The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
- Thread starter D&A
- Start date
Re: Too Tempting ... Please Also Ignore This Post .-)
Bob
This a bit less frenetic?Just when I've gotten back to that relaxed "mission accomplied" feeling, you go ahead and posted this image. It's making me nervous...or should I say it's bokeh is(LOL!) ....and here I was just getting to the point of admiring the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 . Maybe I was right all along and this thread should have been ignored by most :shocked:
Dave (D&A)
Bob
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Was that supposed to be "never take reflections for granite" or "never take relections for granted".....a play on words? LOL!
I hope you know I was just kidding when I asked what those pentagon specular highlights were. I certainly wasn't serious!
Dave (D&A)
Hi Bob,
Was that supposed to be "never take reflections for granite" or "never take relections for granted".....a play on words? LOL!
I hope you know I was just kidding when I asked what those pentagon specular highlights were. I certainly wasn't serious!
Dave (D&A)
V
Vivek
Guest
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
I found proof a while ago that Bokeh is very subjective. I had my monster Canon 50/0.95 on the Epson RD-1s and approached this pigeon very carefully to capture all the buttery smooth bokeh.
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
Here is the final reaction from the pigeon:
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
I found proof a while ago that Bokeh is very subjective.
I had my monster Canon 50/0.95 on the Epson RD-1s and approached this pigeon very carefully to capture all the buttery smooth bokeh.Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
Here is the final reaction from the pigeon:
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
3000 pixel wide image loaded in our gallery. Copied the BBC code
3000 pixel wide image loaded in our gallery. Copied the BBC code
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Same Image at 1200 MPX wide. BTW shot with a D800E with a Zeiss 35mm F2 lens with 3 Nikon strobes for fill. My new 4 wheel drive toy. LOL
You should see this sucker climb a hill. LOL
Same Image at 1200 MPX wide. BTW shot with a D800E with a Zeiss 35mm F2 lens with 3 Nikon strobes for fill. My new 4 wheel drive toy. LOL
You should see this sucker climb a hill. LOL
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
As you can see our forum will resize a big image to 1200 Mpx wide. Jack knows far more about the settings than me on what we have installed. As far as Flicker i have no idea and would NEVER EVER use a Flicker account.
As you can see our forum will resize a big image to 1200 Mpx wide. Jack knows far more about the settings than me on what we have installed. As far as Flicker i have no idea and would NEVER EVER use a Flicker account.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
I know this question gets asked a lot but we do have it posted on how to use our forum gallery. Thanks Bob for posting this earlier
Perhaps:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/1081-post4.html
Or:
The GetDPI Photography Forums - BB Code List
I also found this thread as well
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/about-g...w/54-how-post-images-threads-use-gallery.html
I know this question gets asked a lot but we do have it posted on how to use our forum gallery. Thanks Bob for posting this earlier
Perhaps:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/1081-post4.html
Or:
The GetDPI Photography Forums - BB Code List
I also found this thread as well
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/about-g...w/54-how-post-images-threads-use-gallery.html
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
i personally make full use of the gallery, using it's categories as well, as my image host. Both for posting images here and elsewhere.
I also use one of Jack;s image re-sizing PS actions to set my final web size, to 1200 or 900 wide
it is a quite useful service, thanks to the Forum!
i personally make full use of the gallery, using it's categories as well, as my image host. Both for posting images here and elsewhere.
I also use one of Jack;s image re-sizing PS actions to set my final web size, to 1200 or 900 wide
it is a quite useful service, thanks to the Forum!
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Totally agree , we really are the best place to post and you can post the BBC code on other forums as well.
Totally agree , we really are the best place to post and you can post the BBC code on other forums as well.
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Seriously, as I briefly explained earlier in this thread, I was most focused on attempting to post images from a couple of hosting sites that I use where privacy/security concerns for images are addressed for my needs. Unfortunately after working for the longest time in trying to find ways to capture the neessary "BB" or whateever else I might need, in order be able to then post an image (from them) onto here in Getdpi, was becomeing an exercies in fustration.
After attempting to do this from those sites on and off for maybe close to a year and coming to the conclusion it wasn't possible (guess that's where their security part comes in), I finally decided to simply and quickly set up a Flickr acc't for only getdpi posted images. I figured once I worked that out by getting through some glitches (using IE browser was one of them), with the wonderful assistance provided by many others here, I would eventually go back when time permitted and re-read those links you provided. This would eventually provide a better route for posting and at the same time establish a gallery. All in due time, as they say but look forward to it.
You didn't spell it out but I guess I have some idea why you mentioned you would't set up a Flickr acc't. If it's the same reasons why I hesitated, I can then understand.
Oh one question: You posted two images above, one approx 3000 pixel's wide and one 1200 pixels wide, which obviously got posted with the same dimensions for the reasons you outlined. When I attemted as a similar test, a Flickr posted image (refer to post #66 in this thread), my two test images got posted in somewhat different widths. It appeared my 1200 pixel wide image was smaller than the width of the Getdpi webpage, whereas my approx 2400 pixel wide image, posted much like yours (full width). One of the many little mysteries I still can't quite figure out and maybe has something to do with flickr itself and how it handles files.
Another possible solution to all this is for me to upload full rez images to your laptop 24 hr/day 365 days, and have you adjust, crop and resize as per my personal phone conversations/instructions to you, at all hrs of the day and night. Isn't that one of the perks of being a Getdpi member? :ROTFL: OK, Ok, nuff said
Thanks for your suggestions and input!
