I would like to suggest that all thumbnail pics uploaded here be required to be the 'full' version of the upload submitted and not partial or hidden versions of such uploads. Would help us ancient, SLOW speed dial-uppers in perusing the gallery. I download at approximately 2.7 kbps in my country location. There is no DSL or Cable available in this area as it is too far from city limits. And, microwave wireless will not work in this area due to large wooded terrain/trees. Thanks kindly, for any consideration. Much appreciated. T.P.

Message edited on: 07/14/2005 13:35

Message edited on: 07/14/2005 13:36

In most cases it won't allow you to see enough of the detail which is why I won't do it. Unless a thumbnail is deceptive, regardless of how cropped it is you should be able to tell approximately what the image is.

An eye catching thumbnail is an art in and of itself. To require the artist to show the entire image seems to be limiting the creative process. These sites are graphic intensive by their very nature. I would imagine that at least 75% of the planet is on some kind of broadband connection.It doesn't seem fair to set that kind of condition just to accommodate the small percentage of those still on dial-up. Just my opinion Tom

"I would like to suggest that all thumbnail pics uploaded here be required to be the 'full' version of the upload submitted and not partial or hidden versions of such uploads." Isn't that kind of extreme to give up my freedom of expression for your convenience? what next, no more naked vickies? what's the fun of making art when you are limited with countless rules and regulations? one friendly suggestion: if you don't like the thumbnails, move on to the next pic. Live and let live, buddy. :oP

"I would imagine that at least 75% of the planet is on some kind of broadband connection.It doesn't seem fair to set that kind of condition just to accommodate the small percentage of those still on dial-up."

No it may not seem fair - but then Renderosity is a Business and as such should be attempting to reach the largest consumer base it can and strangely enough that includes folk on dial up connections.

Any experienced web designer will take careful note of page load times and try to stick within reasonable times based on 56 k.

IMHO - the problem with the galleries is that not enough people take the time to optimize their images properly.

Do you really need to post that image at maximum resolution and kb allowance? - there are plenty of graphics programs out there that optimize well for the web....

I think the poster has a valid point but it's not going to happen. The reason I think it's valid is that there are some [not a lot] but some people who put thumbnails up that have no relation to the actual image just to get hits. These are my personal views and in no way represent the site's views! thefixer, poser coord.

I do agree about the optimization. Don't-cha just love the 1280 X 1024 image where the subject only takes up a fraction of that with a plain white background? 8 ) Tom

I can think of one good effect from requiring that the full image appear in thumbnails --

Such a restriction would eliminate the "gotcha!" type posts that are put up from time to time.......usually with the annoying intent of teaching the rest of us a lesson.

However: I wouldn't be in favor of such a 'thumbnail rule' on general principles. I like to let people do what they want to do -- it's when they demand my approval for what they are doing that we've got a problem.

Many sites have automatic thumbnail creation. Personally- I like the idea :) I don't look at pics that aren't showen full thumb. Hate croped thumbs!

About 60-70% of users are still on dial-up. AFAIK some people use cropped thumbs because they are afraid nobody will click on their images if they see the whole thing in the thumb. However, automatic thumbnail generators are not a good idea, since they quickly become a major nightmare for gallery admins.

An eye catching thumbnail is an art in and of itself. To require the artist to show the entire image seems to be limiting the creative process.... ...one friendly suggestion: if you don't like the thumbnails, move on to the next pic. Live and let live, buddy. :oP I've done it both ways, sometimes it seems not to be worth it to see the full image if you've already seen the full thumb. OTOH you can also see a promising thumb and be disappointed that it doesn't fulfill that promise of what you thought it was. But what has already been brought up are the 2 most important points, since the thumbs are just as much a part of the creative imagery as the full size version so it's up to the artist to decide how they want to present them. It's up to the viewer to decide which images they want to look at. Those with dial-up have to make lots of choices depending on the limits of their connection, not just here but on the whole Internet.

