DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> 800 pixels photos in Members Challenges.
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 319, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/28/2005 08:14:31 AM · #26
I'm all for the 800 on the horizontal but I would like to keep 640 on the vertical. I'm on 1024 x 768 and I still have to do a bit of vertical scrolling when viewing a 640 portrait shot.

:-)
04/28/2005 08:21:56 AM · #27
I wish I was at my home office where I could double-check my settings. I tele-commute 3 of 5 days a week, today isn't one of them. Here I have a 17" monitor but at least I have a T1 connection!

I may have my home monitor set to 1024 x 768, but I don't think so. If the image is 640 high, and you factor in a toolbar plus address bar in your browser config, then add the dpchallenge image and navigation, the real estate gets much tighter.

In addition to the above space grabbers for voting on images you also get to add the image title, followed by the challenge name, then some spacing, then the voting bar (numbers). It all takes space...

Just checked a 640 high image on this 17" monitor at 1024 x 768 and it for sure doesn't fit.

Originally posted by samtrundle:

While I can understand your concern over file size gladtobebad... I should probably point out that we must have very diffent monitors - On my 19 inch if I set it at 1280 x 1024 a 640 image appears quite small -i can fit about 1.5 640 shot's in the screen even in portrait orientation. And of course there is always the useful option of hitting f11 and view in full screen mode, in which case the available space increases further.

04/28/2005 08:22:38 AM · #28
Yes to Proposition 800....

as for image theft...well...c'est la vie!
04/28/2005 08:24:28 AM · #29
Originally posted by Truegsht:

I score 4 and below most of the time anyway..so I don't see how changing would hurt me much. I'm all for it! Make the change...you have my vote.


why?
04/28/2005 08:39:24 AM · #30
How's about a trial area where we can upload comparitive images and take a vote?
04/28/2005 08:45:06 AM · #31
Originally posted by DrJOnes:


c) 1024x768 is the screen resolution standard nowadays, and many people are even on a larger resolution than that.


As you say, 1024x768 is the standard these days. So why propose going to a default size that doesn't display within the standard screen resolution ?
04/28/2005 08:47:13 AM · #32
How about the idea of 800x600 as maximum dimensions, such that 600 is the maximum height i.e. a portrait images would end up being something like 600px tall and 450px wide. Keeping to a 150kb max of course.

I'm thinking aloud here, dunno if this is a good idea or not.

Also people will ge used to seeing images of all widths so I don't think that portrait images would be at a disadvantage.
04/28/2005 08:58:29 AM · #33
640 is definitely too small.

My wish list in order of preference:

1) max width 1024 - max height 768; or

2) max width 800 - max height 768

max size 250kb

-are
04/28/2005 09:12:17 AM · #34
I've long been a proponent of this idea, and I agree with those who state that the difference in theft problems with 800px vs 640px is minimal.
The limitations of the most popular screen resolution of 1024x768 need to be kept in mind. 800px in width is not a problem, but the maximum usable space in the vertical direction is about 720px (in "F11" full-screen mode). Moving the voting scale and grayscale stripe to either side would ease the vertical space issue.
With regard to compression, I'll post the link again to a test I did last year...

//www.pbase.com/kirbic/compression_samples

These samples used a pic that includes large areas of very high contrast fine detail, and also areas of very smooth color. It's a devil of an image to compress, and shows artifacts easily. As you can see, it looks OK at 800x800 and 150k, even though the JPEG quality was as low as 19% (!!) to get down to 150k.

In summary, I'd be in support the following:

- Maximum height of 720px
- Maximum width of 800px
- Maximum file size of 150k

04/28/2005 09:15:23 AM · #35
I think this would be a good idea if 80-90% of DPC users had at least 19" of screen real estate, and zippy fast connections. But that is not the case. A friend of mine on dial-up recently commented how "dial-up friendly" this site was. Accessibility is the word guys! The best websites are accessible to all kinds of users.

