HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Search PostsPosts By CategoryRecent Posts 
Questions, Answers and Comments by Category
Discussion id : 88-745
most recent 17 OCT 15 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 17 OCT 15 by Margaret Furness
I'm not winning with the Photo side-to-side flip - it worked, but also flipped the photos up/down. Then when I looked at the on them Q & A posting, they hadn't changed (despite the refresh button), but when I clicked on each one to edit it again, they were correct (in the Edit window only).
I have dealt with it, by re-loading the photos after flipping them with Photoshop Elements.
REPLY
Discussion id : 84-480
most recent 26 AUG 15 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 24 APR 15 by Patricia Routley
It has been mentioned before, but I can't find it. Can anyone tell me the ideal size for photos for HelpMefind?
Thanks
Patricia
REPLY
Reply #1 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by HMF Admin
Patricia,

Your question is actually a bit more complex than it may seem. We really need an Ezine article to address photo uploading in depth but I'll do my best to answer the size aspect. There are two different "sizes" to consider and both come into play in uploading files to HMF.

The first is size of the image. The image size can range from a small 2 by 2 inch thumbnail to a large 12 by 12 inch photo. These image dimensions are typically quoted in pixels rather than inches or centimeters. HelpMeFind image processing reduces images to roughly 800 by 700 pixels (W x H) although tall, narrow or wide, panoramic photos are reduced proportionally.. This reduction keeps your photo viewing quick and prevents anyone from overwhelming HMF's resources. Ideally, photos should be at least 800 by 700 pixels and no more than 2000 by 2000 pixels.

The second size to consider is the actual file size of the image. A few different elements come into play here starting with the image size discussed above. As one would expect, a small thumbnail sized image does not require a lot of file space while a large image can require an enormous amount of file space. Sometimes many megabytes. The larger the file size of the image you upload to HMF, the longer it takes and the more taxing (and costly) it is on HMF resources. For this reason, file upload size is currently limited to 6 megabytes.

This is probably more than you wanted to know and even this explanation is a bit of an oversimplification. The short answer is, pixel size of around 1200 by 1200 and no larger than 4 megabytes works well.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by Give me caffeine
Really people should resize their photos before attempting to upload them, as a digital shot straight from the camera is huge, in both pixels and bytes. Unfortunately many don't seem to know how to do this, even though it's very quick and easy once you know how.

Photoshop CS2 is available as a legitimate free download these days, and would be fine for most people. Very easy to learn for the sort of thing needed in this case. Alternatively, Irfanview will even batch process image resizing if anyone really needs that.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by HMF Admin
Exactly! Thank you for your input.

Most cameras do allow you to select a default image size to use and doing so, if you are so inclined and tech savvy, will create smaller, HMF-ready image files that will not need to be reduced. It's a time saver but using separate image manipulation software, as suggested, allows you to crop the image perfectly and then reduce it. This sequence will produce the optimal image quality for HMF use.

HMF is investigating the possibility of enhancing our photo upload software to allow one to reduce and crop photos but like all our other planned enhancements, it's a matter of time and money. If you've not done so and can afford to, please consider helping support our community funded website.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by Give me caffeine
Yes I have been thinking I should chip in. I will be getting a membership upgrade, as soon as I have a few more readies (bit of a kerfuffle this week). Should be fine Monday week, which brings something up.

I don't use credit cards. I'm a bit old school like that. I'm happy to airmail an international bank draft, or the local post office will apparently handle sending payments by Western Union. Do you have any preference?
REPLY
Reply #7 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by HMF Admin
Please accept my apology for making it appear the plea for funding support was directed specifically at you. That was certainly not my intention but I regretfully acknowledge that is a likely assumption many might make: Mea cupla.

