Is 400 x 400 Pixels Too Small for Effective Communication on This Forum?

[aek]

1 Big Problem With Site!

This forum is indeed very warm and kind and honestly helpful. For this to be continued and further enhanced, the attachment size of 400 x 400 pixels is rather too small and vague for someone to help another. I'm calling upon whoever is in charge to increase the limit for the sake of people who are willing to learn via different means of communication. Thanks

 

[chroot]

This is actually a very reasonable suggestion. The attachments show up as thumbnails anyway, so they don't take up screen real estate. The bandwidth is negligible unless it gets downloaded 1,000 times by every user, and the site has plenty of disk space. If Greg's okay with it, we'll increase the size limits.

Thanks for the suggestion.

- Warren

 

[aek]

thanks a lot chroot

 

[russ_watters]

This is actually a very reasonable suggestion. The attachments show up as thumbnails anyway, so they don't take up screen real estate. The bandwidth is negligible unless it gets downloaded 1,000 times by every user, and the site has plenty of disk space. If Greg's okay with it, we'll increase the size limits.

Thanks for the suggestion.

- Warren

What you can do is up the dimensions to, say, 640x480, but enact a KB size limit for the sake of server space/bandwidth (say, 50K?) if the software supports it. I know that would be helpful for all of my astrophotos - even at 640x480, they are only about 10K since they are mostly black.

 

[Moonbear]

This is actually a very reasonable suggestion. The attachments show up as thumbnails anyway, so they don't take up screen real estate. The bandwidth is negligible unless it gets downloaded 1,000 times by every user, and the site has plenty of disk space. If Greg's okay with it, we'll increase the size limits.

Thanks for the suggestion.

- Warren

The place where this might present an issue would be in General Discussion where folks attach photos that get lots of views, but are more for fun than for providing visual aids in answers to serious questions. Is it possible to keep the smaller limit there if necessary? Not that I'd argue if you want to allow larger attachments there too, but it's not such a necessity if it's going to eat up bandwidth and server space.

I agree with Russ' suggestion that file size is probably more relevant than dimensions of the image.

 

[chroot]

Okay, I've doubled the acceptable attachment size from 50 kB to 100 kB. The max sizes for all pictures is now 1280 x 1024. If I see any abuse or problems, we might have to knock the file sizes back down, but I don't think it'll be an issue. Enjoy.

- Warren

 

[dextercioby]

Thanks,Warren.What's the limit to the # and the total size of the attachements one member is allowed to post on the forum...?I've posted >10 attachements and probably will do so in the future.How much more can i go without deleting them...?

Daniel.

 

[chroot]

There is no limit to the number of attachments, only to the size of each. Attach away.

- Warren

 

[Evo]

There is no limit to the number of attachments, only to the size of each. Attach away.

- Warren

I don't know, perhaps we should limit dex. There's just no telling what he'll be posting.

<kidding dex>

 

[dextercioby]

Yeah,that 100KB (or was it Kb...?) is enormous.I think i'll be posting maths (integrals).Is that worrying...?

Daniel.

 

[chroot]

Every large integral you post with the TeX system is generally a kilobyte or two anyway. 100 kB is not a big deal.

- Warren