I thought bandwidth WAS the issue for only allowing one upload per day? If not, then why are they charging $5 to have a higher upload limit? That is SURELY to cover bandwidth costs. Someone else did the math on this in another thread..when you have a lot of people uploading large images contsantly, and others requesting those images while surfing the galleries, bandwidth on a place like this can turn into a nightmare...exponentially! And bandwith overages can be EXPENSIVE. I know I wouldn't want to pay the bill here for bandwidth..and I run 5 dedicated servers as well as about 40 sites and have bandwidth coming out my ears. I still think the one a day is too restrictive...perhaps X many a week would be more convenient to artists, although that may pose a programming problem on the technical end. If its possible to limit downloads to 2-3 times like at DAZ, then why not the reverse? It IS possible using a SQL backend to track it. When you hit 7 in a week period, thats it. Bandwidth would still be the same, but convenience would be better. I know it bugs me to not be able to upload 2 or 3 at a time...but then again, I only post about once a month. One reason to control overall size (not weight, although that IS an issue) is to preserve the site layout as well as make it easy for people to view images. Large images that make me scroll forever simply confuse my overall interpretation of the piece, since I cant see it "in context"...only in sequential "chunks". I assume the reason to post is for others to view. So why make it hard on them? 4000 x 4000 is QUITE generous since most people, even if at VERY high resolution, don't set their screens over 1100-1200 or so. Even at 1600, a 4000 x 4000 image is still a scrolling pain. Pick a reason...any reason...above...all are valid and have nothing to do with raining on anyone's parade..its just simple math, economics and usability...skills anyone running a site should employ. It's not irrational to simply ask the question.

Rendo Store | Freebies | RDNA Store