, let alone this one. But, that is a reality that we have to deal with as best we can.

The actual image-size/file-size limits have been 750x750 and 244KB since shortly after we migrated to vBulletin around 2006. That limit was established because we operate on donated resources, both in terms of storage and bandwidth. Externally-hosted images, of course, can be larger, because they don't use our server's storage or bandwidth. I don't recall the earlier versions of vBulletin having an auto-resize feature at all.

Yes but I'm doing nothing different than I ever did but now I have to resize EVERYTHING and I never had to do that before. So something has changed on your end.

djdister
17-Jan-2015, 10:30
Anyway, my tested solution involved creating a blog on Blogger.com (free), creating a new blog posting, using a template that looks like creating a Word document (no HTML needed), and then posting those two 6x17 images to my blog page. Then when looking at the displayed (published) blog page, I found the URL link directly to each photo and pasted that reference into the "Insert Image" tool on my posting on this forum. Again, no HTML code was harmed in this process. I did have to spend a few extra minutes deciding how large I wanted my images to be on the blog posting, but as you can see, they now display quite well (and no extra sharpening applied) when referenced in this forum's posting. Of course, now I also have a public blog site to think about and mess with...

Randy Moe
17-Jan-2015, 10:54
Anyway, my tested solution involved creating a blog on Blogger.com (free), creating a new blog posting, using a template that looks like creating a Word document (no HTML needed), and then posting those two 6x17 images to my blog page. Then when looking at the displayed (published) blog page, I found the URL link directly to each photo and pasted that reference into the "Insert Image" tool on my posting on this forum. Again, no HTML code was harmed in this process. I did have to spend a few extra minutes deciding how large I wanted my images to be on the blog posting, but as you can see, they now display quite well (and no extra sharpening applied) when referenced in this forum's posting. Of course, now I also have a public blog site to think about and mess with...

Maybe even I can figure that out, I hope I don't need to call tech support...maybe they could call me, as I can't find the phone. Where is that pesky thing!

Kirk Gittings
17-Jan-2015, 11:48
If I have to go through the above or make a special sized version solely for this site, then I will be posting images here much less often.

djdister
17-Jan-2015, 13:44
If I have to go through the above or make a special sized version solely for this site, then I will be posting images here much less often.

T'would be a pity for the rest of us...

Randy Moe
17-Jan-2015, 13:53
I re-size for any web use in Picasa and add my email as you all may have seen. It's free, it's fast, does batch and adds the watermark where I want it easily.

I have not tried it on a phone yet...

StoneNYC
17-Jan-2015, 14:02
I re-size for any web use in Picasa and add my email as you all may have seen. It's free, it's fast, does batch and adds the watermark where I want it easily.

I have not tried it on a phone yet...

Now that the tapatalk app will let me choose sizes, I'm ok to post, just going to be small images, just posted a few from my phone.

FrankS
17-Jan-2015, 14:59
My guess is that there is something wrong with the forum software that used to be able to resize photos, but now does not.

I'm simply using safari on my ipad, not tapatalk.

It used to work, now it does not. No changes on my end.

Kirk Gittings
17-Jan-2015, 15:03
T'would be a pity for the rest of us...

I'm just feeling a bit put out right now. I'll probably get over it. But posting images here is something I squeeze in down time which I have precious little of these days.

TXFZ1
17-Jan-2015, 16:51
Not picking on you but if you have a website and a blog, then why store your photos on this server? You can size them any way you desire.

For my two cents, kill the option and save server space for the forum.

David

Randy Moe
17-Jan-2015, 17:01
Not picking on you but if you have a website and a blog, then why store your photos on this server? You can size them any way you desire.

For my two cents, kill the option and save server space for the forum.

David

Well then we need to get everybody up to speed. Maybe a tall task.

rdenney
17-Jan-2015, 17:16
Stone, this is a computer-based forum, so we do have to assume a certain base competence with making things work on the computer. Resizing images for targeting is not difficult, and it's something I do for every size print I make. Just think of the forum as a very small print.

Rick "thinking the blog approach is the slickest way to link photos externally" Denney

jnanian
17-Jan-2015, 19:26
image menu >> image size >> change resolution to something small, maybe 72?, change pxel dimensions to whatever they need to be ( 750 on long side ) don't change anything else

file menu>> save for web >> name and save new small image
(it doesn't rewrite the image file)

takes about 30 seconds ...

you can google "resize images in photoshop" for a website called photoshop essentials
there will be more words, screen shots of menus &c if my explanation is confusing.

Kirk Gittings
18-Jan-2015, 01:10
jeez finally figured out how to link to Facebook images again. I will just do that. Used to be easy and then something changed-finally figured it out again.
https://scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10930859_10205771509596929_2429884327237978603_n.jpg?oh=08a3d1b8b6c9ac5f55fbb9e451cc8f36&oe=552BACE0

Fred L
18-Jan-2015, 11:38
Stone,

As alluded to earlier, becoming comfortable with PS can only help you down the road, there are absolutely no downsides. Curious, any reason why you never learned or became familiar with PS ?

