| Author |
 Topic  |
|
belle
|
 Posted -
24/09/2007
:
14:52
|
I have finally got round to scanning some of the post cards i have, thought I would start with transport. However havving uploaded a pic onto the site I now can't find it to transfer it to here. It's in the X catagory, and is entitled Army Bi planes on Franborough common...have a couple of other pics to put on but will wait to see if i can do this one first!
Life is what you make it
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
Big Kev
|
Posted - 24/09/2007 : 17:09
Are you sure that's where you put it?
Big Kev
It doesn't matter who you vote for, you always end up with the government.  |
panbiker
|
Posted - 24/09/2007 : 17:32
Belle, it may not have been added yet by the admin members. If you want to post it straight into your topic before its added to the list of new pics, you have to grab the URL as soon as you have uploaded the picture. That's how I normally do it.
As soon as the picture has uploaded you should see a screen with the URL on it. Highlight this line and copy it into the insert picture box. Alternatively, you can paste the link into a temporary text document and save it. You can then retrieve the URL at your lesiure. The screen with the URL on it will only stay on the screen for about 30 seconds so you have to be quick. If you miss it you will have to wait until admin moderates your picture and adds it to the gallery.
Ian |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 24/09/2007 : 17:32
Can't find hide nor hair of it Belle. Post it again.....
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
moh
|
Posted - 24/09/2007 : 20:28
It is a complete mystery this posting of pictures - how come some members find it so easy?
Say only a little but say it well |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 25/09/2007 : 07:03
Because they have hit all the rocks! Like anything else it is easy once you get it right. Here's my way.....
POSTING PICS
posting pics..... Make sure the pic is JPEG. Adjust size to 7" maximum dimension at 72dpi for colour and 9" max dimension for B&W. Save the adjusted pic in a folder dedicated to OG pics on your hard drive. Pick a time when the web is quiet and our server isn't under pressure, early in the morning, late at night or weekend. On Photos menu at top of page > Main Directory>submit pic. (long way round but most reliable way). Fill in the submit form and when you click on 'browse' to find your pic, go to your OGFB pics folder. Click on the pic you want to upload and then click submit on the form. If you've done everything right and you have a good connection to the server you will get a dialogue box that tells you your pic has been accepted. If you want to post that pic in a topic, highlight and copy the top URL by clicking on it and dragging cursor across it and right clicking for copy. Navigate back to the topic and in the edit box click on the 'submit image' icon, paste in the site URL and click submit. Your pic will appear in the edit box. Hit return until the cursor is below the pic and carry on. Keywords are just a way of helping the search engine to find the pics. I never bother but give a descriptive title as the search engine scans that as well. Once you have cracked it posting pics is easy. Time out error means the server is busy, wait 'til later or try again. Most common user error is wrong format or wrong size. It’s not a good idea to link pics in from another site, this can cause problems. Have the file physically present on your hard drive, that way you can be sure of access.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
belle
|
Posted - 25/09/2007 : 16:27
I did it the way you said and it told me it was being moderated, i did another one entitled Caravan, and it was alos being moderated...who knows where they are now...will send the pics to you Stanley, if they don't turn up in a day or so.
Life is what you make it |
Ringo
Site Administrator
3793 Posts
|
|
Posted - 25/09/2007 : 17:36
I aint seen the missing picture either
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 26/09/2007 : 07:12
Send me the files Belle and I'll post them for you. They haven't appeared in the task list for moderators...... Something to do with your operating system perhaps. Did you know that the first motorised vehicle to exceed 100mph was a Stanley Steamer?
(Wykepedia) The Stanley (nicknamed Stanley Steamer) was a steam-powered automobile produced by the Stanley Motor Carriage Company. In 1906, the Stanley Rocket set the world land speed record at 127.7 mph (205.5 km/h) at the Daytona Beach Road Course, driven by Fred Marriott, picking up the Dewar Trophy in the process. This is still officially recognized as the land speed record for a steam car. The Steamer enjoyed a boom in the early 1900s before eventually being overtaken technologically by the internal combustion engine.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
panbiker
|
Posted - 26/09/2007 : 13:00
Your name gets everywhere Stanley! next thing we know, they'll be using it on DIY tools
Ian |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 26/09/2007 : 16:23
The best tool for the job........
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
pluggy
|
Posted - 29/09/2007 : 12:07
Yeek, if I had to go through all that to post a picture I wouldn't bother.
With the right software uploading to a plain old ftp site is drag and drop.
One or two issues, in what way does linking to another site cause problems ?. The forum script just sends out a url and the users browser puts up the picture. It neither knows nor cares what is in the URL, its just more text it pulled out of a database and assemblede into a viewable web page, it only knows its a picture because you told it.
Hosting the picture elsewhere will reduce the load on a struggling server and reduce the bandwidth bills if you pay by the Gb.
What difference does colour or B&W make ?, the issues with pictures on forums are them being too large to fit on the users screen, there is no way to know who or waht is going to display the picture, so its better kept small. Pixels are what counts, but inches and DPI are just the same units. 72DPI at 7" is 504 pixels. The other issue is file size which isn't an exact science especially with JPGs. It depends as much on the JPG compression as anything else. Colour or B&W makes comparitively little difference with JPG, its easily possible to have the same sized B&W much larger file size than a colour.