The current system fits nicely into 1024x768 res on my 15/16" display. Ditto with a laptop.
04/28/2005 09:39:07 AM · #36
Originally posted by PollyBean:

I think this would be a good idea if 80-90% of DPC users had at least 19" of screen real estate, and zippy fast connections. But that is not the case. A friend of mine on dial-up recently commented how "dial-up friendly" this site was. Accessibility is the word guys! The best websites are accessible to all kinds of users.

The current system fits nicely into 1024x768 res on my 15/16" display. Ditto with a laptop.


Certainly nothing will be even considered that does not respect the 1024x768 screen resolution and bandwidth issues. Remember that nobody is talking about increasing the allowable file size, so there would be no change in download time, bandwidth used, or server storage required.
04/28/2005 09:45:54 AM · #37
Cool. Thanks Kirbic!
04/28/2005 09:51:34 AM · #38
Just to throw in my $.02, I think a better suggestion would be to up the file size limit to say 200k is more important than a size increase (which I also support). i see many photos that suffer from compression artifacting.
04/28/2005 09:52:37 AM · #39
Originally posted by cghubbell:

Let's be honest and realistic here... How many of you would incur tangible financial loss by having a few people use your 800 pixel image as a desktop, or an unauthorized backdrop on their web page? Worse yet, let's assume they print a 72dpi post card from an 800 pixel image... Do you really think they'll steal your customers? Do you really think your work will become so widespread in theft that it's an issue?


i would like to see larger images as well, but i don't think it's fair to discount other people's concerns about the image theft.

it has happened (it's happened to me), and even if it's not for the purposes of printing images, people have swiped images and posted them as their own work elsewhere.

i don't think that the difference between a 640 image and an 800 image is going to lead to a huge rash of image theft, but it DOES happen and it's a valid concern. of course, it could happen no matter where you post your images online.
04/28/2005 09:56:43 AM · #40
Let's not get carried away here folks.

The 800 pixel idea has been discussed in the past, and I haven't seen any new points raised in this thread. Even the OP said that he put it back before just because it's been a while. And he didn't address the "having to scroll" part very clearly even thought he acknowledged that 1024x768 is the norm.

The people who would be hurt most by the proposed change include the ones with the small sensor cams, the ones on dial-up, and the ones with older monitors, etc. It may be all in my imagination but I feel those groups overlap with the ones who have the most to gain from dpc in it's learning/teaching mode. There are hundreds of places on the internet for the more advanced photographers to showcase their works in larger sizes. This is not a case of an unmet need begging for dpc to meet it.

Calling this proposed change a "necessity" is, IMHO, just not the reality of the current situation.

Calling it "fantastic" is, IMHO, geting carried away.

Going to 800 will change the site. Maybe a lot more than we think it will. And change it in ways that we cannot perceive in advance. It will be very difficult, maybe impossible, to undo those changes if we decide we liked the old dpc better.

And a caution -- don't say you are for a trial and/or a vote unless you are totally sure that 800 is the way you want the site to go. If we have a trial it will be widely applauded as a success. If we have a vote it will almost certainly pass, or be close enough that it can be disregarded. We don't try new things and then back away from them here at dpc, that's not going to happen.
04/28/2005 10:00:14 AM · #41
I say no.
Unless new voting page is designed, so we can see the whole 800x800 on a 1024x768... Hmm... wait a minute! :)
04/28/2005 10:04:33 AM · #42
wow, i feel like an endangered species in this forum... I think 640x640 is perfect and works really well, and I dont see the need to change it. In fact many times I find myself submitting at 600 max side to maintain my image quality especially in sqaure shots.

I said it earlier but think its worth repeating again, the closer people are allowed to get to photos the more the differences between cameras become apparent. Someone earlier mentioned about a 1.3 megapixel pda having lots of run to crop, but will a 100% pda picture look like a 10x scaled down photo from a rebel?
The move to 800 is increasing available pixel area by 150%, and thats a big change.

