Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
New workshop vehicle Bob. Heck we can go anywhere now.LOL
New workshop vehicle Bob. Heck we can go anywhere now.LOL
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: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
First, thanks for your explanations. I suspect as I think you suggested, that the various sizes for images flickr is how should I say, approx or maybe a bit optimistic. Whatever the case, it may not be reflective of the precise size so actually selecting something larger than 1200 pixels wide and allowing the Getdpi resizing engine downsize it to 1200 pixels, may be the way to ensure max. posting size.
What I meant by ""no matter which browser I initially secured the image from"...in my posting in this thread yesterday, I was having certain issues with IE browser on my PC in both being able to select a Flickr image that was any larger than a posted 1200 pixel wide image as well as not being able to select the right click option of "Copy Image Address" (of one of my test images) so I could copy any image, but especially one 1600 pixel wide (or larger). Both options were non existant when I used IE. Since I have Safari on my PC (which I rarely use since its not optimized for a PC), and logged into my Flickr acc't from Safari instead of IE,, both these options were made available. Therefore only with Safari, not IE could I both capture the Image Address (with .jpg extention, which was impossible with IE) and also capture an image's address for an image larger than 1200 pixels wide.
I assume most Getdpi users are on Macs and using Safari, so those Mac/Safari users never noticed the issues I encountered with Flickr and IE on a PC.
As a side note, when I just went to view (compare) my two images in post #66 in both IE and Safari, the sizing of each image on Getdpi looked and displayed a bit differently. I can't say much about this observation though, as it was only a quick look and will look into this a bit later.
Dave (D&A)
Hi Bob,
First, thanks for your explanations. I suspect as I think you suggested, that the various sizes for images flickr is how should I say, approx or maybe a bit optimistic. Whatever the case, it may not be reflective of the precise size so actually selecting something larger than 1200 pixels wide and allowing the Getdpi resizing engine downsize it to 1200 pixels, may be the way to ensure max. posting size.
What I meant by ""no matter which browser I initially secured the image from"...in my posting in this thread yesterday, I was having certain issues with IE browser on my PC in both being able to select a Flickr image that was any larger than a posted 1200 pixel wide image as well as not being able to select the right click option of "Copy Image Address" (of one of my test images) so I could copy any image, but especially one 1600 pixel wide (or larger). Both options were non existant when I used IE. Since I have Safari on my PC (which I rarely use since its not optimized for a PC), and logged into my Flickr acc't from Safari instead of IE,, both these options were made available. Therefore only with Safari, not IE could I both capture the Image Address (with .jpg extention, which was impossible with IE) and also capture an image's address for an image larger than 1200 pixels wide.
I assume most Getdpi users are on Macs and using Safari, so those Mac/Safari users never noticed the issues I encountered with Flickr and IE on a PC.
As a side note, when I just went to view (compare) my two images in post #66 in both IE and Safari, the sizing of each image on Getdpi looked and displayed a bit differently. I can't say much about this observation though, as it was only a quick look and will look into this a bit later.
Dave (D&A)
Last edited:
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Guy wrote>>>>"Btw although the army vehicle is part of a real job"<<<<
Isn't that what we all say...LOL! You mean you had to test drive the vehicle all over different terrain ...um, I mean sacrifice yourself for 3/4 of the day, not only to wait for the end of day light to be "just right", but to give you some feel and connection to your photographic subject in order to have a real working relationship with it? Sort of like what's requried during a model shoot...LOL! If you're like me, it basically comes down to "tough work", but someones got to do it! (I couldn't resist).
Dave (D&A)
Guy wrote>>>>"Btw although the army vehicle is part of a real job"<<<<
Isn't that what we all say...LOL! You mean you had to test drive the vehicle all over different terrain ...um, I mean sacrifice yourself for 3/4 of the day, not only to wait for the end of day light to be "just right", but to give you some feel and connection to your photographic subject in order to have a real working relationship with it? Sort of like what's requried during a model shoot...LOL! If you're like me, it basically comes down to "tough work", but someones got to do it! (I couldn't resist).
Dave (D&A)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Guy, yea, sort of what I wrote in my previous comments to Bob. Not sure what Flickr is doing with their sizing (or resizing). Problem as all of us know all too well is the copyright infringement issue as well as illegal lifting of images without prior authorization. One of the reasons I had to take down a website...even when no "right clicking" is instituted, was there were obviously ways some would get around this to "lift" images. When images of well know/recognized personalities are pulled off sites and later found in unauthorized product advertisements found in other parts of the world, a multitude of issues and problems develop quickly as you can imagine.
Regardless of the reasons or types of images, no ones likes their pics lifted and/or utilized without prior authorization, regardless of the intent. This is especially true of websites offer hosting services and then feel free to have access to use said images for profitabilty and personal gain with aquiring permission and providing adaquate compensation. That's why I'll tread slowly when it comes to storing select images for eventual posting, on Flickr.
