It seems a lot of members do not 'cruise' the gallery looking at these so perhaps I am alone here, yet I find it astonishing the number of thumbnails that have no resemblance to the actual image.

I judge by the thumbnail if I am going to take a closer look at an image or not. Often when the full image is viewed it can be a disappointment compared to the impression given by the thumbnail and I'll move swiftly on. Conversely I have opened some thumbnails, I had not considered on first inspection, only to find a quite stunning image when it is viewed.

Seems a strange strategy to me to have a different thumbnail image to the full size. Surely if an artist thinks the thumbnail they have made has more impact and will attract viewers more than the full size image, then they would have done better to take the shot as framed in the thumbnail.

Yours,
Mystified of Tunbridge Wells.

Message edited on: 01/03/2006 15:28

Hopefully when we convert to php the thumbnail will be an automatic resized version of the actual image.Most forums do this as it is. We are unique in one way that we allow the users to have a lot of choices on thier galleries. Trust me....for us staffers having to look at every image in the galleries...a real thumbnail would make life easier. Makes for a fast browse first, before opening up the image.

i throughly agree & even suggested the site have an option to generate full thumbs for a member (especially for those who can't figure it out) ..but it was pointed out to me that some view their thumbs as works of art unto themselves & would have a hissy in changing it.. okie doke.. ;]

Hear Hear! I couldnt agree more!!! I never understood the point in not having the same thumb as the actual image. Eh....some view their thumbs as art???

in some of the other galleries they appear to be.. yeah..

I've seen this too. Some people use thumbnails as a way of attracting viewers to click...but I don't really see the point since the disappointment in most cases only generates either comments that has nothing to do with the image itself, or the viewer will leave without making any comment at all. And thumbnail size as art is usually called "miniature"...while a thumbnail is suppose to be a preview...at least to me it is :D

Well it seems a redundant point now as change is afoot anyway - welcomed by me and many others here too it seems. "for those who can't figure it out" I use EasyThumbnails for resizing up or down as it produces better results than PSP, and arguably PS too. It only involves typing in the size required.

yep, i have left the www.fookes on numerous unthumbed posts ;]

Hmmmm.I hope I don't get skewered for this,but sometimes,especially if the image is a large one,I think the thumb doesn't look as good.The details are just too tiny.And especially if there is text in the image. Also,I occasionally like to do a creative thumb.I thought the thumb I used for my holiday pic looked better when it focussed on a single element in my shot,than a 'miniature' of the whole thing.I have also seen some very funny thumbs in the gallery from time to time... Okay,it's not that I disagree with the valid points you all have made here...It just doesn't bother me.Sorry.MHO. And now... the cheese stands alone,lol. :^)

I used to do creative/cropped thumbs thinkin it added a bit of mystery ...hoping viewers would be "pulled in"! Like giving them just a li'l taste of the image. It just became too much work for me. Most software apps can do batch resizes of images now, so I can resize a bunch of pics in no-time! I would LOVE auto thumbnails implemented here at Render! Preferable on ALL uploaded images for consistency sake! This would eliminate those "trick" type images talked about above where the thumb really have no relation to the actual image posted! This would also stop the "blank" thumb thing that happens quite alot here with gallery images too,many of which get skipped over because they have no thumbnail. Another thing this would possible help with is site speed in general, creating a thumb "on the fly" instead of uploading 2 images for each post!

Worse than extrememly cropped thumbs are the images with no thumbnail at all...I simply do not visit those. Only if a thuumbnail (miniature?) in enticing enough do it open the image. Generally the ones I open are a larger version of the small file..for me it just works that way. Sure, some thumbs are done well enough to get a sense of the image and some nudes, etc. are likely best left to cropped thumbs for viewers of all sorts to choose see or not see. That is my humble opinion. Have you ever cropped an image to do a thumbnail and liked the cropped one better than the original. I have. Now, I load up full image thumbnails for the sake of all unless there is some "touchy" reason to only show part of the pic. TomDart.

