Why is it that people post work that is far too big to see without having to scroll across the screen?
I have a 17" monitor set at 1024 x 768. Even if I bang up the 'rosity page to max size I still find myself having to scroll around to see the whole pic.

I would like to suggest that if you want to do a BIG render, post here (and the gallery) at around 800 x 600 and stick the big version on your websites. I know some of you already do this, but I see less and less of these as time goes by.

Another prob - especially when you only have dial-up (not broadband) - I think the kb of the pic is important. I hate having to wait for ages while a picture loads. 200-250kb is big enough to see the quality of work. Again, if you have an issue with this - why not post it on your own website or ask someone to host it for you.

Message edited on: 08/13/2004 08:38

Message edited on: 08/13/2004 08:39

I'll second that! Or if one doesn't have a website setup, at least mention the image size if it's larger than XGA size. The best bet though is to save the huge pics for the printer, and use smaller sizes that will fit on the screen when sharing on the web. Also some compression couldn't hurt. My rule of thumb is to keep file sizes around 100KB for a 800 x 600, and around 160 KB for 1024 x 768.

after hearing the same gripe about that from others i've always made my forum images to be 800x600. In my gallery, the general size is an atipic 1124xsomething. If you wanna see it all, you could just save it on your computer and load it in an image viewer. that will make the image look smaller. shrug E~ (and i never go past 300kb on my pics in the gallery unless i have to for quality's sake)

I have a 1400 x 1050 monitor, my laptop will yell at me if I set it at anything else, of course I have cable internet as well. But some images still go beyond the scope of my screen. What I do (since I'm so crafty and stuff) is take the image and copy it into a new Internet Explorer (if I really want to see it). IE resizes the image automatically. Thank you for mentioning a final image size. Us cable users sometimes forget about having to wait for a pic to download. 200kb sounds reasonable, especially at 800 x 600. Anything less than 800 x 600 gets a little hard to make out details however.

yeah, there's really no need to go smaller than 800x600... Don't feel bad, Bryster, i've got my Dinosaur of a machine set up at 1152x864 and i have problems seeing all these works...it's a shame, because most of them are beautiful.

I thought the max file size for posting was 150kb.

i know i do tend to be guilty of posting bigger renders occasionally, but in answer to one of the comments, the image/file size is indicated under each thumbnail.

Hmm... I agree to a certain extent. I do not think that images should all be 800 X 600 though. 1024 by 768 perhaps, that's what mine tend to be when I do a large render.

I agree with Bryster. When an image is so big that I have to scroll around to see the entire image, the full effect of that image is lost. I also experience problems where the thumbnail image looks great, but when I click to see the larger image, it is banded. Meaning that the colors don't blend into each other like they should, but are broken up into areas of solid colors. this seems to happen with the "larger than screen" images too. I've never experienced this with images that fit my screen and I have a 21" monitor.

Man you have mentioned one of my pet peeves! HUGE file sizes. I am on dial up as well. The 500KB images are killing me. And I just dont get how some images can be 800x600 and weigh in at 400KB. I think its just a fact of some people not knowing how to compress their image and/or having broadband and not caring. Maybe we need a couple tutorials focusing on several programs (Photoshop, Photopaint, etc.) and how to compress images in them? Then have links to em on the top of this forum and the gallery. Just my thoughts.

800 x 600 images that are 400kb - its beacuse the members save the jpg at FAR too high a quality. When your program uses a percentage, I have found the sweet spot to be around 85%, depending on the pic. Let me look, we may already have some tutorials sitting around on image compression.... AS

OK Striving! Here goes! Tut for compressing Jpegs in PSP7. Open your finished render in PSP7 Click IMAGE on the top toolbar. Go to RESIZE. Re-size your image to 800 x 600 (Or whatever provided it meets the above criterior.) Go to FILE and select EXPORT. Select JPEG OPTIMIZER Select USE WIZARD (bottom left of box) Move the SLIDER UP to the top. Hit NEXT. Wait for the COMPRESSED SIZE to tell you how big your image will be. If it is more than say 250kb hit the BACK button and move the SLIDER down slightly. Hit NEXT. Repeat until you have the right kb size. Hit FINISH and use the SAVE COPY AS box as normal. Post your new file on Renderosity. There ya go!

Slakker: I don't feel bad. I've given up on opening images that are too big to see in one shot. And if they are taking forever to load, I give up and look at someone elses. I'm only on this planet till my lift arrives and that'll be that.......It's the guy who's posting that's losing out. I NEVER post bigger than 800x600 these days. I don't even want to wait for my own stuff to d/l.....LOL

Wow...Never thought about it....Maybe thats why I went from 1000+ views down to just Hundreds...And I usually like to stay around 239kb...

I publish at my screen size as they are my wallpapers and it's what most of my friends are set at as well. I do however keep the image size to between 180k and 270k (for a 1280x1024 jpg)

I'm afraid I'm just a selfish bar-steward and have 3mb cable link and 1400 res screen. But I do try to keep images at around 180k and pretty much render in Bryce at 950 pixels wide (the frame I put on adds 56 pixels). Not sure what we should do about this. Should we all run at the pace of the slowest runner, or present pictures in the way we think they look best? (Sorry for the mixed metaphor, I ran out of ideas)

I used to be on dial up. Used, and still do, Mozilla. Right-click, Open in New Tab(not New Window), meanwhile you keep scrolling down the gallery page to see any others you want to look at. Get to the bottum, hit next. While that page is loading, look over the opened tabs of the pics you want to check. Doesn't do to badly. Course, I am spoilled now with cable . . . :-p

I'm still on dial up. Tabbed browsing is so sweet!

Ain't it though! Suprised Microsoft hasn't caught on yet. Well on the other hand, no I am not.

Tabbed browsing? What's that? I keep intending to download Firefox but on dialup I HATE downloading anymore. I always lose the connection or something with 1kb to go (after waiting for hours). Ugh!

I've been with compuserve on their dial-up for years and its rock solid. I think I have lost the connection about 4 or 5 times in the last 12 years.