Menu
What's new
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!

Mount Fuji Active … 📸

pegelli

pegelli

Well-known member
k-hawinkler said:
Thanks Bart. I have a simple but basic question:

Which part of the Internet imposes these restrictions, source server, the Internet, destination server GetDPI, or somewhere in between? :facesmack:
Click to expand...
Since I can see everything w/o problems (XXL etc.) I can't imagine it's GetDPI or the way Bart stores/hosts the images.

So I think it's the internet en-route to you, your connection with your ISP or in your computer.
 
Knorp

Knorp

Well-known member
Another try, this time the XXL image has a limited file size (JPEG quality 50%).
Click in the image below to load the XXL image (4128x3096 2MB) and then click again to view the image at actual size.



| gfx 50s | gf 250 |
 
k-hawinkler

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Knorp said:
Another try, this time the XXL image has a limited file size (JPEG quality 50%).
Click in the image below to load the XXL image (4128x3096 2MB) and then click again to view the image at actual size.



| gfx 50s | gf 250 |
Click to expand...
Thanks Bart. I see the image of a ship.
When I click on it I only get a partial image.
That happens in Safari and Firefox.
 
PeterA

PeterA

Well-known member
For those interested - this is a very good street shooter using the R in Vancouver - lots of excellent photos with light as the subject (of course) -:)

No one really needs a camera the size of the R or S to do this kind of shooting of course - unless they like what Fuji offers in terms of protability and colour and lenses...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6kjvfsNHxA

Pete
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Knorp said:
Another try, this time the XXL image has a limited file size (JPEG quality 50%).
Click in the image below to load the XXL image (4128x3096 2MB) and then click again to view the image at actual size.


| gfx 50s | gf 250 |
Click to expand...
One click leads to a larger image on a separate page, immediately. That image is not further clickable.
 
PeterA

PeterA

Well-known member
Knorp said:
And it was me who found your shots pretty ‘punchy’ compared to mine in particular the beach shots ... :LOL:

BTW - I never thought of your shots as ‘awful’ in terms of IQ. Small maybe, but certainly not awful !
Click to expand...
Bart - look at your test clickable for larger sized image - the detail difference between the 2 is there..
some photos don't need the file size to present well
and
other subject matter definitely lends itself to greater appreciation with more detail
balancing the two in order to get a decent shot posted on internet ( given all the jpeg compression that happens anyway) is tricky.
Mind you nothing is as frustrating as seeing someone do a 'dump' of really large files onto a page and having to wait and wait till they render - usually resulting in me just leaving the page and not returning..my internet speed has gone up a lot over the last few years so I don't experience this kind of meltdown anymore- however some people on GETDPi insist on posting massive files for no purpose illustrating nothing much except pretty awful photography using very expensive camera equipment to do it ..

live and let live is a good motto though - best to say nothing than put out negative karma - there is enough of that in the world anyway.

I would like to know what the forum suggested posting size rules are ( if any) and I'll knock up some processes to make various sizes for various sites accordingly.

Pete
 
L

Leigh

New member
Knorp said:
Okay, I followed (more or less) the procedure as described by Carl.
Click in the image below to load the XXL image (4128x3096 6MB) and then click again to view the image at actual size ... :rolleyes:



| gfx 50s | gf 32-64 |
Click to expand...
Both steps work fine here.
Great shot, fantastic detail.

- Leigh
 
Knorp

Knorp

Well-known member
PeterA said:
Bart - look at your test clickable for larger sized image - the detail difference between the 2 is there..
some photos don't need the file size to present well
and
other subject matter definitely lends itself to greater appreciation with more detail
balancing the two in order to get a decent shot posted on internet ( given all the jpeg compression that happens anyway) is tricky.
Mind you nothing is as frustrating as seeing someone do a 'dump' of really large files onto a page and having to wait and wait till they render - usually resulting in me just leaving the page and not returning..my internet speed has gone up a lot over the last few years so I don't experience this kind of meltdown anymore- however some people on GETDPi insist on posting massive files for no purpose illustrating nothing much except pretty awful photography using very expensive camera equipment to do it ..

live and let live is a good motto though - best to say nothing than put out negative karma - there is enough of that in the world anyway.

I would like to know what the forum suggested posting size rules are ( if any) and I'll knock up some processes to make various sizes for various sites accordingly.

Pete
Click to expand...
Hi Pete,

just to have this clear: I have no intention to post IRT file size such large images.
This was just an exercise to find out why some of us are experiencing problems loading and viewing my images and what file size is 'viewable' and what not.
So lessons learned I'd say and I'll keep the file size to 1 MB and for special occasions an imbedded larger image with a file size below 3 MB.
Now I could be wrong and this is just a coincidence, but I think the whole issue started when posting my Fuji images.
AFAIK I never had any complaints with images shot with other gear.

Best regards.
 
PeterA

PeterA

Well-known member
Knorp said:
Hi Pete,

just to have this clear: I have no intention to post IRT file size such large images.
This was just an exercise to find out why some of us are experiencing problems loading and viewing my images and what file size is 'viewable' and what not.
So lessons learned I'd say and I'll keep the file size to 1 MB and for special occasions an imbedded larger image with a file size below 3 MB.
Now I could be wrong and this is just a coincidence, but I think the whole issue started when posting my Fuji images.
AFAIK I never had any complaints with images shot with other gear.

Best regards.
Click to expand...
Sure is a weird issue - I haven't experienced it though with your shots ( or anyone else's).

Pete
 
AlanS

AlanS

Well-known member
Just like to say I am with pegelli in that I am having no issues at all with any of the files shown. I am on win 10 and use firefox as my browser.

And by the way all my latest pics (with white matt on) are 1500pix high x whatever and vary in size from appox 1-3mb.
 
Last edited:
pegelli

pegelli

Well-known member
Knorp said:
Another try, this time the XXL image has a limited file size (JPEG quality 50%).
Click in the image below to load the XXL image (4128x3096 2MB) and then click again to view the image at actual size.
Click to expand...
Works flawlessly here, when I click once I see the image sized for my screen and the cursor becomes a little magnifying glass. When I click again then the area around the cursor is magnified to what I think will be 1:1 of the posted image.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I remember Jack reiterating those in response to some huge files posted on the Sony forum. Some even tried to be clever and posted in portrait orientation (1200pix wide). I can’t find those posts, unfortnately. You can always PM Jack.

AFAIK, only in one section large images are allowed (also dated but there are no changes that I know of) in a thread for large images started by Jack.

Knorp said:
Thanks, Vivek. Those rules date back at least 10 years or so. The world has changed quite a bit, I'd say.
I remember the time when my posted images were only 800px wide ... :rolleyes:

Kind regards.
Click to expand...
 
PeterA

PeterA

Well-known member
I blame it on Dante's inferno - people have to post bigger photos because they have more megapixels?:grin:
 
Knorp

Knorp

Well-known member
Vivek said:
I remember Jack reiterating those in response to some huge files posted on the Sony forum. Some even tried to be clever and posted in portrait orientation (1200pix wide). I can’t find those posts, unfortnately. You can always PM Jack.

AFAIK, only in one section large images are allowed (also dated but there are no changes that I know of) in a thread for large images started by Jack.
Click to expand...
Hi Vivek, I think those 1200px are no longer enforced.
But I will certainly comply to Getdpi’s requirements and rules.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Hi Bart, I know you will. Let me reiterate that was just repsonding to all the discussions here with what I know and have no qualms about pics showing or not showing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top