I have poured over this ever since I have been on here, and tried many different formats. 1. Keeping them all landscape format 2. Keeping them all portrait format 3. Making a thumb totally different (for fun) 4. Doing a thumb exactly the same as the image 5. Making a thumb 200x200 I dont like having thumbnails of different orientation as I think it looks messy, so my latest 200x200 format makes everything uniform and tidy, I know I would have to time travel back 3 years to make my whole gallery consistent, clearly I am not going to do that. I have no objection to auto thumbnails although the thought of a php gallery does raise an eyebrow, because these sometimes further compress images on upload (admin will set that how they want it) this can really mess up an image if its isnt done correctly, and make them look over sharpened and even blocky. Some sites that I use apply too much compression on upload (probably to save server space), and on occasion this can wreck an image to the point that I just delete it, as I feel that it reflects poorly on my work. I never batch resize as I like to do every image individually (my preference)

This matter deserves some serious thought.

Thanks Richard to point this out (loud) !

I usually use 'easy thumbnails' but, now and then I crop the photo (just only when 'easy thumbnails' reduce too much the 'quality' of the full image.

I agree with the automatic thumb generation instead of uploading 2 files for each post.

Carlos.

Richard, you have started something here...... I look at all 7 to 9 new pages in the gallery every day. I agree with you totally. The ones that really annoy me are the ones with no thumb, which is becoming more common, and the ones that have a totally different thumb to the main shot. Especially those that make there thumb in PS/PSP or whatever, of just text on a background, WHY!!!!! I think if the new PHP system can auto make a thumb from the original, it should be used. Whilst we are at it, when the new PHP thingy starts, I also think the Ranking vote thing should also be removed. total waste of time. I stopped using this ages ago on my gallery and never use it on viewed photos. If I really like a shot I will say so in the comments box. Just my few pennies worth. Well glad I got that off my chest. Morning all. Steve

i never really cared one way or the other about the thumb. doesn't matter to me that much. i will skip over an image without a thumb though. i only recently just learned how to make the thumb look good. most of the time when i would resize my thumb, the thumb would terrible. so when it looked sucky, i would simply crop out a portion and resize and normally it would look better. then i found out that the reason my thumbs were looking sucky was because i was resizing them in bucubic. so now i usually resize in smart size and they look better. i don't like to resize my images with the frame. and sometimes i just like to make my thumb a bit different just for the hell of it. i also started resizing a lot of my thumbs at 200 x 200...not all of them but some.

One reason some people do not use a thumb is because they are new and do not know how.I know I will contact them and see if they need assistance, and so will Cindy. Then there are those who just want to mess around trying to get views by faking it out. Those annoy me. ...anyways we have a huge list of wants for when the conversion takes place and I am sure it will please us all. Another note...not having a thumbnail keeps you out of the Last week in galleries.Would take way too much time creating a thumbnail and making the thing.

Like has been said, Renderosity is pretty unique in the fact that thumbnails are left up to the individual, also the rules regarding thumbnails are pretty broad, you can do anything within 200x200 and up to 15k, that in itself makes the scope for what can be done pretty wide. An image with no thumb wont stop me looking at it, but unless it had an interesting title I mostly (probably wrongly pass then by. I an not concerned at all about the use of different thumbs to attract attention, this method is used everyday on many news sites to get you to click on the story, here like in everyday life it is about ratings (as in TV) views (as in getting as many people as possible to look at your picture) that is just human nature. That said I would welcome auto thumbs for the ease on it, I just hope they will be big enough to do the images justice. My biggest niggle, always has been and probably always will be..another story entirely.