I would like to suggest that all thumbnail pics uploaded here be required to be the 'full' version of the upload You're free to suggest anything you want. Others are free to ignore you. :-) bonni

"About 60-70% of users are still on dial-up. " Really? My estimate was mostly speculation based on the folks that I interact with. Rarely do I hear "I'm on dial-up so please be patient" or things like that. It seems everyone I know(Online and offline) is on broadband of some kind. It would make for an interesting poll. Tom

High Speed Cable here! :)

Attached Link: Image Link

Renderosity is a Business and as such should be attempting to reach the largest consumer base it can Sure, but the galleries aren't exactly necessary for doing business here, and REQURING all members to take a complete image and squash it down into a 200x200 thumbnail for the convienience of a few seems to be a bit draconian. ;-) bonni

Attached Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772589/

Really?

My estimate was mostly speculation based on the folks that I interact with. Rarely do I hear "I'm on dial-up so please be patient" or things like that. It seems everyone I know(Online and offline) is on broadband of some kind.*

Actually he's fairly close according to a year-old Pew poll, but I would imagine the numbers have dipped a few more percentage points against dial-up since that poll was taken.

As far as the PNG v. JPG test, I did fairly well. Thanks to "mjr" for making that available. Good info.

"200x200 thumbnail for the convienience of a few seems to be a bit draconian. ;-)"

Agreed - but what few are we talking about - the few that want to see the entire image thumbnailed or the supposed few that don't have broadband? If it's the latter than it is more than a few it's about 60% of the users......

So this is what I use now. It's less than 13kb.

Message edited on: 07/14/2005 22:48

"Actually he's fairly close according to a year-old Pew poll, but I would imagine the numbers have dipped a few more percentage points against dial-up since that poll was taken."

Bear in mind that that is US figures in that report I doubt if that would actually reflect the world wide situation as to broadband vs dialup

I don't personally like thumbnails that are just "the whole image" squashed into a teeny little version of itself. I prefer a cropped area, or a selected area. The quality and creativity of the thumbnail is a good indicator as to the quality and creativity of the picture, I find. bonni

Exactly, Bonni. :)

It's the Great Hunt for Hits.

Too bad that one cannot deposit gallery hits into your account down at your local bank...........

I don't really care what people choose to do with their thumbnail images. It's only childish attempts at misdirection that irritate me.

"Bear in mind that that is US figures in that report I doubt if that would actually reflect the world wide situation as to broadband vs dialup" Absolutely. Canada, Korea and Japan lead the way in Broadband. The U.S. lags far behind. In Korea and Japan, many are now enjoying 20 to 40 megabit connections at the price U.S. users are paying for DSL. Blame it on competition, greed and regulations. Most DSL is oversold. It'll take years for U.S. DSL to match what Japan and Korea have to offer. A new CO costs Verizon $1 million dollars to build.

For the staff, having the actual image as thumb is a big plus.To view as many images as we do each day/night, it means having to click them all to see what is behind.Gallery generated thumbs imho would be an assset. But I do like creativity in graphics, so be it as it be. I do however think that having to look at an image over 1280x1024 kind of discredits the overall webview.

For the staff, having the actual image as thumb is a big plus. Oh, that's a good point. One of my personal galleries uses auto-generated thumbnails, actually. That's more for my convienience than anything else. :-) I do still believe that making a good thumbnail is an art, but if/when R'sity ever managed to get the site changed over (I keep hearing mumblings that this is supposed to be happening) to PHP or whatever it is that they're doing, perhaps giving at least the option of auto-thumbnailing would be a good thing. bonni

PHP?

Oh, well......I suppose that the basic structure of every site should look like every other. BBC code for the masses! No matter where you go, there you are.

I wonder if a conversion over to PHP would wipe out all existing threads? Now THAT would be most unfortunate.

I suspect that about half of the old threads at Renderosity have vanished into the ether(net), anyway......

