Photo file size

For dial-up users, one photo under 100K should be fine. If you have a group of photos, try to get them down under 20K each.

Do this by resizing the images (2000×1500 —> 600×400, etc) and then applying JPEG compression.

Another option for dialup is to set your browser to not display photos. In internet explorer it’s in the tools-options-advanced tab and you uncheck the “show pictures” box. You can do this while reading forums and then switch back to showing pictures.

I personally like URLs instead. That way I can open an image in a separate window/tab, and keep on reading the original page naturally . It prevents the page from jumping as large images are completed–which happens even on my fast connection. It also gives a chance to check out the rest of a hiker’s gallery or webpage, follow their links, and find more and more new stuff. And that’s cool.

But the 100k is a good rule of thumb. Maybe a sample and a link to the rest of the photo collection for the truly intrigued?
-Mark

What Mark has proposed is not just a good idea it’s considered good web etiquette on most boards I’ve ever had anything to do with.

Furthermore, when there are a lot of large images posted, it means many more pages on a busy thread to scroll through.

Thanks to everyone who responded. In the future, I think I’ll use URLs and link them to images 100K in size or less. One more question. Say I’m writing something like: “Here’s a side view of my tarptent in the wind.” How would I turn the word “tarptent” into a clickable link instead of showing the entire URL?

Whoops. Donald, to display something like this in your post:

Yada yada I love my tarptent!

Type this:

Yada yada I love my <a href=”http://www.tarptent.com”>tarptent</a&gt;!

-Mark

see above

x

Consider posting thumbnails of your images with links to the larger image. Thumbnails can be very small, so they shouldn’t bother anyone and then if someone needs the details, they can click on it to get the full picture.

Bob

Consider posting thumbnails of your images with links to the larger image. Thumbnails can be very small, so they shouldn’t bother anyone and then if someone needs the details, they can click on it to get the full picture.

Bob

Bob,

I just edited one of my earlier posts using a thumbnail and really like the way it works. Thanks for the suggestion.

Dondo

Could you explain how you did it?

Thanks
FastWalker

Just load your pictures into Photoshop or equivelent and then resize it to be maybe 100 pixel wide. Save that as a medium quality JPEG. The file should be 10k or something. Then put that in the same directory as the main file. Then in the editor put the text

<a href=”http://www.mywebsite.com/bigpicture.jpg”><img src=”http://www.mywebsite.com/thumbnail.jpg”></a&gt;

where http://www.mywebsite.com/bigpicture.jpg is the URL for the big picture and http://www.mywebsite.com/thumbnail.jpg is the URL for the thumbnail.

Bob

NO

NO???? Were the instructions wrong?

My pictures are all small email size of 640×480. There really aren’t that many pictures even posted here. The site rules do not require what you are asking and I have more to do with my time. I have DSL but don’t have Cable TV. That is how I chose to spend my money. I pay to be a member of this site and it does not yet require me go to all that extra trouble to post a picture(s).

Bob,
when your pictures resize in photo shop wont the link to the pitures be the same size photo?

or do you have to have the same picture saved twice, one small and one large

Bob

Thanks for the impromptu lesson in posting management.
Perhaps it is a little more work to create a more forum friendly posting but the results are worth it.

Best regards,
FastWalker

Ryan-

I believe your second guess is correct. There are two versions of the same photo–one smaller one to display in the forum, and the link takes the reader to the original larger version. Thanks for sharing, Bob.

Bill-

There’s no harm in Bob’s responding to a direct question about how he posted a thumbnail link. I don’t think it was meant personally. While your pictures are large in dimensions, the file size is generally small, which is nice.

There’s just a balance to consider with a wide variety of users from across the planet. Not all users have high bandwidth, not all users have studio monitors running on 2560×1600. Much like our gear choices, those who are mindful of web design and ease of use also appreciate the results of a more ‘lightweight’ approach.
-Mark

Bill-
My post was not aimed at you. I saw a discussion of adding links instead of pictures and I was simply giving a suggestion on how one could “have their cake and eat it too.” It doesn’t matter to me how people post their pictures. I acutally like pictures in posts. It spruces things up a bit ;)

Ryan-
Yes, you would have to save it twice. One large and one small. You use the small one as the image for the IMG tag and the large one as the image for the A tag.

that what I thought.
thanks

Bob: or someone: How do you make a logo show up with a URL. Some URL’s have a neat little piece of graphic’s at the beginning of there Web address.
It also stays with the URL when you boolmark it.

BMW needs the oval with BPL on it like the sticker they sell.

Bill,

If you are interested, there is a very quick and easy way to make clickable thumbnails from the “your album” page in Photobucket. Just scroll to the bottom and click the button that says “Generate HTML and IMG Code”. When the new page appears just copy the code in the box at the top and paste into your post.

Dondo

That was easy but it would involve a bit of time to do several pictures.

I always wondered what that stuff at the bottom of the page did. Thanks

Can I get rid of the words <center> above and below the picture?

Ok I just deleted the words and the picture seems to be the same.