You've all covered it pretty well here. I'll add my thoughts to the list. I used to do creative thumbnails, or details from the photo. I like the control ReRo allows artists. It is your gallery, and you should be able to exhibit things the way you want. It all depends wether you view the thumbs as utilitarian or as art in themselves. I almost never click on images without thumbs, so I really think some sort of thumbnail is needed. **If ReRo could generate a thumbnail if the artist doesn't provide one, I think that would be the ideal. But keep the option available to provide your own.** My thumbs have evolved to a format where I normally show the entire image, and use a black border to fill up the rest of the 200x200 space. I think it gives my gallery a nice uniform look if someone is browsing through it. But I feel that there are occasions where a creative thumb is an intriguing idea. About 2 weeks ago I posted 3 images with animated thumbs. They added some extra interest and I don't think they detracted from the larger work. An example is above. All that said, I would not be TOO opposed to Renderosity moving to an automatic thumb generation system. I just don't want us to become like all the other art sites out there. This is Renderosity, not DeviantArt, and it has it's own style and flavor. Let's evolve, but not loose our identity.

I couldn't agree more,Kort.Evidently this 'cheese' isn't standing alone,lol. That thumb is brilliant...and it would be a shame if that was no longer possible.

Thanks Marlenealouche! See, you didn't get skewered! ;^P

Yep :) I allso like to be creative on the thumbies..now and then...as Marlene said..when its for ex. a panorama view..then perfect to crop..otherwise U dont see a shit on the thumb :) and..... LOL!!!!! when U dont wanna peepers to see whats behind ;) LOL again :) No seriously...Like Kort said...I wouldnt die either if it was automaticly....But I really enjoy..being creative on the thumbs somtimes.. But I can allso understand U 2, Cindy and Dough..I cant understan how U 2 manage to go through 'em all anyway/all the time :) nine to 5 job??? Puss & Kram @ Kort :) Lovley thumbie rolling eyes ;) Puss & Kram

i don't think anyone need worry about them making it mandatory it be a mini version as there are some that are better off cropped for better detail & to hide more from the general viewing gallery when the nudity flag may not apply.. i have cropped a few too for just the same reasons, so i stand corrected the option to generate an auto thumb has already been suggested up high

That's good to hear.I wouldn't like a mandatory 'mini' version.But as an option...sounds great. :^) And I'm so happy I wasn't skewered.LOL.

The day isn't over though... ;]

LOL!!!! Sounds great :)

True Kortalouche.On our side of the pond,the night is young... So I have plenty more opportunities to screw up,lol.

I too pass up no thumb pics and for those who don't know how or don't want to do it, a site generated one is a great idea. For those who "cheat" with the thumb being a "switch and bait" thing, they get what they sow. For those who are creative with their thumbs (as in the above demonstrated example), I say bravo!!!!! It would be a shame to stifle such creativity. Therefore my vote ( if I get any, lol) is too have the best of both -- Site generated and member submitted options.

A very interesting discussion here! My two cents to add to the dollar! :) Usually I resize my stuff downto 200 pix as max size, depending landscape or portrait format. After a little sharpening I post the thumbnail, but now and then it's more than 15 kb, so I need to leave it a bit more blurry, or blur a part of it. Automatic resize would be a great thing, but there are postings with pictures containing lots of details and a resized version of it as thumb is just a kaleidscope of colors, nothing more. It would do no justice to the original picture to post a thumbnail like that, so in that case I crop the original picture and resize it to thumbnail format.

• As I read the earlier comments I see several interest-roles:
• the interest of the artist (easy uploading, great artistic freedom)
• the interest of the viewers (easy browsing)
• the interest of the administrators (little load on performance and fast browsing).

Finding a way to optimalise the system, to add automical thumbs if not uploaded, would be great. Question is, should it be an obligatory function, or would it be better to leave artistic freedom to the one posting one's artwork?

Very good questions JC. According to cynlee, the auto thumb option is being considered. I hope it gets more attention than the Hot20 topic. Maybe 2006 will bring us some closure to all of these things...

Sometimes I use the thumbnail to show a detail of the larger image, as in "Lighthouse Island" as the detail would be lost to view otherwise. Actually to me the thumb is an opportunity to show details more than anything. In the "Peace" image the eyes are highlighted, because for the web the smallness of the image causes that detail to recede to much which in print it's fine; so thumb's can lend themselves to different stratgies, not just advertisement. And as to panoramas, the thumb, if one gets the whole image in there pretty much shows nothing.