Voting Closed: Picture Display Options

[Ryan]

This poll will run for 1 week. At that time, based on popular vote, I will make whatever necessary changes there are and the issue will not be addressed again.

Your options are:

1. The old method. One attachment per post, which loads full-size within the message.

2. The new method. Five attachments per post, thumbnailed, for easy previewing. The image may be clicked on to view a larger version.

[jerryz]

Si it's so important that there have been 6 votes? Now that funny right there

[Green Country Discus]

Ryan, I voted for the new format...but, I do not like the way all the posts streatch beyond the screen. What can you do?? Or is it our setup??

[Squiggy]

:crazy:

That was 6 votes in 14 minutes, Jerry....

[Ryan]

Si it's so important that there have been 6 votes? Now that funny right there

I just posted the poll tonight. It's running for 7 days. Apparently it's important if certain people decided that they didn't like it.

[Greg Richardson]

1. The old method. One attachment per post, which loads full-size within the message.

Does this mean you will limit it to one? Before I could put more than one but I limited it due to dial up users.

[Ryan]

Attachments, not embedded pictures from Photobucket or similar. Attachments are actually using the board's picture upload option. That was limited to 1 per post before I added the thumbnails. If people vote for the old format, it will go back to 1 picture attachment/upload per post.

[Kindredspirit]

If people vote for the old format, it will go back to 1 picture attachment/upload per post.



...unless I use Photo Bucket ...which allows me to put more per post right? But I love this new method Ryan! I think it makes the site look really nice and polished:)


I voted for the New Method~:)

Marie ~ http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_5_2.gif

[hadji25]

Are you hosting the pic when it is attached? It seems to me that would eat up alot of bandwith. Either way is fine for me. Just whats easier for you all!!

[devonpond]

I find I look at fewer photos now, due to the extra time needed to click on thumbnails and then close down each and every large photo.

I would prefer that posting be to the benefit of broadband users (big photos immediately), with configuration option of not initially loading photos for dialup users. Ideally dialup users could click on a text hyperlink to see those photos they choose.

[tpl*co]

I think we should have an option.

I like the new format for multiple pictures and it's usefull in showing fish or asking questions but...

I find it a real PITA for the help or how to forums where the old format was better when I printed out instructions and the pictures were right there full size with the printout. Especially when just a link that you can click on is visible.

So that's why I say "it depends" LOL

Tina

[brewmaster15]

I think we should have an option. LOL Tina.... would you like that on a silver platter too:) seriously... I wish it worked like that..but it doesn't. Its one or the other.:)

-al

[Ryan]

There is no option. These are global board settings. I have to set how EVERYONE sees pictures.

It's also ignorant to assume that we should cater to broadband users, because a LOT more people use dial-up than you might imagine. Broadband is nice, but it's expensive and it's also not available in a lot of rural areas, mine included.

Ryan

[Ryan]

Are you hosting the pic when it is attached? It seems to me that would eat up alot of bandwith. Either way is fine for me. Just whats easier for you all!!

Yes, every picture that is attached here is hosted by us. That's why bandwidth is almost $300 a month.

[jeep]

I say you guys are footing the bill so do what you want to do...

[jeep]

You may want to fix the forum clock though. It's 14 minutes off :D

[Ryan]

You may want to fix the forum clock though. It's 14 minutes off :D

This happens as the server bogs down and needs to be reset. I'll see if I can get it changed... but it'll probably go back.

[Kindredspirit]

I say you guys are footing the bill so do what you want to do...


This is true ~ either way works for me ~


...but....if I could have that "silver platter".....I like the new method! It is a tie...what will ya do now Ryan? When does this poll close?

Marie ~ http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_5_2.gif

[Ryan]

When does this poll close?

There's a date at the top of the page, where the poll is... I think it's 10/08.

[Kindredspirit]

I saw that right when I was leaving the thread:o Sorry!