You have frequently provided much appreciated insight and experience. Thank you and please do not feel pressured to provide financial support.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by Give me caffeine
No apology required. I think chipping in is a good idea anyway. I'm not even that fussed about the extra functionality since I'm not a professional. I just think it's time I chipped in.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by Patricia Routley
Love short answers. And I can remember "around 1200 by 1200".
Many thanks for your reply Admin. I appreciate it and can now upload some recent garden photos.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by HMF Admin
Many thanks to YOU Patricia; your continued participation and support is greatly appreciated and valued.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 12 posted 1 MAY 15 by Jay-Jay
Hear Hear! ...I cannot agree more! Thank You Patricia.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 12 posted 2 MAY 15 by Patricia Routley
Thanks Admin and Jay-Jay. I just wish some of the "oldies" would take up the baton again. They have so much knowledge to share and they would lighten the load.
REPLY
Reply #11 of 12 posted 25 AUG 15 by Give me caffeine
Found out something odd about your image resizing code today. I just uploaded my first photo, showing progress of one of my miscreants, and upped it at 1280x960 and 287 kB.

Your site has resized it to 900x675. From what you were saying earlier I now assume that 900 is the actual limit for resized width, rather than 800. Does this also apply to height? Reason I ask is that I've done so much image optimisation in my time that I personally don't mind what the limits are. I can easily resize to suit anyway.

The second point is that although I uploaded at 287 kB, your code has reprocessed the image to 428 kB. So your resize code has cut the pixels down, but has simultaneously increased the download burden for your site by approximately 50%*.

If I'd resized it to 900x675 myself, I could have done the same image at just under 160 kB with no discernible loss of quality.

In other words, if somebody does upload an image suitably optimised for use on a website (ie: .jpg format, saved on medium quality setting) your existing code will nevertheless reprocess it to be less optimal. This seems like a bad idea.

So next question: if an image is upped at < 900px in size, will your resize algorithm just accept it without reprocessing, or will it reprocess anyway? If the former, then there's benefit in people sorting it before uploading. If the latter, then there's really no point in people sorting it themselves, because it'll be a wasted effort.

*For the non-techy types, bandwidth usage is directly related to image size in bytes, not to image size in pixels. Pixels don't matter for bandwidth (although they do matter for browser RAM if you want to go down that rabbit hole, but that's not the website's problem).
REPLY
Reply #12 of 12 posted 26 AUG 15 by HMF Admin
Can you please email the original photo to our support department so we can process this on our on-house system to see what's going on. All your points are valid and we need to see where the problem is.

And yes, we did recently increase the maximum allowed photo size as well as the final resized image on HMF. Thanks
REPLY
Discussion id : 82-889
most recent 30 JAN 15 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 30 JAN 15 by Give me caffeine
This is a rather technical point, but I think it is worth considering. The terms of use for this site stipulate that images are not to be downloaded. I understand the intent here, but it conflicts with the way browsers are coded.

For performance reasons, all browsers automatically cache images. In other words (explaining for any non-technical readers) all browsers will automatically download the data for any image on the page you are viewing, and then store that image data on whichever device you are using. The only way of avoiding this is to disable image caching, which is something a front end developer might do when testing new coding, but not something the average user is likely to have even heard of. This means that, technically, it is likely that the vast majority of visitors are unwittingly in breach of the site's terms of use. Whether this would ever be an issue in practice is debatable, but it's nevertheless true.

Since the intent is obviously to prevent people re-using images from this site without authorisation, it may make more sense to stipulate that redistribution is what is prohibited. This term would cover everything from passing on a flash drive full of images to a third party, to re-use in another web site or app. This would not conflict with automatic browser behaviour, while still prohibiting anyone from re-using the images in an unauthorised fashion.
REPLY
Discussion id : 82-567
most recent 19 JAN 15 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 19 JAN 15 by wrygrass
Sometimes I see questions--particularly in the plant identification category--with pictures. How do you add a picture to a question or comment?

Thanks!
REPLY
Reply #1 of 1 posted 19 JAN 15 by HMF Admin
After you post your comment you use the ADD PHOTO button to add 1 or more photos to your post - it's easy!
REPLY
© 2017 HelpMeFind.com