I was just curious...although never foolproof, is there a reason it's difficult to implement "no right clicking" to copy or save images here on GETdpi and other hosting sites?
Dave (D&A)
Guy, yea, sort of what I wrote in my previous comments to Bob. Not sure what Flickr is doing with their sizing (or resizing). Problem as all of us know all too well is the copyright infringement issue as well as illegal lifting of images without prior authorization. One of the reasons I had to take down a website...even when no "right clicking" is instituted, was there were obviously ways some would get around this to "lift" images. When images of well know/recognized personalities are pulled off sites and later found in unauthorized product advertisements found in other parts of the world, a multitude of issues and problems develop quickly as you can imagine.
Regardless of the reasons or types of images, no ones likes their pics lifted and/or utilized without prior authorization, regardless of the intent. This is especially true of websites offer hosting services and then feel free to have access to use said images for profitabilty and personal gain with aquiring permission and providing adaquate compensation. That's why I'll tread slowly when it comes to storing select images for eventual posting, on Flickr.
I was just curious...although never foolproof, is there a reason it's difficult to implement "no right clicking" to copy or save images here on GETdpi and other hosting sites?
Dave (D&A)
Last edited:
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
-bob
In answer to the no right clicking all it takes is a java script to intercept and toss the event. Of course, all it takes to circumvent that is to view the html source, find the image url and just download it from that. OTOH folks do like to occasionally take the posted images and perform alternate processing on them, especially when the poster asked for help.
-bob
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
By the way, did you see my previous response to your question regarding what I mentioned about my using different browsers to grab an image from Flickr and the consequences (issues) I ran into with IE but not Safari, on a PC?
Dave (DA&)
Bob, thanks for the explanation. Oh, absolutely no problem when someone grabs an image such as here on Getdpi, simply to post their attempts with alternate post processing and repost their attempts. Their good intentions are obvious.
By the way, did you see my previous response to your question regarding what I mentioned about my using different browsers to grab an image from Flickr and the consequences (issues) I ran into with IE but not Safari, on a PC?
Dave (DA&)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
In IE when logged onto Flickr, I didn't try going to properties and coping the URL as suggested. I'll attempt this when I get back. Unlike Safari though, the right click option to "Copy Image Address" wasn't available as most suggested using. Sounds like this is the alternative method when using IE.
Maybe that's why I'm 3/4's illiterate when it comes to all things computers...and here I used to program and write my own software in the earliest days. Keeping up with technology for some like me, can be a bit*h. I'm learning....slowly!
Dave (D&A)
Hi Steen,
In IE when logged onto Flickr, I didn't try going to properties and coping the URL as suggested. I'll attempt this when I get back. Unlike Safari though, the right click option to "Copy Image Address" wasn't available as most suggested using. Sounds like this is the alternative method when using IE.
Maybe that's why I'm 3/4's illiterate when it comes to all things computers...and here I used to program and write my own software in the earliest days. Keeping up with technology for some like me, can be a bit*h
. I'm learning....slowly!Dave (D&A)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Dave (D&A)
Thanks Uwe! Once I finish cleaning and reorganizing this particular PC and all associated hard drives, I might just do that. I already have a strange issue with IE that no one can solve. Every time it's loaded, within 4 seconds of doing anything with it, like beginning to type in a web address, it looses what is called "focus"...so that I have to click on the window a 2nd time to make it active again. Only with IE on this machine, no other browser does this.
Dave (D&A)
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Dave (D&A)
Funny you should mention this. A few minutes right after my last post above, I started getting a strange message everytime I started entering a web address on IE. It was ligit and mentioned part of IE preference settings had become corrupt. I re-installed IE and that took care of that but I agree, timetable to install Chrome has been siginifcantly bumped up. I assume Chrome plays nice with a window's PC? Thanks!From my personal experience, IE is the gateway of malwarez. I would bump installing chrome to a higher priority
Dave (D&A)
Lars
Active member
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
I just removed Chrome from all our home computers running Windows. It's too much of a bloated resource hog - 3-15 GB disk space per user (plus temp files), every open tab uses 100-300 MB memory. So keep an eye on it. YMMV.
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Dave (D&A)
I heard sort of the same thing and thats why I have been in a holding pattern regarding loading it. I'm trying to learn more and get some additonal opinions. Thanks!
Dave (D&A)
Lars
Active member
Re: Testing...Please Ignor this Post
Also look at \Users\Dave\AppData to see how much disk Chrome uses it uses. Appdata is a hidden folder. Somewhere inside AppData is one of more folders named Chrome.
If you want to keep a closer look, use Task Manager to see how much memory Chrome uses. No big deal unless you keep a zillion tabs open.
Also look at \Users\Dave\AppData to see how much disk Chrome uses it uses. Appdata is a hidden folder. Somewhere inside AppData is one of more folders named Chrome.