As an example,heres two pictures, both the same, but saved at opposite ends of JPG compression. One shows slightly less 'JPG artifacts' , but it is 30 times the file size. 12 kb vs 370 kb . The smaller puts a lot less strain on the server, but these are on my server, which doesn't load OG at all.
Edited by - pluggy on 29 September 2007 12:15:45
Edited by - pluggy on 29 September 2007 12:17:18
Need computer work ?
"http://www.stsr.co.uk" 
Pluggy's Household Monitor |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 29/09/2007 : 15:26
I've said it before and I'll say it again, even though nobody takes any notice.Save your photos at 300dpi but with a pixel dimension of 650 x 450, JPG high or medium. Not only is the resulting filesize manageable, but anyone downloading your picture in future will get much better results. The better the screen and/or printer, the clearer your pic will be. If you have nothing better to do with your time, compare the output from a photo with a physical size of 7" and 72dpi, with one of the same physical size (7") but 300dpi and 650px. Then enlarge both. If you DO have better things to do, just take my word for it. Pluggy is right about the pixel thing, but I would feel more comfortable if the photos I submit are kept with the rest of OGFB material, especially as a remote server may go bump just when someone is trying to access them from OGFB. If OneGuy's server is down, they wouldn't be looking at them anyway so there would be no confusion. |
pluggy
|
Posted - 29/09/2007 : 17:01
It depends on how your software manages DPI , if it actually saves at 650*450 Pixels it will look crap when you enlarge it whatever you do to the settings. None of the software I have uses DPI at all, its meaningless when you don't have control of the viewing medium. Set a 17" CRT monitor to 800 * 600 and its approximately 64 DPI, The 17" LCD I have at 1280*1024 comes out at 96DPI and Apples iPhone and later iPods have 200 DPI. Multiply Dots Per Inch by Inches and you're left with Dots (or Pixels in computer speak). When stuff is printed on physical paper DPI means something, it doesn't with web images.
To get similar quality to a real photo, you'll need around 1000 DPI or better depending on the grain of the film. In the real world you're unlikely to notice below about 500 if they are printed using a photographic process or 300 printed on an Inkjet. Modern Digital Cameras (say 6 megapixel - 3000 * 2000 pixels) will stand about 8" by 6" without out giving away they are digital to the naked eye.
I'd happily use OG for pictures if uploading them wasn't such a lottery, it wasn't so involved and the URL's didn't alter when Stanley does some houskeeping. But each to their own.
Need computer work ?
"http://www.stsr.co.uk"
Pluggy's Household Monitor |
Callunna
Revolving Grey Blob
3044 Posts
|
|
Posted - 29/09/2007 : 18:36
quote:
if it actually saves at 650*450 Pixels it will look crap when you enlarge it
Forgive me - I'm obviously not explaining myself very well. The fact that I'm a graphic designer who has to deal with images professionally on a day-to-day basis should give me a bit of cred here, but from Pluggy's comment it's clear that I'm not explaining the technique very well.
I've just printed out one of the Broadhead collection photos to make sure I'm not talking rubbish. It was saved in Photoshop with a pixel width of 650x451 and a dpi of 300. The actual physical width was 5.5cm (2.1 inches). Of course, if you print it out at 100% it's small, but if anyone wishes to use the photo, they can enlarge the file within the computer. Because it was saved with 300dpi, it will still have 300dpi whether you enlarge it to 8 inches, 24 inches or whatever. The tonal information is still contained in the file.
To prove this to myself, I changed the same file's physical dimensions (in Photoshop) from 2.1" to 10" wide and it printed out perfectly.
But of course, if I saved it like this it would be a larger size (in kilobytes). You could keep the physical size at 7" and drop the dpi to 72, but in doing so you will permanently erase much of the tonal information so that if anyone wanted to output it at 24" the resulting photo would not look so good.
Keeping the image at 300dpi but reducing pixel width allows much more flexibility while keeping the filesize small.
I use Photoshop, but I believe this can be done in many other programs. If you wanted to cheat, just press the Auto button when you're in the Image Size window. You can choose a few alternatives and Photoshop works it out for you.
I can only assume people disagree with me because they don't understand the technique & principles, and if I still haven't explained it well enough, then I apologise. But I can't stress enough how much more valuable and useful an image will be for future historians if my suggestions are taken on board. |
pluggy
|
Posted - 29/09/2007 : 20:17
It works in photoshop. It doesn't work when its reduced to a lowly jpg which is what the web uses.
I'm a website maintainer not a Graphic designer.
As an illustration heres a 4:1 zoom of the first picture you posted in 'The Broadhead Collection' thread, Its done in Macromedia Fireworks, not quite in the same league as photoshop but it does the DPI zoom trick when its working on its own files, but it just plain doesn't when its reduced to a humble JPG. Its just plain 650 * 449 and when you zoom the pixels just get bigger.
What a graphics package can do and what the web can do are two different things.
Try loading one of the .JPG files you posted back into photoshop (Not the original, the one on OG) and see if its any different to what I've posted. 4:1 should work fine as 300dpi down to 72dpi is about the same scaling.
Need computer work ?
"http://www.stsr.co.uk"
Pluggy's Household Monitor |
Early transport
