Maximum Picture Widths in Forums - 2011

Lee · 22nd December 2011, 05:40 PM

I suspect a lot of members have replaced their computer equipment since the last poll in 2004 .

The picture below shows common possible picture widths
up to our current width limit of 1280.
For many, I suspect the whole picture is too wide for your screen,
and a slider bar has appeared on the bottom of your screen
to allow you to pan the picture.

AJ1356 · 22nd December 2011, 05:45 PM

personally I like 800 since I wont have to scrol sideways to see the whole picture.

Atlantia · 22nd December 2011, 06:24 PM

I vote for keeping 1280 (I think it's a good compromise).
Sometimes you need a BIG picture, sometimes you don't.
But I think it's best to give as much of a margin as possible to allow for those who don't have good cameras/ability to crop etc to show as much detail as they can, without it being to big for users still running at 800 like AJ.

My screen is set to 1680/1050, If I zoom to 130% then 1280 fits my screen.

laEspadaAncha · 22nd December 2011, 08:30 PM

I think I tend to post pics at 800 pixels as it presents a nice compromise - big enough to show sufficient detail in most instances, but small enough to load quickly and doesn't require a left/right scroll for my default window size.

That being said, sometimes I think there is a need to show a larger image, and IMO an 800-pixel cap is too small, as it might require unnecessary edits in order to show sufficient detail. So IMHO I would suggest going with either the 1024 or 1280 cap if server space and bandwidth allow for it...

kronckew · 22nd December 2011, 08:36 PM

i never run my browser at full resolution, i can handle 1280x1024, but 800 fits my browser best, if the forum doesn't allow for auto-resizing of images.

i use firefox which will auto-resize, but only if the forum software supports it and it is turned on by the admin.

when it works, the pics always fit the browser, and you can click on them to see them in full size if desired.

it's frustrating when the larger pics don't resize & you have to scroll to read the text and see the whole pic.

katana · 22nd December 2011, 09:31 PM

1024 seems a good size for me , I can easily see the entire picture without scrolling ....and prevents the need to scroll when reading text accompanying the larger resolution pics.

MERRY CHRISTMAS .....HAPPY HOLIDAYS ....JOYEAUX NOEL.....FELIZ NATAL...FELIZ NAVIDAD

David

Lee · 22nd December 2011, 10:53 PM

Do not be concerned about the image size limits being reduced, that is not under consideration. I just have been seeing more machines that run at 1920 x 1200 native resolution for their screens and wondered if I should bump it up. My primary machine for forums maintenance is at 1280 (x3) and so anything over 1024 gives me the slider bar...

Technical hint - You should always attempt to run at the native resolution of a CRT screen for best image clarity. The operating system should have settings to adjust text and icon size.

View Poll Results: Which is the widest arrow that fits comfortably on your screen?
800 pixels	3	18.75%
1024 pixels	6	37.50%
1280 pixels	5	31.25%
Still have plenty of lateral width (likely running 1600 or 1920)	2	12.50%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

22nd December 2011, 05:40 PM	#1
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 899	Maximum Picture Widths in Forums - 2011 I suspect a lot of members have replaced their computer equipment since the last poll in 2004 . The picture below shows common possible picture widths up to our current width limit of 1280. For many, I suspect the whole picture is too wide for your screen, and a slider bar has appeared on the bottom of your screen to allow you to pan the picture. Attached Images

22nd December 2011, 05:45 PM	#2
AJ1356 Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Nashville Posts: 314	personally I like 800 since I wont have to scrol sideways to see the whole picture.

22nd December 2011, 06:24 PM	#3
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	I vote for keeping 1280 (I think it's a good compromise). Sometimes you need a BIG picture, sometimes you don't. But I think it's best to give as much of a margin as possible to allow for those who don't have good cameras/ability to crop etc to show as much detail as they can, without it being to big for users still running at 800 like AJ. My screen is set to 1680/1050, If I zoom to 130% then 1280 fits my screen.

22nd December 2011, 08:30 PM	#4
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	I think I tend to post pics at 800 pixels as it presents a nice compromise - big enough to show sufficient detail in most instances, but small enough to load quickly and doesn't require a left/right scroll for my default window size. That being said, sometimes I think there is a need to show a larger image, and IMO an 800-pixel cap is too small, as it might require unnecessary edits in order to show sufficient detail. So IMHO I would suggest going with either the 1024 or 1280 cap if server space and bandwidth allow for it...

22nd December 2011, 08:36 PM	#5
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,154	i never run my browser at full resolution, i can handle 1280x1024, but 800 fits my browser best, if the forum doesn't allow for auto-resizing of images. i use firefox which will auto-resize, but only if the forum software supports it and it is turned on by the admin. when it works, the pics always fit the browser, and you can click on them to see them in full size if desired. it's frustrating when the larger pics don't resize & you have to scroll to read the text and see the whole pic.

22nd December 2011, 09:31 PM	#6
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	1024 seems a good size for me , I can easily see the entire picture without scrolling ....and prevents the need to scroll when reading text accompanying the larger resolution pics. MERRY CHRISTMAS .....HAPPY HOLIDAYS ....JOYEAUX NOEL.....FELIZ NATAL...FELIZ NAVIDAD David

22nd December 2011, 10:53 PM	#7
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 899	Do not be concerned about the image size limits being reduced, that is not under consideration. I just have been seeing more machines that run at 1920 x 1200 native resolution for their screens and wondered if I should bump it up. My primary machine for forums maintenance is at 1280 (x3) and so anything over 1024 gives me the slider bar... Technical hint - You should always attempt to run at the native resolution of a CRT screen for best image clarity. The operating system should have settings to adjust text and icon size.