Marie ~ http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_5_2.gif

[Elcid]

Hey Marie:

Ryan made it a tough choice. But look at it this way. With the new method you can post 75 pics in one page by opening one thread and 14 replys. That's the advantage. But for someone who is viewing your page he or she would have to click 75 times to see the pics and 75 times to close those pics every time he opens that page. And don't forget that you can't just scroll through the pics, each one is a separate window. Those thumbnails on my 15" laptop are not really clear enough to tell me much more than the fact that they are discus in that pic and maybe the type of discus!

HTH,
Sandeep

[Kindredspirit]

oh....I see ~ NOT! lol.....I am sorry San... I have much on my mind .....


NOW...We can post five pics per post right? And...I do not have to go to Photo Bucket anymore....I just resize to Small in Windows and then Sd grabs the photo...five of them ...I really like that San...and...it looks nice on the threads too IMO ~

With me so far?


Cuz you lost me babe...lol! If people who do not have high-speed connection ...they can not do this? Also you say that some have to click on one of the five posted pics and it takes a long time to load?

Or am I just .........completely lost?:(

Marie ~ http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_5_2.gif

[Elcid]

Hey Marie:

I'm sorry, just read my post again. Instead of going to photo bucket you could always use SD upload and use the reply feature 4 times to get your 5 pics loaded. That's how we have always done it in the past because of the 1 pic per post limit previously. U guyz stitched all those photos together in photobucket was a neat trick but it's probably more time consuming then just replying 4 times to get ur 5 pics on the page? But I dont' know I haven't done it!

BTW, has anyone really complained that they were having a hard time loading simplypages because of too many pics? Maybe that's another poll? I had AOL dialup until maybe a year ago and I had the problem maybe 2wice on some large pages. Now with DSL at only $12.95 a month dialup is history. But I can understand that some ppl overseas may have poor connections with dialup and maybe only 1200 baud which could be annoying as hell! But even my dad in India has broadband now! There can't bee too many no?

take care,
Sandeep

[tpl*co]

Sorry Ryan, I figured that was probably the case with one or the other. Was just hoping is all.

Tina

[Giniel]

I like the new method ,but I would have to say which ever way is cheapest and easiest for the board would be what I would go for.

Debbie

[fishmama]

I prefer best photo quality...period.

I can't seem to get any of mine posted...exceeds by 3X what available.

More Apple friendly please! Especially for us newbies needing "disease" and "discus university" info.

As Always,
Fishmama

P.S. Give me some time to figure out how to get my pics posted. You have so much info, and I have so little time!!!

[brewmaster15]

Hi Fishmama,
Welcome to SimplyDiscus.com!!!


You may find some answers and Tips on those photo posting here..

http://forum.simplydiscus.com//photo-gallery/38346-tips-resizing-photos.html

http://forum.simplydiscus.com//photo-gallery/21447-posting-pics.html

http://forum.simplydiscus.com//photo-gallery/23652-free-online-photo-hosting-resources.html


Hope that helps,
al

[fishmama]

Thanks so much Al.

SimplyDiscus is such a great resource.

Fishmama

[Upper Canada]

My choice is the old method, but I will be glad to use whatever method is decided upon.

Bob,
upper Canada Discus.

[Greg Richardson]

There is no option. These are global board settings. I have to set how EVERYONE sees pictures.

It's also ignorant to assume that we should cater to broadband users, because a LOT more people use dial-up than you might imagine. Broadband is nice, but it's expensive and it's also not available in a lot of rural areas, mine included.

Ryan

I can't get DSL here. I can get cable or satellite.
What I find is interesting with this situation is when I had dial up every where I went I had to wait for pictures and text to load.

At no time did I ask others to change the way they were doing things because of my hook up situation.

Yet, here we have dial up users who have to wait at other websites for pages to load that now expect this one website to change for them.

When looking at pictures that are all on one thread I like to compare different pictures for different situations. Thumbnails change that.
I guess instead of two monitors I'll need to hook up 2 now if this vote stays the same. LOL!

