What's the deal with those? Do you click on them? Sometimes I wonder if the poster of those images is being lazy, other times I think it's their first post and they didn't realize they could create a thumbnail, and then the other option is that they are deliberately creating mystery, and will lead to more hits. Your thoughts? (Would love to hear from people who post images without thumbs) Personally, I never bother to look at the images that lack thumbnails. My motto is "It's all about the thumb."

I won't look at them. I'm afraid to...

I look at images based on the following: 1) interesting thumbnail (not booby thumbnails but other body parts, interesting colors, etc). I really don't like when the thumbnail is just the image shrunk to thumbnail size. 2) The title of the image. Sometimes the thumbnail is not that good but a title will grab my attention. This applies mainly to the "no thumb" images and the booby thumbnail images.

I actually prefer "shrunk to thumbnail" over "cropped". I find the crop thumbnails often misslead and given my conventional art background I prefer a view of the overall composition before I click. It takes a gallery image 3-5 minutes to load with my dial-up connect. I never read titles... part of my whole organic cortex based banner filtering software maybe?

Momodot, I like your response "I'm afraid to." You're right. In addition to the other possibilities I listed in my first post of this thread, there is the option of the image being too "ominous" to merit a thumb!

The few times I've clicked an image without a thumb, it became obvious why they didn't include a thumb - the pic sucked. I no longer bother to view thumbless pics as there are many excellent images with thumbnails, and only so many hours in a day. On a related note: ever notice that "cropped" thumbnails are generally better "composed" than the full shot? There's something about the decision of where to crop the thumbnail that forces a person to focus on whats the real point of their pic. Many gallery images are disappointing compared to the well-focused thumbnail.

If the artist spent enough time to make a creative thumbnail, chances are he/she did the same with the entire image. I'll give it a click.

I like the element of surprise that a cropped thumbnail provides.

I think most of the thumbless images are made by newbies who don't know how to make thumbnails.

never go there,

No thumb...no look. Also, I click on a thumb & appears to "normal" & I get to the image & it's nothing but big hooters or other various naked parts...I will never look at that person art ever again.

To me, if the thumb nail is missing or too vauge, I skip it!

Wolfman

Message edited on: 04/28/2005 13:13

Is there something wrong with not making a thumbnail? I think it adds an element of surprise to the image.

My first ever image didn't have a thumbnail. I didn't know how to make one. So sue me. :P

There are just so many pic's in the gallery these days, that I have to skip most of the ones with a thumb. I feel the odds that a thumb less pic might actually be worth the view are so small, that I never even click them anymore.

There's nothing wrong about not making a thumbnail, but with um. over 300 images uploaded each day, gallery viewer seems to be um...'selective', so I'd say a nice thumbnail would help your image getting noticed. Lemme see, hold on Paul, what is my lawyer's phone number... :o)

JV - :P :D

I dont look at images without thumbnails. I barly have time to look at the images that do have thumbnails that are interesting. As to making thumbnails, I crop selectively to try to gain interest. Giving a full view of the image is like telling someone the punch line in hopes they will want to hear the joke. In some cases people are giving away the punch line in their cropped thumbnail. Those enormous breasts are funny, arent they?

Yeah, a nice cropped thumbnail is a fun chalenge to make (I know cause I have done them realizing no one else likes full size down) and having the image revealed is fun (though not I am sorry to say at 1.5kb/sec! but that is my problem not the artist's). I was serious though, I don't clik blank thumbnails because I'm afraid I'll open something realy disturbing that I'll have to down a fith of scotch to get out of my head... its happened. The TOS is quite restrictive in some ways but I have seen some pretty messed up stuff in the galleries by accident... aparently you can do absolutly anything with a Vicky mesh so long as she has her breast size dialed way up!

I never look at images that don't have thumbnails. Besides, creating the right thumbnail can be an art itself. Eddie

Momodot, I don't do the full size image scaled down for the thumbnail because often it will make the file size of the thumbnail too small and then you have to adjust resolution to get it to upload. I won't even look at an image without a thumbnail and I look at the thumbnails to rule out images I don't want to look at like the over abundance of nudie pin-ups...

PapaBlueMarlin, I agree with you, but sometimes the crop disguises the genre (unintentionally I'm sure) and a few times I feel I have been "tricked" into viewing nasty stuff by people cropping to some innocuous part of the image. But you are absolutly right, usualy good crop thumbnails are fun to see "opened up" and few things looked good straight scalled down I know.

It would be much simpler if a thumbnail could be automatically created from the image...as they do at Poser Pros.

I do it sometimes when I forget that Renderosity doesn't do the auto thumbnail, etc. and I don't normally post that often so it slips my mind.

I like creating my thumbnails. A good thumbnail has tremendous impact on the number of hits you get. I like to play with thumbnails and see how I can influence the number of hits. It's all about marketing--crass, I know, but such is the world in which we live. If ya' can't beat 'em, join 'em, I says.

No thumbnail, no looky. It's hard enough to veiw some that interest me with this slow dialup. Which brings me to the file size, I check that to before I look. I still haven't figured out why people need to have such big file sizes. The top 20 are bad for that. I see so many that have the same quality image with half the file size.

To be honest, I rarely visit the gallery. About the only time I do is if I see a post here where someone is talking about their gallery, or asking for input on an image.

When I DO have the time (and patience with R'City...one of the slowest sites on the web) to look through the galleries, I skip thumbless images. I assume like others above have...no thumb is an indication of the quality of the image I will be waiting on R'City to show me. Now, if this site were as fast as most others on the Web...might be a different story.

i look at both with or without thumbnails, its the titles that grab me, having one item in my gallery without a thumb because i had went back to edit and forgot the thumbnail i left it off and it still has over 100 hits, not that the amount of hits matters in all honesty the one person who it mattered most to me seeing it, did and she loved it.. So maybe ppl are missing out on the best images because they are picky and wont click on an image without a thumbnail.. IMO

So maybe ppl are missing out on the best images because they are picky and wont click on an image without a thumbnail.. IME, that is rarely the case. Nine times out of ten, it's a newbie who doesn't know how to make thumbnails. :-) In any case, there are so many images in the galleries. It's like trying to drink from a firehose. No way can one person look at every image. A good thumbnail is essential.

that is true randy, my comment was not meant to piss someone off and i know that's not what you are getting at but rather clarifying for me that is the general case in no thumbs ^.~

I use thumbnails as a means of filtering the images, the same way an editor uses a query letter to decide if they want to hear more from the author. I use the "no thumbnail" thing as an automatic "no click". bonni

Sometimes, if I'm really bored, I'll click on a thumbless image, out of sheer curiosity. I almost always regret doing so....

Like Mariana, the title of an image attracts me more than a thumbnail. I almost always pick a movie by how much I like the title of it. If I don't like the title, there is slim chance that I'll like the movie. I find this to be true nearly 100% of the time, no matter how attractive they make the lead-in clips look. I use the same criteria for browsing art galleries on the net.