This seasons picture's......................... [Archive] - Fly Fishing Forum

: This seasons picture's.........................


Striper
11-20-2001, 10:42 PM
I thought seeing as how they started a thread like this on one of the other boards and I learned something new that maybe we could start something similiar on this board. Of course this would be with Juro's permission, I don't know what his servers can handle file size wise but if we keep the file sizes down maybe it can be do-able. Anyway here is one of my entries.
http://wsphotofews.excite.com/016/Qp/tP/wA/RB73213.jpg
This is a photo of my wife with a nice Milford CT. Bluefish!

Striper
11-20-2001, 10:46 PM
Juro,
Let me know if this is going to be cool with you on the board, this file I cut down to 640X512 if they need to be smaller I can do that as well. I think that it is a great way for all of us to get to know one another better and put faces with names. If this is going to put too much of a strain on your servers storage then I will cease posting pics immediately. You know how it is though kid in a candy store kinda thing:)

NrthFrk16
11-20-2001, 11:26 PM
This PNW boy would love to see a bunch of pictures to match up with all the stories I've heard...

Plus, God knows the The Fish Voyeaur shall have some great pictures to post himself. ;)

Roop
11-21-2001, 06:21 AM
Beautiful!! (nice fish too)

Good idea but I'm sure we'll need to set a maximum size restriction.

need to find a scanner

Quentin
11-21-2001, 10:48 AM
I'm sure Juro and others are much more knowledgeable about this stuff than I am so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

When you post a photo using the "img src= . . ." method, the photo is actually stored on your own web site and not on this board. All you store on the board is a pointer to the photo. I'm not sure if posting photos this way has any other adverse effects on the server, but I don't believe that file size is an issue. The main concern with file size is that larger files take longer to open when you try to read the message and the image may be much larger than the screen. This can be annoying when you are reading messages. Another problem with posting photos is that you probably won't want to leave all of your photos on your web space forever, and when you take them down from your web space they will no longer be visible in your message.

I haven't tried to use the "attach file" option to add a photo, but if that puts the actual image into your message then I would imagine that file size is definitely a concern.

In any event, Juro, please let us know if you want to establish guidelines for posting photos. I certainly don't want to do anything to mess up this board!
Q

juro
11-21-2001, 12:10 PM
Thanks for your consideration, as usual. What a great community, no kidding.

You are a lucky man to be able to share the enjoyment of such a slammer bluefish with your wife, Striper!

Images... haven't really thought this one through but since you were kind enough to ask I will try to provide a good answer:


There are two sides to this: Image tags (IMG) and Attachments.

I. Image Tags -

Like Quentin says the image can live on another server so the only considerations are (a) time to load and (b) wide pictures blowing out the sides.

(a) Time to load is a courtesy thing you do for your fellow members. For instance if we all IMG'ed to huge files this thread would take an hour to appear. 20-40k is the best range for getting the visual impact across without killing our dial-up members.

(b) Blowing out the sides, same thing - courtesy. I think a 500 pixel limit would be best, any opinions?


II. Attachments

Attachments use up storage on our server and if it gets out of hand I would have to shut the option off. As long as people don't abuse it I don't see why we can't try it out for a while. We'll leave it on and see how it goes.

Not sure what the limits are set to right now but images should be kept to 20k - 40k whenever possible.


Overall:

- If you have a humungous picture (over 100k bytes) please don't post it, send it to me and I will reduce it for you -or- put it on your website and post the link. I love humongous pictures for the quality but it's not considerate to the general browsership

- Attachments - as long as there is no abuse and we have disc space go for it! (warning: there is a limit to file sizes and types)

- Keeping the width reasonable won't blow out the sides of the board, but if the full screen effect is part of the presentation just attach it and it will come up in a new browser window (full screen)




Thoughts, opinions, discussion?

jborkowski
11-21-2001, 12:28 PM
Can anyone else NOT see the image Mike(striper) posted? Shows as broken image.

jborkowski
11-21-2001, 12:39 PM
Well, with all the shark hype on the Cape this season, I started receiving calls from family and friends around the country telling me I should stay out of the water. In reponse, I sent around a couple photos of me fishing the Monomoy flats, in all their serene beauty.

My younger brother submitted the following in return.

juro
11-21-2001, 01:25 PM
Jeff -

No, Striper's image comes in fine for me... so does yours! What are brothers for :p

Striper
11-21-2001, 10:05 PM
Quentin,
Both you and Juro are correct, my brain was on temporary holiday when I wrote that post.........DUH! I posted those pics on a free pic posting site so their servers would be the ones that take all the load. And Juro I will keep in mind your guidelines on picture size for future reference.

Roop
11-23-2001, 07:41 AM
HA! I got it!

MV Sunset

I guess I didn't :mad:

No - wait, maybe I do...:confused:

C:\My Documents\JWR\MV sunset.jpg

Roop
11-23-2001, 12:01 PM
Jim Doogue on one of this seasons trips to the tropics...

C:\My Documents\JWR\jim doogue.jpg:D

I'm trying to post this one because:
A. He's a great guy
B. It was a great day
C. Check out all the different shades of blue, I used a medium quality copy here, the high quality really shows the beauty of the sky & water