Hi all. I'm currently working on an image full of lots of many of tiny details, and I'm considering posting it in full size. Usually I render at 1100x880 and resize to 1024x819 for gallery posting. This time, I'd like to go with the full 1280x1024, so: I know that many Rosity users have a 1024x768 res and my question is simple: generally speaking, are you annoyed when you see a gallery posting that doesn't fit into your screen and you have to scroll to see it? Excusing my "Italian Morning" English, yours faithfully. S.

In general, if the pic looks good it doesn't worry me if I have to scroll. So, yours won't worry me.

No, if I get ansy to see the whole thing...I'll copy and resize it. But generally I'm set at 1280x1024.

BIG IS BEAUTIFUL

Although YOUR images are never really affected by a resize, no matter what resizing reduces (mathematically) an image's detail. And also, locking into a screen's aspect ratio might limit your art, your "shot"... If anything, it would be best to be locked into DPI modes. Just make your picture, don't even bother lowering it's resolution! Some of my rigs are at 800x600, some are at 1600x1200. But the average is closer to 1024x768...

Post'em Big. AS

I don't mind big as long as the image is a good one. Doublecrash, it's guarenteed that it's good so just like AgentSmith said, "Post 'em big." MD :)

Hi there is a similar thread in the poser forum and I think that the consensus would be screen res for gallery and a link to the larger version. Scrolling an image does annoy me but thats me (I havn't got any image editing sofware at work) but this brings a point If I was to copy an image for this purpose would I not be breaking copyright/tos etc? Dave

As long as you crunch the kb down as low as you can go without screwing up the image, I don't care how much scrolling I have to do. But make sure the details are worth it on a larger image.

I really dont mind if i have to scroll to view all of an image. If the mood takes me i often set the piccy as my desktop and have a proper good look Stash ;0)

if its a good image from the part you can already see, then I dont have a problem scrolling!

I've yet to meet a Texan who wants tiny pics..go get 'em, y'all..;)

Image size doesn't matter - the image itself does. I am happy with larger images, even if I have to scroll to see them. I started to post larger images some weeks ago, too - I didn't wanted to resize them because of the details which are better in large renders. Plus - I've started to use an unusual image size of 1200 x 600 because I like the panorama look of it. So - go on and post your large works, I'm looking forward to it! Greets, Jimi

Bigger is better....

Sorry, I hate images you have to scroll to see. I run at 1024x768 and I want to see pics all in one shot. I know this is a problem for you folks who want to pack as much as you can into a pic but here you go! 0.02p

Doesn't bother me, I run at 1280x1024 as my native format. All my renders are sized for my wallpaper then reframed/resampled for 1024x768 for posting.

No Problem to me DC.... I like 'em big... 8) errr.... the pics that is. lol

I don't particularly mind scrolling, but an image can lose overall impact when you don't look at it all at once. Of course, I also enjoy looking at little details. Maybe post both versions and make a note that one is full size?

Thanks for the input. 'Twas something I was really curious about.

I like screen size (XGA 1024x768), but if you want bigger I'm not gonna stop you. All I'd suggest is something in the caption or thumb that lets people know ahead of time. Or even do two versions, I doubt there's a rule against it. It'll just be one less new gallery image for a day.

Methinks it's always best to make them big. Computer screens are cool, but printed art is much more important in the long run. Plus, even though you lose some detail, one can always resize an image DOWN, but it would lose MASSIVE detail when resizing up. It's a bit of a compromise situation...