Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Help / Feedback forum

Help / Feedback forum This area should address site improvements and help with the forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Image display size on RFF changed?
Old 06-10-2014   #1
tomtofa
Registered User
 
tomtofa's Avatar
 
tomtofa is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,162
Image display size on RFF changed?

Has the image display size in the photo threads been changed? It looks like everything is now 650px wide - I'm used to seeing 1040px or so. Makes the pics look almost like thumbnails.

Or is it just something at my end?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #2
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 1,861
I've noticed this too.
Is it an official forum change?
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #3
Taipei-metro
Registered User
 
Taipei-metro is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,655
The 'Edit' button is back.
The image size shrunk.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #4
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,140
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...=142837&page=3

#22
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #5
lynnb
Registered User
 
lynnb's Avatar
 
lynnb is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,439
If you click on an image in a thread that was loaded at a larger size, the original size image will display in a new browser tab (at least it does with Safari). I think this is very practical, as it allows people to view pictures in threads without scrolling sideways, but still view larger versions if they want to.
__________________
Lynn
happiest when shooting 35mm and 120 film
RFF Gallery
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #6
tomtofa
Registered User
 
tomtofa's Avatar
 
tomtofa is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynnb View Post
If you click on an image in a thread that was loaded at a larger size, the original size image will display in a new browser tab (at least it does with Safari). I think this is very practical, as it allows people to view pictures in threads without scrolling sideways, but still view larger versions if they want to.
Hmm... that's a lot of extra clicks if one wants to see a number of photos in a thread - and of course one wants to, given the general excellence of the photos here.

Maybe the default shrinking could be set to something a little larger - 1024px or so on a PC/laptop, with smaller auto resizing if the site recognizes a tablet or phone is accessing the site? That would take care of the scrolling for most people.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #7
Taipei-metro
Registered User
 
Taipei-metro is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,655
It'll be ideal, if sized to 800.
Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-10-2014   #8
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,755
For all practical purposes smaller size images are better in threads. Want bigger? Click on it!
But it's just me, some people like large sizes mixed up with text.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #9
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,748
It is now a bit too small - 800 or 1000 please.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #10
Sparrow
Registered User
 
Sparrow's Avatar
 
Sparrow is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perfidious Albion
Age: 67
Posts: 12,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenInTime View Post
It is now a bit too small - 800 or 1000 please.
yep please ...

... well unless we're doing a flicker and aiming to alienate our present users and go for a more hipster hand-held sector
__________________
Regards Stewart

Stewart McBride

RIP 2015



You’re only young once, but one can always be immature.

flickr stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #11
Sparrow
Registered User
 
Sparrow's Avatar
 
Sparrow is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perfidious Albion
Age: 67
Posts: 12,451
well ... if one wants to see it out of context that is
__________________
Regards Stewart

Stewart McBride

RIP 2015



You’re only young once, but one can always be immature.

flickr stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #12
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 4,073
Thank goodness for that ... no more scrolling.
Like the new set up .... like seeing the larger image away from all the blather.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #13
redisburning
-
 
redisburning is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
Still, as btgc says, we can always click to see more.
or you can make a mobile site with resizing that people can go to if they have smaller screens?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #14
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sejanus.Aelianus View Post
I'm very happy with 650. Let's hope it stays like that.
Its 500 at the moment. Too small IMO.
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #15
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,579
Thank god for the auto resizing in threads ... but a little larger wouldn't hurt!

Sideways scrolling has kept me away from many of my favourite image threads.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-11-2014   #16
KEH
Registered User
 
KEH's Avatar
 
KEH is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 654
A larger default (800 px?) would help. The other problem is that links open in a new tab, but uploaded images open in the same tab. This leads to bad mistakes involving closing the whole browser instead of a tab...

Kirk
__________________
My Gallery
My other galleries
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-13-2014   #17
jmanivelle
Registered User
 
jmanivelle's Avatar
 
jmanivelle is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brazil
Posts: 575
What about a poll for the users to vote for the display size itself?
I fear RFF is getting the flickr syndrome ...

I vote for 1000 px as I am visiting this site daily for the quality of the pictures we share .

Maybe a 500 px or less redux option in the Display modes for the viewers using small monitors would make everyone happy !

My 2 cents,
JM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #18
divewizard
perspicaz
 
divewizard's Avatar
 
divewizard is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: California
Posts: 841
It is too small and really does nothing to decrease required bandwidth since the full size picture loads and is scaled.