I hope that this site doesn't start to look like all the others. :sigh: I much prefer the chronological threads... especially like now when I have a month's worth of posts in the Poser Forum to go through. TallPockets, I have 2 dozen images in the galleries and every single one of them is a crop or an alternate view. I've tried the squished-down thumbnails and it makes havok of fine ink work and mush of a palette. I regard thumbnails as an inviting door or parted curtain... the viewer is invited to look inside. The viewer ought also to be rewarded for taking the time to click on an image, so I do try to only upload images worth taking the time to view. If the cropped image opens to something splendid or interesting, then I've done my job. I don't do misleading or gotcha thumbnails and I proceed to ignore people who do that. But I don't click on boob or butt shots anyway (and I'm sooooooo glad that I'm no longer a moderator!). If an artist is so desperate for hits that he has to show a crotch in the thumbnail, he perhaps isn't that great of an artist. I'd rather have a few perceptive viewers appreciate what I've done, than attract 500 pimply-faced boys who can't think beyond their gonads. Making a good thumbnail is a creative act, and ought to be appreciated on its own merits, not stifled and shut away. Carolly

*PHP?

Oh, well......I suppose that the basic structure of every site should look like every other. BBC code for the masses! No matter where you go, there you are.*

PHP is a coding language. There's no reason to think that because a site uses it for functions or inclusions, that the site necessarily has to look like any other.

It's as silly as assuming all web pages written in HTML must look the same!

bonni Message edited on: 07/15/2005 01:21

Most every PHP site that I've been to (which seems to be most all of them these days) tends to follow a basic structure.

Sure, the color schemes are different -- banners are different -- and so forth......

But the basic structure of the board is always the same.

It's sort of like fast food restaurants that all get their ingredients from the same distribution companies. One isn't surprised at how familiar the taste of the food is from one 'unique' place as compared to another.

PHP ain't bad. It's just that everybody's doin' it.

It's not the PHP doing it though! It's that people use pre-made scripts that happen to be written in PHP. bonni

TallPockets wrote above, "Would help us ancient, SLOW speed dial-uppers in perusing the gallery."

Ouch! LOL. Such vitriole cometh forth? And I thought this was a 'nice' place to visit? WINK.

Sorry to any so apparently deeply offended at my 'sugestion'. Not my intention. I peruse other artistic
websites that upload full only thumbs as S.O.P.

I will now ever so kindly ASK any wonderful artists
here, who are so inclined to help us dial-uppers peruse
these magnificent galleries and admire such great artistic endeavors, to simply consider this honest request.

This site crawls at times as all well know. It also takes forever to search at times as all well know. It often takes forever to view full artworks here as all well know. For those of you that have access to high internet speeds I bear no ill will. I wish ALL had access and could afford it, if offered in their particular area. There are many here who have some health concerns that may limit their viewing times even before all the above impediments.

And, to all here who will 'help' others see more of their majestic artistic works, a BIG thanks!

Thanks again, for all the comments and replies. PEACE & LOVE dear members.

TallPockets.

TallPockets, I'm going to ask you to look at 3 images in my gallery which perhaps can demonstrate my points. The 11th one in is "Cascade Creek". The thumbnail shows a bit of water. Open the image and scroll down to get the full effect of the falls. By doing so, you become a participant in the flow of the water, not just a casual glance-and-run viewer. The 6th one in is "Smotherhood". Because the thumbnail is full size, the "eye" of the elderly dryad is clearly visible and watching. In the main image, it would be easy to lose that eye under the smothering layers of lichens if you hadn't noticed it first. Finally, look at the second one in: "This Most Magical of Valleys". The colors of the cropped part in the thumbnail are almost natural, but a bit misty, like a high mountain entrance to Shangri-La. This isn't a "gotcha" image because the title sets the viewer up for something different. He might not be expecting the full joyous riot of exuberant (and excessively colorful) growth, however. :) Just as a thumbnail acts as a gateway, I chose to crop showing that entrance, and reinforcing the seclusion of this valley. Maybe more people would click on my images if I showed the entire scene in the thumbnail, but something vital in the viewing would be lost. Carolly

Someone mentioned earlier that thumbnails can be part of the creative process. Couldn't agree more. Many times, in fact, the thumbnail turns out much better than the actual image. Not to mention the really cool chrome and blurred signatures that cover the thumbnails. Keep 'em comin!

