Yucky "resize this image" banner when using IMG tag

[RichS]

So when someone uses an IMG tag to link to an image that is big, is it my browser or the forum that resizes the image and then adds the banner to let me look at the image full size? If it is the forum that does it, can we turn this off? Or maybe make it default to big and allow folks to click the banner to see a smaller image?



Thanks.

[Chris Mackey]

Just resize the image before uploading. There are numerous websites that do it free.

[JWA]

The forum software does it, and personally I think it is a nice feature.

[Mr. Know]

You can attach the image yourself, the forum does not resize those...unfortunately I resize a metric ton of them...

[RichS]

Heh.

I think folks are not understanding my 'issue'.

I'm not worried about my images (I always attach images), I'm wishing that the forum didn't take images that others have linked to using the IMG tag and shrink them by default so that I have to click the 'resize this image' banner at the top.

The forum isn't reducing the bandwith (the full image comes down), it's just making it so that people with small monitors (and one should wonder why they are the preferred audience) don't have to scroll to see images that are linked using the IMG tag. Of course the forum doesn't do this for images that are uploaded.

What I'm suggesting is that the default behavior for big images that are linked using the IMG tag should be to show the whole image and then (if necessary) add a banner to the image that allows the image to be shrunk for those poor unfortunate folks who don't have big monitors.

I love all the image on this site. I love that people post big clear images. I love looking at them on my 30" monitor.

[Riddlefox]

Go to User CP (up at the top), then Edit Options. Scroll down a bit, and there's a setting in there to keep default sizes.

Hope that helps!

[RichS]

Riddlefox, you are the best!

Thanks, that addressed the issue.

I'm noticing that the default for image resizing is 960 pixels wide. Which means that a 1024 (pretty common) image gets the re-size banner and then only grows a tiny bit (this was the thing that seemed kind of silly to me) when you click it.

Thanks again!

[Riddlefox]

[Mr. Know]

Originally Posted by RichS

Riddlefox, you are the best!

I understand exactly what you mean now, and you are right...I misunderstood before. It is annoying to get the bar above for a very small image difference when clicked.

[Chris Mackey]

Learn something new every day. Where was that brain surgery web forum...?

[RichS]

With all the smart folks here, shouldn't it just be a sub-forum?

[...m...]

Originally Posted by RichS

I'm noticing that the default for image resizing is 960 pixels wide. Which means that a 1024 (pretty common) image gets the re-size banner and then only grows a tiny bit (this was the thing that seemed kind of silly to me) when you click it.

...this is why the auto-resize feature is handy to have by default...

[RichS]

Originally Posted by ...m...

...this is why the auto-resize feature is handy to have by default...

I just turn on my second monitor and I can see the entire width of the image. I only have to scroll up and down a bit...



This actually does bring up a good point: With that resize banner, what should be the default resize? Right now it looks like it shrinks things to be 960 pixels wide. Should we take a survey and see how big people's monitors are? I'm at 4480 x 1600 (with both monitors), but I'm going to guess that I'm on the high side... But I'd be willing to be that there are relatively few people who are looking at this site on a 1024 x 768 monitor (which seems to be the default size assumption).

I think assuming a 1024 default monitor width is rather conservative. Even most laptops today have 1440 or more pixel widths...

[ZAMMY1]

wait a minute,,,,,i'm still counting my pixels...
sam

[LordZ]

Originally Posted by RichS

I just turn on my second monitor and I can see the entire width of the image. I only have to scroll up and down a bit...



This actually does bring up a good point: With that resize banner, what should be the default resize? Right now it looks like it shrinks things to be 960 pixels wide. Should we take a survey and see how big people's monitors are? I'm at 4480 x 1600 (with both monitors), but I'm going to guess that I'm on the high side... But I'd be willing to be that there are relatively few people who are looking at this site on a 1024 x 768 monitor (which seems to be the default size assumption).

I think assuming a 1024 default monitor width is rather conservative. Even most laptops today have 1440 or more pixel widths...

2560x1600, single monitor.

1680X1050 is standard for the ones at work. I would think most would have a 20" wide as a minimum. Hell Dell practically gives those away with their systems.

[Noble]

Originally Posted by ...m...

...this is why the auto-resize feature is handy to have by default...

Life sized 1:1 scale.............sweet

[Riddlefox]

Originally Posted by RichS

I just turn on my second monitor and I can see the entire width of the image. I only have to scroll up and down a bit...



This actually does bring up a good point: With that resize banner, what should be the default resize? Right now it looks like it shrinks things to be 960 pixels wide. Should we take a survey and see how big people's monitors are? I'm at 4480 x 1600 (with both monitors), but I'm going to guess that I'm on the high side... But I'd be willing to be that there are relatively few people who are looking at this site on a 1024 x 768 monitor (which seems to be the default size assumption).

I think assuming a 1024 default monitor width is rather conservative. Even most laptops today have 1440 or more pixel widths...

There's also the pixels to the side of the screen where the name, avatar, etc, are.

But it still must be nice to have 4480x1600 resolution... That's pretty crazy! Most of my work computers are 1280x1024.

Since you have such a beautiful setup, I won't feel too bad putting this one up then

[Demonized]

What would be the point of changing this? (Other than through your own user set-up)

Just click the banner if you wanna see the fullsized version.

[...m...]

Originally Posted by RichS

This actually does bring up a good point: With that resize banner, what should be the default resize? Right now it looks like it shrinks things to be 960 pixels wide.

Should we take a survey and see how big people's monitors are? I think assuming a 1024 default monitor width is rather conservative. Even most laptops today have 1440 or more pixel widths...

...my desktop runs 3840x1280 (2x1920x1280) although i seldom have any single application window opened to that size, my office machine is (1600x1200+1152x864), and my powerbook is 1024x768...

...for readability across varying platforms and browsing styles, i've found the sweet spot for images posted within forum software to be 800 pixels wide - it's the largest 'standard' image size which readily fits a 1024-pixel-wide display, which is fairly common on subnotebooks, older desktops, and larger displays used by people with poor vision, and it also seems well-suited to most default page layout schemes...



...these days, though, with handheld browsing becoming more and more ubiquitous, unless you're running an iphone which rescales everything dynamically, QVGA is pretty common at 320x240...personally, i think defaulting images to anything smaller than 600 pixels wide is overkill, since most folks with a handheld browser use it to supplement a more full-featured machine, and images that small sacrifice a lot of real estate...