The smallest size should be 1024, however I would vote for 1200 wide. All modern laptops and most tablets can easily display that. The forum apps for phones reduce the pictures anyway.
__________________
RFs: Olympus 35SP & Wide-S, Fuji GW690, GSW690ii, & GS645S, Mamiya 6, Wollensak Stereo 10

Chris Grossman
diver.net
GoberianBlue.com


  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #19
Ron (Netherlands)
Registered User
 
Ron (Netherlands)'s Avatar
 
Ron (Netherlands) is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by divewizard View Post
It is too small and really does nothing to decrease required bandwidth since the full size picture loads and is scaled.

The smallest size should be 1024, however I would vote for 1200 wide. All modern laptops and most tablets can easily display that. The forum apps for phones reduce the pictures anyway.
+1 especially if we want to appreciate each others MF files
__________________
__________________
When day is done......

Leica: IIa synch conversion, IIIb, M6 TTL Millenium, 2x Rolleicord Vb, 2x Rolleiflex 3.5F white face, Rolleiflex 2.8A, 5x ICA Tropica

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #20
Addy101
Registered User
 
Addy101 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by divewizard View Post
It is too small and really does nothing to decrease required bandwidth since the full size picture loads and is scaled.

The smallest size should be 1024, however I would vote for 1200 wide. All modern laptops and most tablets can easily display that. The forum apps for phones reduce the pictures anyway.
Hmmm, the iPad mini is only 1024, so 1200 won't do for a lot of folks... and not everybody is using an app on his phone.
__________________
Das Bild ist ein Modell der Wirklichkeit - Wittgenstein
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #21
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,755
So here we have two camps - ones (myself including) are content with medium sized pictures and others want images blowed up to size of screen. As screens aren't all same it's not easy task to design layout fitting all cases.

On 3:4 ratio display some pictures creep out of frame horizontally, on wide displays portrait oriented pictures may not fit vertically (honestly, I think I've seen images not fitting wide displays also horizontally!). Scrolling display to see whole image kills most beautyful pictures....Imagine sitting behind printed book and unfolding each page to see missing 1/4th of image....

Also keep in mind left part of screen is dedicated for user info, vertically some part is taken up by browser (some more, some less, and how you configure 'em but there are different visible areas) and thus not not whole screen is reserved for picture.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #22
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by btgc View Post
So here we have two camps - ones (myself including) are content with medium sized pictures and others want images blowed up to size of screen. As screens aren't all same it's not easy task to design layout fitting all cases.

On 3:4 ratio display some pictures creep out of frame horizontally, on wide displays portrait oriented pictures may not fit vertically (honestly, I think I've seen images not fitting wide displays also horizontally!). Scrolling display to see whole image kills most beautyful pictures....Imagine sitting behind printed book and unfolding each page to see missing 1/4th of image....

Also keep in mind left part of screen is dedicated for user info, vertically some part is taken up by browser (some more, some less, and how you configure 'em but there are different visible areas) and thus not not whole screen is reserved for picture.
If this poll is anything to go by, the main camp by far would prefer a default image display size of 800 pixels wide or 1024 pixels wide, both of which are not too large but considerably larger than the current default image size of 500 pixels wide.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=142949
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #23
SausalitoDog
Registered User
 
SausalitoDog's Avatar
 
SausalitoDog is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sausalito, CA
Posts: 597
I'm definitely in favor of much larger images in the threads...just to see how it would go, why not make it so that those who DON'T want larger images can click on each one to make them smaller? I think that would be many fewer than those who actually want to see the quality of the fine images made in this group.

But that's just me...

Tom
__________________
Tom O'Connell

“Dogs are friendly animals. They are very much like people with hair. But they don’t complain and don’t ask for money or a copy of the print.”
- Elliott Erwitt
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #24
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmanjiro View Post
Oh, what a relief - thanks, voted for 800
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-15-2014   #25
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by SausalitoDog View Post
I'm definitely in favor of much larger images in the threads...just to see how it would go, why not make it so that those who DON'T want larger images can click on each one to make them smaller?
Tell that to anybody whose smartphone data plan is exceeded by large images... Most of the problems with large images are a matter of transport and processing volume, so they can only be avoided if the images never make it into the download - allowing the viewer to downsize after the fact merely adds an insult to the injury.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

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



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:36.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.