Another thing I dont like about proposition 800 is that portrait shots are basically going to be getting screwed. If they are allowed to be 800 then a lot of people will not be able to see the whole shot at once, if they are capped to 720 then they will be smaller dimensions, and likely recieve lower scores for having lesser impact.

Also I acknowlege that no one is forced to submit at 800 but the greater variance that it is going to create in image size is not a good thing especially if it becomes a prime voting factor which I forsee it becoming (think of the last photo at 200x200 pizel that did well). It would be a really sad move if voters are voting on the size of your image rather than the photo itself... which actually happens now, but to a lot lesser extent.
04/28/2005 10:08:33 AM · #43
Image theft is an issue and beleive me it is real and out there but at 800px there is no concern of commercial loss of a print image.
04/28/2005 10:19:35 AM · #44
Originally posted by nico_blue:

Another thing I dont like about proposition 800 is that portrait shots are basically going to be getting screwed. If they are allowed to be 800 then a lot of people will not be able to see the whole shot at once, if they are capped to 720 then they will be smaller dimensions, and likely recieve lower scores for having lesser impact.


Disagree, I would no longer post a portrait format image at 640px as I believe I'd lose more votes due to the fact that people would have to scroll too much and the impact of my image would be lost. The last portrait format image that I submitted was only 560px tall.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/305/thumb/140618.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/305/thumb/140618.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
04/28/2005 10:21:58 AM · #45
Guys, change is good.
Don't be affraid.
It doesn't hurt as much as you anticipate it will.
Try it sometimes. You might be surprised.

Cheers! I'm off to Boston. Will check back on this thread Sunday.


04/28/2005 10:24:05 AM · #46
Originally posted by DrJOnes:

Guys, change is good.
Don't be affraid.
It doesn't hurt as much as you anticipate it will.
Try it sometimes. You might be surprised.

Cheers! I'm off to Boston. Will check back on this thread Sunday.


I hope that you are right - I'm about to give up my job and leave the country although I have nothing planned (no job or any real idea where I will go).
04/28/2005 10:31:05 AM · #47
I agree with the 800 pixels, as when you compress an image from 3072x2048 to 640x427, it is reduced by 4.8 times and is as bad as enlarging images, it can loose clarity.

I am all for it, bigger the better.
04/28/2005 11:01:46 AM · #48
How about a compromise? (although I'm totally in favor of moving to 800 wide) Since many seem to feel that we need to maintain 1024x768 compatibility for portrait shots, why not boost the resolution maximum to something like 720x720 as an interim step? Also, minor changes to the voting page could yield more vertical room.

Message edited by author 2005-04-28 11:11:16.
04/28/2005 11:19:21 AM · #49
Why would anyone want their image to be only visible by scrolling up and down?

The safest recommended dimensions for a 1024x768 screen are 968x578. I really see no advantage of a height larger then 600px if we are using the 1024x768 screen as our standard.

As there are practicality issues with reducing the height from the current 640px then the obvious answer is a compromise of 800x640 to make efficient use of the screen.

Link for more info on canvas size
04/28/2005 11:27:32 AM · #50
Originally posted by muckpond:

i don't think that the difference between a 640 image and an 800 image is going to lead to a huge rash of image theft, but it DOES happen and it's a valid concern. of course, it could happen no matter where you post your images online.


I'm sure it has happened to many people... Heck, it has probably happened to me and I haven't discovered it yet. My point was that I question whether people were truly harmed by it happening to the point where it needs to be treated as an infringement on their existence.

If someone swipes one of my 600 or 800 px images, I equate it someone who doesn't know me walking by on the street and and saying "You're a jerk!". Was it wrong? Sure. Will it harm or effect me in any way? Not on my most creative day.

For the average amateur out there, image theft is not really worth the stress people give it. If one grows from amatuer to pro and needs to protect their work, they have the originals and can defend themself against infringement. In the mean time, it's probably a better investment of energy to work on *getting oneself* to the point where it matters than stressing about it.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 07/28/2021 01:19:11 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 07/28/2021 01:19:11 PM EDT.