bdighe Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Today when I upload a big photo to photo.net, it returns me an error saying photo can not be larger than 3 MB. Why cant the software resize the photo and make its size under 3 MB? Most of the other photo sites like flickrand picasa resize the images on the fly. Today I need to maintain two copies of each image so that it can beuploaded to photo.net. I love photo.net and I have been its member since 7 years, I feel it needs some major changes to keep up withother sites. Regards,- Bharat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Laur Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Wouldn't you rather resize the image yourself, and be in control of the manner in which sharpening and compression impact the look of the image you post? Never mind 3MB in and of itself... why would you post anything so large - dimensionally - that it can't been seen without scrolling around on even a large-windowed, high-resolution browser? A 1000-pixel-wide 2x3 image of some complexity - even marginally compressed to a JPG - should come in at under 500KB. I certainly don't want a cruise-control robot script treaing a portrait the same way it would treat a seascape, a product shot, or a grainy black and white scanned-film street shot. Once you render a PN-friendly lower-res file and upload it... just delete it from your local storage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike dixon Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Sites like flickr and picasa have far greater financial and processing resources than photo.net. They can afford additional computers devoted to resizing huge image files (a very processor-intensive activity). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Downsizing large images was a significant drain on serverr resources. In order to make the servers and site run faster, a size limit was introduced. We could easily downsize large images, but the tradeoff of a slower site isn't a good one for most users. Perhaps photo.net expects a little more from its members than Flickr does. We don't necessarily have to do what they do, just as in the forums we don't have to have personal messaging, signature files, Avatars and smiley faces, such as are found on other forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 We're very good with frowny faces tho'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdighe Posted July 21, 2008 Author Share Posted July 21, 2008 Now I understand, thanks all for your responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now