Confusion about posting photos in forum messages ?

[scottp]

It has been about a decade since the cost of computer storage was a factor in deciding how to keep large
quantities of photos so the photo-bucket advice is no longer relevant. I can see when posting that
attachments are possible but I do not understand the "place photo inline" option and when or why
to use that option.

An update to the Forum Etiquette area would be appreciated that explains the current photo attachment options
which can be such a big help in making our points when posting messages since as they say photos often are worth
a thousand words.

[Mark-NJ]

I just host elsewhere and embed with {img} and {/img} html tags. Makes for a much better appearance, IMO.

Kinda wish everyone did. Sure beats minimized thumbnails that are often mis-oriented.

[bjfrater]

The only problem with that approach is that after time the links to external images often get lost and there is nothing worse than finding a thread talking about an issue you might be having and finding all the images missing.

[Roberta]

I agree on the hosted pics getting lost over time. The picture posting is very easy and does make a nice small pic that when clicked on, returns to the larger size, based on file size.

When posting with pictures:

Click on "Attachments"
Click on "Add files"
You are now shown a block in your computer. Pick the file source (Pictures), choose the picture, click "Open". You are done, The picture will upload and the status will show when completed. Comments can be typed in the file comment box.

Submit your post and the pictures will appear. Click on them to enlarge.

I will ask that this info be made a sticky in the etiquette thread.

Roberta

[vupilot]

"place inline" simply puts the photo where your cursor currently is. So if you want your photo at the end of your paragraph just make sure your cursor is at the beginning of the next line following your paragraph and click place in line. The photo text code will appear there and when you submit your post the photo will appear.

[Roberta]

Good point, Chris!!

Roberta

[scottp]

It sounds simple but the website forum software presents some inconsistencies. Somehow
or for some reason, there is perhaps a limit on the number of photos that can be attached per
message and it could depend on the cumulative file size of the photos.... just guessing.

I just tried to post five images in another thread and two or three succeeded as attachments
and the other two files were listed in selection boxes that said "place inline".

Maybe the list moderator can create a practice/test area for posting photos so we can
figure it out and the higher ups at Glen-L can contact their website contractor
to implement an update to fix the problem. This is a great forum and the inability
to feature images along with messages can severely hamper the technical transfer
to the forum reader. There is no higher or greater environment than construction/assembly
of complex objects where specific image examples can be put to good use.

For many of us older guys we have reached the era of electronic magic. I have a plug in
thumbdrive smaller than a stick of chewing gum that could hold thirty million images
and presently costs less than $100. ( 128 gigabytes ) , these inexpensive storage costs
have made it to website hosting services to the point of Google and Microsoft for instance
giving us "unlimited" ( or effectively unlimted.... not sure exactly ) space on cloud drives
for no charge. I am real new here and dont want to be seen as complaining but this
capability simply makes Glen-L more competitive for essentially little or no cost.

Keep it up Glen-L ..... I am loving what I am seeing and drooling over what I see are
the possibilities of a Tiny-Might as an affordable and exciting and reliable play toy.

[Bill Edmundson]

Scott

Each post has a size limit. If you shoot 6 MP pictures (which I do), you can post about 5 pictures, 8 MP about 4, 10 MP about 3, 12 MP maybe only 2.

Bill

[scottp]

Bill- I understand what you are saying but I dont think so. What you are talking about is the number of
pixels in the image such that a tic-tac-toe board has 9 pixels. This is nearly independent of file
storage space required (governed by image file type and compression etc )

I also say that because I've tried to upload five or six exceedingly small images as attachments
and only three were allowed ? ? ?

Someone--- likely the website management contractor ----- is going to be able to answer the
question and remove the uncertainty of how it all works.

[Bill Edmundson]

A 10MP file is much larger than a 6MP file.

Bill

[scottp]

Bill- this isnt necessarily getting us anywhere but your unit of measure is mega-pixels and not
megabytes and a much larger mega-pixel image can very easily be smaller in mega bytes.
If you have a chance to communicate with the tech guys programming the forum, please
ask how their forum software works re image attachments and how the automatic "inline" for
exceeding limits is working and request the latest versions of the forum program.

I'm guessing we are trotting along on a ten year old or older version which is still pretty good.
An upgrade/update might take five minutes or it might cost a ton. Wouldnt hurt to ask.

[Denon Osterman]

I'll chime in briefly as I've now experienced all of these pain points!

As a brief summary - posting with "img" allows you to link in from another host. This is annoying because links can end up defective (like on my post from two years ago, which now has no photos anymore ), etc. But it at least allows full pictures of an unlimited number to show up...which is very nice. Using "attachments", I've only ever been able to get 3 pictures uploaded (File size* did not matter)...which is very, very annoying when you're shutter happy like me!

What I think everyone wants is a way to actually upload as many photos as possible to each post, so that they "live" on the post, but aren't limited in size or quantity. I do remember that a few years ago the forum got switched to a new type - but it looks like that hasn't solved the issue yet, sadly. I agree that contacting phpBB is the way to go here...though I think John & Gayle would be the first line of contact to get that done.

*A note on photo size - Both are technically correct, but to clear things up a 10MP file is actually not necessarily any bigger than a 6MP file - that's only true if they're the same file type. For instance a 10 MP JPEG or PNG image will be much, much, much smaller *file* than a 6MP RAW *file* - even though the pixel count / visual size of the 10 MP is much higher. The vast majority of people that I know shoot in JPEG, so it's generally a moot point, but I usually find pretty good compression gains switching to PNG for web posting (PNG literally stands for Portable Network Graphics, and was optimized for web hosted images )