A suggestion. When polls are taken that effect the site it might be good to make sure that when people log in they see a note with link to the poll just like a notice one gets when they haven't posted in a while.
I think that will increase participation.

[Greg Richardson]

Be nice to have more than 63 out of THOUSANDS that use this site vote on this.

Like I suggested a note at the top when coming to SD would be a way to ensure more of a vote that is going to effect use of site.

I hate to see SD become a site where comparing fish either in one post or more becomes obsolete due to new method.

The other forums I go to I'm able to compare them that way and never see dial up users complain there.

Every other site dial up users go to they have to wait also.
I know I had dial up for 6 years.
That's called life.

Why take away the quality of this site by going to new method makes no sense at all to me.

Comparing fish is very, very, important use factor of site.

[Ryan]

I added an announcement in red at the top and extended the poll until 10/12.

General is the most read section on the forum. I doubt people aren't voting because they don't know the thread is here. Most just aren't concerned with that kind of thing. All the polls on Simply are like that. It's also why 95% of our members will never donate. A lot of people wouldn't consider it important.

Simply gets 38,000 hits a day currently... over a million per month. And yet we only have 8000 members. And of those 8000, there are about 1000 that are moderately active. Out of 1000 active members, 60 or so have voted on the poll. It's a trickle-down kind of thing.

[Greg Richardson]

Ryan. Thanks for the link at the top. Much appreciated.
SD means a lot to me as you can see by the passion of my posts concerning this situation.

It's a shame why others don't take the time to let their voice be heard.

This has been built into a great site by you and AL.

The ones who participate here should at least return some respect back and care about their community in the way it functions in order to enjoy the hobby at it's fullest.

[jeep]

Sorry I haven't voted but I really don't care either way. I'm fine with either option...

[Kindredspirit]

I voted ~ I like the New Method but either way works for me;)


Marie ~ http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_2_15.gif

[t_j]

I also voted after it was posted:D I also like the new way but if we went back to the old way it wouldn't matter to me I think it was ok the old way except for maybe the picture thing but even that was still ok with me not really any thing to fuss about IMO.:) I also know you and Al do your hardest to make the best out of this site And I really think thats great and The site IMO looks great I really do. I think a lot of people just drop in once in awhile and thats it or get the info they need and thats it their done with the site I don't know it's just what I think.

[larryp]

Hello Simply Discus,I believe the new way is far better more pictures per page you got to love that.Larry*****

[tpastrana]

Hello All,

I voted for the New Method. Reason being is, I have searched and viewed alot of different forums. I chose Simply because of how nice & professional everyone is. There is too much childs play on most of the forums out there. And to be honest I am not that good with the computer that I could ever figure out how to post more than one picture at time. I am sure it can't be that hard but never the less, I still haven't figured it out. When I joined Simply,I of course had problems with my fish and was helped out tremendously. My only problem was trying to post more than one picture so that the professionals could help me. I had to keep re posting for them to view my fish.
And to be honest I really was more concerned with what to do next to get my fish better than to try and figure out how to post multiple pictures. Dial up is what it is and the people who have it allready know what to expect when down loading pictures. I think for helping the newbies and the people who can't seem to figure out the in's & out's of the computer. We would want to make it as Simple as possible to keep this forum the great site that it allready is. Either way that it comes down to, I would never complain. We are all fortunate to be a part of this forum and look forward to many years of participation. Al,Ryan and all involved, I think you are all doing a great job!!!!

[Ed13]

Sorry I haven't voted but I really don't care either way. I'm fine with either option...
This is exactly the way I felt. I was just going to go allong with what the mayority wanted or what is cheaper or easier for the forum.

My thoughts changed after Cage posted this in Jeep's thread titled "Opinions please"?


Also the thumbnail pics open in new windows and you can make the pic windows smaller and look at the pics side by side ........ which you cant even do with the old method. With the old method you would have to scroll up and down to compare i believe........especially if the pics you wish to compare are seperated by lots of posts.

