Author Topic: 100kb why  (Read 4334 times)

The-Knot-Man

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
100kb why
« on: February 19, 2011, 11:39:11 PM »
Why only 100kb per picture? i find this (and so do a lot of youngsters i know) very frustrating.
As some of the work i have done, i no longer have but have the pictures & would like to show
I also have some pictures of times gone by of wire splicing that will interest some people but AGAIN i'm limited to
what i can show because 100kb per picture
Come on IGKT let can we increase the size of KB so we can see more youngsters & newbies showing there work   

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1882
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2011, 11:55:02 PM »
Good day Knot-Man.

I know it is frustrating, the 100kb limit to each attachment, but we've been making do for a while now. Perhaps in the near future the forum will support higher sized attachments.
But, for now you could use an image resizer ,if you have Windows and want a free image resizing program go to this page >

 http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powertoys/xppowertoys.mspx

Scroll down the right side of the page till you find >

"Image Resizer
Download   ImageResizer.exe
521 KB 2 min @ 28.8 Kbps"

Download and install.
From there on out, if you want to make an image smaller all you have to do is right click on the image or images (can do batch resizing) and pick from the small window that will open, what you want to do.
Make sure to click on the small window where it says "advanced" and put a check in the square that reads "Make pictures smaller but not larger". Then click "OK".
I usually will make a smaller copy of the picture as to Not alter the original.

The program works for Windows 7 as well.

Totally safe and totally free. Best of all, it works flawlessly every time.

Hope this helps.

SS

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1841
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2011, 12:14:14 AM »
Why only 100kb per picture? i find this (and so do a lot of youngsters i know) very frustrating.
As some of the work i have done, i no longer have but have the pictures & would like to show
I also have some pictures of times gone by of wire splicing that will interest some people but AGAIN i'm limited to
what i can show because 100kb per picture
Come on IGKT let can we increase the size of KB so we can see more youngsters & newbies showing there work  
Keep in mind that it's also very frustrating for people with slower connections to wait and wait and wait for needlessly huge pictures to download all because someone didn't bother to scale and crop their picture down to a reasonable size.  

Correct formatting helps as well.  Use .jpg format for pictures and .png or .gif format for diagrams. 

« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 12:20:27 AM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


The-Knot-Man

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2011, 01:51:33 AM »
Thanks for the reply guys
I seemed to have ruffled some feathers in the senior members (sorry for that)
It's just in other knot tying forum sites you can upload/download Video
All i'm saying is in this modern day & age connection are a lot faster & if you
don't have fast connection speed YES you can crop & paste
In all, this is a very good site but lets "Knot" get left behind in the technology race
i think 100KB is shameful
Needless to say i my be kicked off this site for what i've written
but maybe what i've written is what a lot of other people are thinking

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1841
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2011, 02:35:01 AM »
i think 100KB is shameful
Needless to say i my be kicked off this site for what i've written
but maybe what i've written is what a lot of other people are thinking
If you can't communicate even the largest knot structure in under 100k, you need to re-evaluate your methods.  We don't need to see individual rope fibers in 24 trillion colors. ;D   The attached image started at 1.3MB and was reduced to 13k with Paint.Net (freely available), and later became a 5k cartoon.

You won't be kicked off the site for asking for bloated image posting capabilities.  I can't remember anyone getting kicked off this forum for anything with the exception of spambots.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 03:05:39 AM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2011, 07:31:51 AM »
i think 100KB is shameful
Needless to say i my be kicked off this site for what i've written
but maybe what i've written is what a lot of other people are thinking
If you can't communicate even the largest knot structure in under 100k, ...

Hmmm, might not be so simple for good decorative work, which can
have a lot of detail to resolve.  I took a quick scan of the Decorative
sub-forum, but didn't quickly find anything very large that would
demand the resolution.

