Posting Larger Images

[George Stewart]

I'm not interested in destroying bandwidth. However, when people post images to this forum, most are "attached thumbnails" that can be clicked on for moderate enlargement, while others are huge by comparison and do not require enlargement. On some posts, I'd like to post an image that is a bit bigger.

Is this forbidden? If not, how does one post larger images? Thanks.

[Ole Tjugen]

Larger images are posted by linking to a picture that is already on the net somewhere else.

Like this:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1076/812201524_b0f83f97fe.jpg
which is entered as [ IMG]http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1076/812201524_b0f83f97fe.jpg[ /IMG] (remove spaces in brackets, they are there to stop it linking so I can show what I'm doing.

The thumbnail would be this:

[darr]

I'm not interested in destroying bandwidth.

When you link from your own source, (hotlinking, inline linking, remote linking (http://www.webweaver.nu/html-tips/hotlinking.shtml)) you do not use this site's bandwidth. You use the linked site's bandwidth.

I link from my own site for this reason and also so that I have a bit more control over my images. I can decide to drop my image links or change them at anytime through my own site. I do use the LF Forum's server to imbed an image or graphic when I feel it may add to this site's informational library.

I think photogs should have a site for image linking/storage and sharing. I built my site CameraArtist.com for this purpose. I use a very easy photo blogging freeware program: pixelpost (http://www.pixelpost.org/) and find it to be a breeze to maintain and is reliable.

Just my 2 cents. :)

Best,
Darr

[Ken Lee]

Web browsers are multi-threaded: they can download content from more than one server at a time. This happens all the time when you navigate to popular sites.

When content is hosted on different servers, the result are generally faster for the user to download. If all the content has to come from one server, then the browser generally has to wait for one request to finish, before the other can start.

[butterflydream]

I use this widget on my Mac to upload image on http://imageshack.us.
http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/blogs_forums/imageupload.html

[ashleyb7144]

I remember that there were some hosting websites for pictures that allowed you to post a little thumbnail , but when mouse over it scaled up to full size image. That is not so distractfull for the image of the forum, still users can properly see the picture. Does anyone know what I'm talking about ? cause I'd like to remember how i used to do this but I can't unfortunatelly.

[Ash]

Most image hosts will generate a thumbnail for organisation. Usually it's the filename with "th_" at the start.

With this in mind, click my blog, as you see it's thumbnails that load the image larger. This can be used for bbcode (forum code ie [img]) for clickable thumbnails at any size you like.

[Phil O.]

Test post. This seems like the best place to see how photo posting works here.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n253/Phillip_CHX/img039.jpg



Upper Mosquito River falls, Pictured Rocks National Park
4X5 Tmax 400, 210mm Sironar-N lens, Linhof Tech III

[Phil O.]

Any feedback on improving on what I'm doing in posting my above image would be much appreciated. I will be looking at this in the next few days from my public library where the computers are much more updated than what I've got. (Pentuim III, 1.0 Ghz motherboard, 15" VGA monitor, rural dialup)

[jnantz]

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/misc.php?do=bbcode

[Ken Lee]

Judging from the lovely sample above, one question that arises, is whether your system at home - or at the library - is calibrated/profiled. You can get a clue by viewing this image (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/tech/4800test.jpg), and others (http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/tech/fujitestimage.jpg) like it.

If not, then whether people see your image as you intend, is a matter of chance. If your system is calibrated, then at least those of us with calibrated systems, will be able to appreciate the richness and nuances.

[Erik Larsen]

thanks for the link John, I always wondered how you guys did that bold, etc stuff. Now I know:)erik

[Phil O.]

Thanks for the input, John and Ken. I've added two of the links you've provided to use for later reference.

I'm still at the novice stage when it comes to posting photos on the internet. My first-ever photo posting from scans was about a month ago. I have a Epson 3200 Pro, with updated downloads of Silverfast Ai Ver 6.0, Photoshop Album 2.0, Photoshop 5.5. and PictureIt.

I find myself relying on the updated Epson software that came with the scanner as my main means of getting things done. I use the professional mode and do further changes in Microsoft PictureIt.

I have made the effort to calibrate my monitor, but am having trouble getting anywhere with it. On the monitor itself, the only two relevant adjustments I'm seeing, and that I can use to calibrate, are contrast and brightness. Much to learn with all this. As with learning the technical side of sentence structure in my High School English classes, I'm also something of a stubborn mule when it comes to learning the technical side of digital and computer related imaging. Some foot dragging going on here.

The images in the links look good to me, so it seems to me that my monitor settings are at least in the ballpark. But, no doubt, there is room for improvement.

And I'm seeing another thread with recent activity on making images look good that I should revisit.

Thanks again for the help.

[Ken Lee]

To calibrate your monitor, you need a tool. It attaches to your monitor temporarily, and driven by the accompanying software, reads a set of colors. Depending on what your monitor emits, it writes a series of corrections to the lookup table on your graphics card, in the form of a profile which can be named and dated. Monitors drift over time, so professionals who rely on accurate color and brightness levels, calibrate their monitors often. Imagine a musician who didn't tune the instrument regularly... ouch.

I have found ChromiX (http://www.chromix.com) to be an excellent and tirelessly patient resource, for purchase and troubleshooting of all kinds of color-related issues, including printing and printer profiles, choice of monitors, etc.

On another note: you need to know that by default, web browsers presume that your photos were made in the sRGB color space. If you make your images in another color space, or none at all, then your'e back to the sound of the musician who doesn't tune the instrument according to a standard pitch... surprise !

When using my Epson 4990, I prefer the Epson software over others. However, for other scanners, I have found VueScan to be the best. It varies.

[Phil O.]

Thanks much, Ken, for the additional info. I'll definately give the ChromiX a good look.

That's also a good analogy on using the comparison of a musician needing to tune their instrument.

[mandoman7]

I'm learning...it appears to work. JY
http://images42.fotki.com/v1374/photos/1/1219782/5412419/PigSnout941-vi.jpg

[Tim Meisburger]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4050/4539490939_f7a5b2e324_o.jpg