TallPockets: "I would like to suggest that all thumbnail pics uploaded here be required to be the 'full' version of the upload submitted and not partial or hidden versions of such uploads."

I totally agree. I really hate it when people post thumbnails that do not tell anything about the image. Often the thumbnail is just a tiny piece clipped from a corner of the image, not related to the actual image in any way. You are then forced to click on the useless thumbnail and wait ages for the image to download, often just to find out that the image is total crap.

JVRenderer : "Isn't that kind of extreme to give up my freedom of expression for your convenience?"

How does a suggestion for artists to use their brains and to do things the right way require you to "give up your freedom"? Why do you think viewers' convenience is a bad thing?

"one friendly suggestion: if you don't like the thumbnails, move on to the next pic."

But that is exactly why a good thumbnail is needed. If the thumbnail shows the image, then the viewer can decide whether or not he/she wants to wait for the actual image to download. But if the image is a cropped piece that does not tell anything about the image, the how on earth is the viewer supposed to be able to make the decision?

hawkfyr: "I would imagine that at least 75% of the planet is on some kind of broadband connection.It doesn't seem fair to set that kind of condition just to accommodate the small percentage of those still on dial-up."

You can imagine what you like, but it has nothing to do with reality. The studies I have seen indicate that only about 20% to 30% of net users have broadband connection.

However, having broadband connection does not mean that the images load instantly.

For example, I acquired a broadband connection few months ago. It is supposed to be able to do 1 Mbps, but in practice I rarely reach transfer speed above 250 kbps even for larger downloads. Thus, if my net connection was the only limiting factor, downloading a 500 kB image would take 20 seconds. That is too long time to spend to find out if the image is worth viewing.

However, the local connection is not the only limiting factor. Unless you are directly connected to Renderosity server, the internet is the limiting factor. Especially for international connections. In addition, Renerosity server is often very slow. When I click on some thumbnail, it typically takes anything from 20 sec to couple of minutes before the image even begins to load.

That is why a good thumbnail is needed. The thumbnail must tell to the viewer what the image contains so that he/she can decide whether or not the actual image is worth downloading.

The thumbnails are there for the viewer, they are not artist's playthings.

"The studies I have seen indicate that only about 20% to 30% of net users have broadband connection." Could you provide a link to back that up? At least I said I "imagined" and "speculated" my estimate. So far I've seen talk of studies and polls, but no data to back them up. And no...I won't go hunt them down for you. The burden of proof is on those claiming to have seen the polls and studies. I would imagine. Tom

Apparently pali didn't read Carolly's demostration which I thought made the point very clear. How is it using your brain thinking only there is only one way that is the "right" way? Seems to me that's avoiding it by expecting everything to be set to an arbitrary standard to follow.

Pali said: "How does a suggestion for artists to use their brains and to do things the right way require you to "give up your freedom"? Why do you think viewers' convenience is a bad thing?"

Art isn't about comformity or convenience. It is about conflict. It has to evoke 'emotions' (anger, horror, love, eroticism. etc...). Doing it the 'right' way is to conform to other's view and your art is lost the cookie cutter standard world.
God, I hate to think I have to solve a quadratic equation just putting up a thumbnail. I do art just to get away from using my brain. I doodle to unwind. I think I've used it enough on my day job. Oh, btw, I am using my brain, the "right" part of my brain, while my left part is resting.

JV :o)

Message edited on: 07/21/2005 12:01