 - - - - -

Btw, reverse the tail's reeving in that eyeknot and you have what I
call the "quick-8" --which seems to hold well in normal loading w/o
further precaution, but for safety I loop the tail to tuck down through
the eye-end loop of the fig.8 base between the eye-legs.  THIS knot
held in 12-strand Dyneema, no slipping.  (wasn't all so strong, but
maybe in climbing rope a different story on that will hold)


--dl*
===

knot4u

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2011, 08:46:02 AM »
http://tinypic.com/  8)

1.3 MB on my computer before uploading


Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2011, 10:19:24 PM »
http://tinypic.com/  8)

1.3 MB on my computer before uploading

So, not a 100kb-limited file attachment, then?

Here's something more complex to resolve, put in lowest JPEG (iPhoto)
and nearly at the limit (96kb), 888 pixels long dimension.

 :)

roo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1841
    • The Notable Knot Index
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2011, 10:23:21 PM »
http://tinypic.com/  8)

1.3 MB on my computer before uploading

Looks like 920k as displayed.  So at 7kbps that would take over 2 minutes. Edit:  On second look, it's looks like 85k.  I wonder what happened.  

In contrast, look at the 10k size of the image attached as reduced with standard old MS Paint (it'd take just over a second):
« Last Edit: February 23, 2011, 10:44:10 PM by roo »
If you wish to add a troll to your ignore list, click "Profile" then "Buddies/Ignore List".


dmacdd

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • My Knot Pages
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #9 on: February 28, 2011, 07:25:45 AM »
Why only 100kb per picture? i find this (and so do a lot of youngsters i know) very frustrating.

100 kB is far greater storage space than is needed for high quality knot pictures on the web. Reducing the file size to well below 100 kB without detectable visual degradation is dead easy with free photo processing software.

On PCs (Computers that run Microsoft Windows) the best free software for photo manipulation is IrfanView.  This software is so good that I run Windows 7 in Bootcamp on my Mac in order to be able to use it on my Mac (and admittedly a couple of other programs that don't have good or affordable alternatives in the Mac world.)

Go to http://www.irfanview.com/ and download both IrfanView and the Addon/Plugins file.  Install them.   Use IrfanView to resize your photo to a jpg of a size that is good for the IGKT site. I find 450 to 600 pixels wide is about right. Then pull down the file menu and click the "Save for Web" item, which will be present or work only if you have installed the Addons.  You will be presented with a compression dialogue window with before and after images and a slider that allows you to select the quality and file size of the jpg representation of the image size (pixel width and height) you have chosen. You will be amazed to see how good the visual quality of the result is, even at a total file size way smaller than 100 kB.

dmacdd

  • Exp. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 120
    • My Knot Pages
Re: 100kb why
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2011, 02:43:42 AM »

Here's something more complex to resolve, put in lowest JPEG (iPhoto)
and nearly at the limit (96kb), 888 pixels long dimension.


Dan sent me the 3 MB original jpeg of his lobster pot photo which he resized and compressed with Mac iPhoto to 888x590 and 96 kB to upload for the quoted post.

I used the Save for Web ... (Plugin) function of the file menu of the IrfanView app for Windows on Windows 7 to produce another 888x590 and 98 kB version of this photo.

I attach it.

There are other paths through Irfanview to resize and compress this photo. None of them produces quality this good except using Save for Web of the File menu for both resizing and compressing in a single invocation of Save for Web.

Open this attachment and the one from Dan's post, http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2892.msg17361#msg17361, in different windows for simultaneous viewing to compare the quality of the iPhoto and IrfanView processing of the image.

I cannot detect a difference of quality between these reduced photos. I do see a big difference of quality between the reduced photos and the original photo (3008 x 2000 pixels x 24 bits/pixel, 2.87 MB).   Much more fine detail is visible in the original.  For example, it is easy to see at a glance  that a simple overhand knot forms the loop in the bridal on each pot to which the surface line is fastened by a double becket bend. In the reductions, we feel the need to compare and contrast several of the examples in the photo before reaching this conclusion.

This knots-in-the-wild photo may be typical of the documentation requirements of such knot photography, but close-up studio photography of knots on a table top is much less demanding of resolution.  Such photographs typically provide a sense of detail and reality even in an image size of  400 pixels wide with a file size of 30 kB or less.

David
« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 09:03:56 AM by dmacdd »