I also think it's prudent for photographers to know their way around ftp, simple CSS editing etc. as otherwise you could be slave to whoever maintains your website and that's not, imo, very wise. You don't need to understand mark up language but knowing how to point to a file on your server is dead simple.

And age has absolutely NOTHING to do with internet/photoshop savviness. I couldn't begin to tell you the people who could run circles around me and others re:PS etc.. They had mad skills that I envied.

StoneNYC
18-Jan-2015, 12:40
Stone,

As alluded to earlier, becoming comfortable with PS can only help you down the road, there are absolutely no downsides. Curious, any reason why you never learned or became familiar with PS ?

I also think it's prudent for photographers to know their way around ftp, simple CSS editing etc. as otherwise you could be slave to whoever maintains your website and that's not, imo, very wise. You don't need to understand mark up language but knowing how to point to a file on your server is dead simple.

And age has absolutely NOTHING to do with internet/photoshop savviness. I couldn't begin to tell you the people who could run circles around me and others re:PS etc.. They had mad skills that I envied.

Thanks, down the road I'm hoping to completely avoid computers as part of the equation of my body of work.

The irony is I can write and read HTML code, I just have trouble with understanding the new code that's way advanced and also how to "get it up there" it used to be simple, and I can usually figure it out after hours of agonizing and struggle, but again I don't like sitting in front of a computer and not worth it to struggle for this one site, it's the only website I interact with that has such restrictions. It's ok, as I said the app now re-sizes so it's ok.

As for PS, it's not the least bit intuitive and just seems insane. I like hands on darkroom work much more, that's the direction I'm going in, and yes SOME knowledge is needed for color work since I use transparency film for my color work, but lightroom does everything I need, there's absolutely nothing that PS provides that I can't do in lightroom that I actually need, not a thing. It's like telling me I need to learn to drive a sailboat even though I only enjoy fishing in freshwater streams.

The only thing I've ever needed in PS that lightroom didn't have was that the content aware dust removal better in CS6 than LR4 but I'm told LR5 is better. And I haven't figured out how to invert colors to turn a straight neg scan into a positive, something I don't normally do anyway, but at one point attempted and had to use PS because I couldn't find the function in LR.

Anyway, way OT at this point, glad they seem to have gotten the site in order and the app in order, and glad Kirk found a way to link from FB.

Randy Moe
18-Jan-2015, 14:05
I have sailed many a freshwater stream. :)

I always carry line, hooks and improvise the rest.

Tom Westbrook
19-Jan-2015, 09:26
Yes but I'm doing nothing different than I ever did but now I have to resize EVERYTHING and I never had to do that before. So something has changed on your end.

I turned off the resizing function in order to reduce the number of variables I need to deal with while I'm trying to figure out why the server is unavailable some mornings. I'll try to get this all figured out and possibly turn resizing back on, but it might take a few weeks of trial & error. In the mean time, please manually resize files you intend to upload to our server. I believe the limits are displayed in the upload dialog, if not let me know and I'll post them separately.

StoneNYC
15-Feb-2015, 02:35
After the site got back up I'm getting "Image file is not a valid file" when I try and upload a photo... Anyone else?

Jim Becia
15-Feb-2015, 06:05
After the site got back up I'm getting "Image file is not a valid file" when I try and upload a photo... Anyone else?

Stone, same here. I have tried to upload a couple of photos from my iPad with the same error message. Jim

baro-nite
15-Feb-2015, 08:06
From Tom W:

There is an issue uploading images to the site. An image processing library missing on the new server. I've asked the server owner to install it, so uploads won't work until that's done. I'll update here when it's fixed. No ETA at present. (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?120091-Site-outage&p=1217344&viewfull=1#post1217344)

StoneNYC
15-Feb-2015, 08:45
From Tom W:

There is an issue uploading images to the site. An image processing library missing on the new server. I've asked the server owner to install it, so uploads won't work until that's done. I'll update here when it's fixed. No ETA at present. (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?120091-Site-outage&p=1217344&viewfull=1#post1217344)

Thanks!

Tom Westbrook
15-Feb-2015, 09:27
The issue has been fixed. Try again.

zsolt
8-Nov-2015, 04:19
Hey Guys!
im having problem uploading images.(this is my first time)
im triing to link flickr,but after i post it the image doesnt appear on the screen.
am i doing something wrong?is there anyone who is uploading via flickr and could tell me his/her trick?
i think im getting crazy here alone triing:)
Thanks Everyone!

Ralph Barker
8-Nov-2015, 08:15
Hey Guys!
im having problem uploading images.(this is my first time)
im triing to link flickr,but after i post it the image doesnt appear on the screen.
am i doing something wrong?is there anyone who is uploading via flickr and could tell me his/her trick?
i think im getting crazy here alone triing:)
Thanks Everyone!

The easiest method is to upload the image to here from your computer. See this thread for explanations of various methods:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?88032-Posting-pix

zsolt
8-Nov-2015, 11:56
The easiest method is to upload the image to here from your computer. See this thread for explanations of various methods:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?88032-Posting-pix

Thanks Ralph!this was more than helpful:)result: posted my first photo here,thanks to You!