With the new method you can even compare pics from different threads side by side.


It had not occured to me to open various windows at the same time, given this I find even easier to compare pics, so I vote for the new method!

[AmberC]

I personally do not like clicking on each picture. When people post links to their fish at another site, I generally do not go look because it takes too much time. I dont like having to click on several different ones, so I voted for the old way, I enjoy seeing the full sized image right there on the page AND if you want more than one picture per post.. use a photo hosting site and just put up the link and you have more than one full sized image right there in your post. Easy as pie.

[greyhoundfan]

I prefer photobucket.

I have cable modem. I do not know how this affects people with dial up. Will the site use less bandwith if more people use photobucket?

[cartoon]

Hey Ryan,
My concern is I'm stuck with dial-up out here. Not because I can't afford anything faster, but because any other high speed internet or DSL is not available in my area yet (and may not be for a while). Yes, at this point I live in a rural "black hole" just south of Kansas City.

I voted for the old method thinking the images would load faster, and I personally can not take the time to be sitting here loading large images that take forever.
Wouldn't it be more cost effective for you guy's anyway when it comes to bandwidth???

Peggy (cartoon)

[brewmaster15]

Hi Peggy,
Actually the new way should be better for you and the slower connection people......

Ryan had posted this elsewhere...



People have complained for 2 years about not being able to attach multiple pictures at one time. So I decided to increase that number to 5 pictures per post. However, each thread shows 15 messages per page. If I didn't use thumbnails, and people posted 5 full sized pictures per message, do the math:

5 full sized pics @ 85KB max = 425KB per message
425KB x 15 messages in a thread = 6375KB...

So with multiple attachments per message, if every message contained a picture, would be over 6 megs per page in a thread. That is extremely large for people on dial-up or even things like satellite (which I use).



Ryan



Basically thumbnails are easier for dial ups because its a small image that loads on the forum thread... You don't have to load the big image if you chose not to.......Additionally.... you have something the old way didn't give you when you viewed a thread... The choice of what images in the thread you want to actually see.... I personally like this when Its a long on going thread... I don't have to look at every picture... just the ones I haven't seen or just the ones that I want to see.


hope that clears things up...

-al

[cartoon]

Very happy to see folks voting :0). After all, the forum serves all of us! Do what is best for the forum. BUT, thanks for asking. Peggy (cartoon)

[robust discus]

I like looking at discus pictures. Especially those nice ones people post. Therefor, the new method can have my vote.;) ;)

[wsoxman]

I like the new display. Keep up the good work.
Jack

[Ryan]

Looks like the New Method stays.

For those that are having a hard time with the thumbnailed format, I will suggest Firefox or the new Internet Explorer 7 because of the tabbed windows. Tabbed windows allow you to open several windows in one, which you can switch back and forth between with tabs. Here's a screenshot of what mine looks like:


http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j49/ryansmith83/tabs.jpg

By clicking on the a link (such as a thumbnail) with your mouse's scroll wheel, it will open in a new Tab. Technically it's still only 1 browser window. When I'm viewing threads with attachments, I click all the attachments at once and let them open in new windows. Then I just flip through them and close them as I go. You can also use the tabbed window method to compare pictures -- you simply flip back and forth between the tab with a click of the mouse. This way there aren't multiple browser windows open and it's much easier to navigate.

I also use this tabbed method when opening new threads in a section on Simply. I go to the main page of a section, then click on each link with my scroll wheel to open all the new posts in new windows. Then I can just go through them one by one, closing each tab as I finish.

In my opinion, this kind of browsing is very helpful and I'm glad that IE 7 adopted it from Firefox in their new version.

You can get the new browsers here:

Firefox: http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/

IE 7 Beta: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/default.mspx

For future reference, I have reposted these suggestions here: http://forum.simplydiscus.com//showthread.php?t=53876