Dave (D&A)
Guy, I noticed the quality of the file from the 1st of the two shots of that you posted (above) is far superior to the 2nd...:grin:
Seriously, as I briefly explained earlier in this thread, I was most focused on attempting to post images from a couple of hosting sites that I use where privacy/security concerns for images are addressed for my needs. Unfortunately after working for the longest time in trying to find ways to capture the neessary "BB" or whateever else I might need, in order be able to then post an image (from them) onto here in Getdpi, was becomeing an exercies in fustration.
After attempting to do this from those sites on and off for maybe close to a year and coming to the conclusion it wasn't possible (guess that's where their security part comes in), I finally decided to simply and quickly set up a Flickr acc't for only getdpi posted images. I figured once I worked that out by getting through some glitches (using IE browser was one of them), with the wonderful assistance provided by many others here, I would eventually go back when time permitted and re-read those links you provided. This would eventually provide a better route for posting and at the same time establish a gallery. All in due time, as they say but look forward to it.
You didn't spell it out but I guess I have some idea why you mentioned you would't set up a Flickr acc't. If it's the same reasons why I hesitated, I can then understand.
Oh one question: You posted two images above, one approx 3000 pixel's wide and one 1200 pixels wide, which obviously got posted with the same dimensions for the reasons you outlined. When I attemted as a similar test, a Flickr posted image (refer to post #66 in this thread), my two test images got posted in somewhat different widths. It appeared my 1200 pixel wide image was smaller than the width of the Getdpi webpage, whereas my approx 2400 pixel wide image, posted much like yours (full width). One of the many little mysteries I still can't quite figure out and maybe has something to do with flickr itself and how it handles files.
Another possible solution to all this is for me to upload full rez images to your laptop 24 hr/day 365 days, and have you adjust, crop and resize as per my personal phone conversations/instructions to you, at all hrs of the day and night. Isn't that one of the perks of being a Getdpi member? :ROTFL: OK, Ok, nuff said
Thanks for your suggestions and input!
Dave (D&A)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Over-sized images are actually transferred from the server to your browser where they are re-sized locally with the script below.
The quality of the re-sizing is dependent on the browser implementation.
Just a bit of warning is that large files that are re-sized by your browser are still downloaded at full size, so they take up bandwidth and are not ideal for slower connections. So, I recommend that you use 1200 max dimension images for use in the forums.
-bob
<script type="text/javascript">
function resizeImages() {
if (document.images) {
var mw = 1200;
var mh = 1200;
for (var ii = 0; ii < document.images.length; ii++) {
var i = document.images[ii];
var iw = i.width;
var ih = i.height;
if (ih > iw && ih > mh) {
i.style.height = mh + 'px';
} else if (iw > mw) {
i.style.width = mw + 'px';
}
}
}
}
if (window.addEventListener) {
window.addEventListener('load', resizeImages, false);
} else if (window.attachEvent) {
window.attachEvent('onload', resizeImages);
} else {
window.onload = resizeImages;
}
</script>
Over-sized images are actually transferred from the server to your browser where they are re-sized locally with the script below.
The quality of the re-sizing is dependent on the browser implementation.
Just a bit of warning is that large files that are re-sized by your browser are still downloaded at full size, so they take up bandwidth and are not ideal for slower connections. So, I recommend that you use 1200 max dimension images for use in the forums.
-bob
<script type="text/javascript">
function resizeImages() {
if (document.images) {
var mw = 1200;
var mh = 1200;
for (var ii = 0; ii < document.images.length; ii++) {
var i = document.images[ii];
var iw = i.width;
var ih = i.height;
if (ih > iw && ih > mh) {
i.style.height = mh + 'px';
} else if (iw > mw) {
i.style.width = mw + 'px';
}
}
}
}
if (window.addEventListener) {
window.addEventListener('load', resizeImages, false);
} else if (window.attachEvent) {
window.attachEvent('onload', resizeImages);
} else {
window.onload = resizeImages;
}
</script>
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Bob, based on what you posted (above), then out of curioisty, why (referring to post #66 in this thread), does my 2400 pixel wide image posted wider while my 1200 pixel wide image of the same file post less so, no matter which browser I initially secured the image from or subsequently viewing the posted images. Maybe it's simply that the 1200 pixel wide Flickr image really was somemething less than 1200 pxiels?
Dave (D&A)
Bob, based on what you posted (above), then out of curioisty, why (referring to post #66 in this thread), does my 2400 pixel wide image posted wider while my 1200 pixel wide image of the same file post less so, no matter which browser I initially secured the image from or subsequently viewing the posted images. Maybe it's simply that the 1200 pixel wide Flickr image really was somemething less than 1200 pxiels?
Dave (D&A)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
The smaller image is 1024 pixels wide so it is not re-sized.
Perhaps flickr is not advertising the actual sizes?
-bob
The larger of the two images is displayed (in Safari) as 1200 pixels wide, however when that image is downloaded it is 1600 pixels wide.
The smaller image is 1024 pixels wide so it is not re-sized.
Perhaps flickr is not advertising the actual sizes?
-bob
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Dave that may very well be the case on Flicker is they are downsizing to fit there preferred dimensions. I agree a lot of this is very confusing and frustrating. Totally understand security stuff and Flicker has been known as a major copyright infringement site, why I don't have a account there. I rather put my stuff on here as it is not so popular in numbers like Flicker.
Dave that may very well be the case on Flicker is they are downsizing to fit there preferred dimensions. I agree a lot of this is very confusing and frustrating. Totally understand security stuff and Flicker has been known as a major copyright infringement site, why I don't have a account there. I rather put my stuff on here as it is not so popular in numbers like Flicker.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Btw although the army vehicle is part of a real job , I just normally never post client work very often.
Btw although the army vehicle is part of a real job , I just normally never post client work very often.
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
I thought it was your new wheels :ROTFL::ROTFL: