Posting photos...

Posting a picture recently and I had sized it to 800 x 600. but it wouldn't let me up-load the file..

Jim, why does the site not let you up-load a file that is 600 x 800 but advises it needs it to be no more than 800 x 600.. ? same size file init? ..

silver said:

Posting a picture recently and I had sized it to 800 x 600. but it wouldn't let me up-load the file..

Jim, why does the site not let you up-load a file that is 600 x 800 but advises it needs it to be no more than 800 x 600.. ? same size file init? ..

Click to expand...

I've had the same problem before Eamonn..seems that they aren't the same

800 wide by 600 high is the maximum allowed by Jim's settings, there are very good reasons for this.
First the picture is still large enough to be viewed in good graphical quality.
Second the file size is reduced to allow room for more pictures without clogging his database.
If you have difficulty in getting your pictures the correct dimensions the is a very good free download which will do it for you.
For windows users click me once installed simply right click on the image and select resize image.
For Linux users (Debian based) open a shell and type "apt-get install nautilus *.*"
For Mac users it is already built into your system you just have to find it.

Grump said:

800 wide by 600 high is the maximum allowed by Jim's settings, there are very good reasons for this.
First the picture is still large enough to be viewed in good graphical quality.
Second the file size is reduced to allow room for more pictures without clogging his database.
If you have difficulty in getting your pictures the correct dimensions the is a very good free download which will do it for you.
For windows users click me once installed simply right click on the image and select resize image.
For Linux users (Debian based) open a shell and type "apt-get install nautilus *.*"
For Mac users it is already built into your system you just have to find it.

Click to expand...

Grumps .. I think the question Eamonn and me are asking is why is 600 x 800 not the same as 800 x 600 . Presumably they are the same size. There is probably a straight forward answer .

They are the right size but the wrong way round turn them on there side just to prove the point and they will upload the max hight is 600 doing it the other way the hight is 800

Woody said:

They are the right size but the wrong way round turn them on there side just to prove the point and they will upload the max hight is 600 doing it the other way the hight is 800

Click to expand...

We know ....but why ?

edlea said:

We know ....but why ?

Click to expand...

Because

edlea said:

We know ....but why ?

Click to expand...

Probably because that is the way the software has been set up !!!!

It goes back to when the resolution of the old type monitors where silly sizes and overlapped in posts, now it is mobiles and ipads etc ..

This was taken from a admin site about forums ...

An image that is 800x600 pixels in dimension will fill a monitor that is 800x600 in resolution. An image that is wider or taller in pixel dimension than a monitor can display will over fill the screen requiring the viewer to use scroll bars to pan across the image. So if you want your images to be universally viewable then make sure they fit within the 800x600 limits of older screens.

Click to expand...

Hope it helps ..

I am an accountant, let me explain.

For an image 800 wide by 600 high

Take the width value and add on a software magnification factor of 800 (800 + 800 = 1600)

Add 20% VAT (1600 x 1.02= 1632)

Take the height value and add a software magnification factor of 800 (600 +800 = 1400)

Add 20% VAT (1400 x 1.02 = 1428)

Multiply the results by each other (1428 x 1632 = 2,330,496)

Deduct accountants fee of 2,000,000 (2,330,496 - 2,000,000 = 330,496)

Divide by golden mean (330496 / 1.6180339 = 204257.77)

Ascertain the square root of the result = 451.95

For an image 600 wide by 800 high

Take the width value and add on a software magnification factor of 800 (600 + 800 = 1400)

Add 20% VAT (1400 x 1.02= 1428)

Take the height value and add a software magnification factor of 600 (800 +600 = 1400)

Add 20% VAT (1400 x 1.02 = 1428)

Multiply the results by each other (1428 x 1428 = 2,039,184)

Deduct accountants fee of 2,000,000 (2,039,184 - 2,000,000 = 39,184)

Divide by golden mean (39,184 / 1.6180339 = 24217.05)

Ascertain the square root of the result = 155.61

Thus the net forum weighted value of an 800 x 600 image is 451.95 whereas:

The net forum value of a 600 x 800 image is 155.61.

The 800 x 600 image is therefore of greater value to the forum and that is why the lower value 600 x 800 image is not acceptable.

Obvious innit.

Bloody Nora is that all

Woody said:

Bloody Nora is that all

Click to expand...

I could write you a paper on the rationale behind my calculation if you like?

But it will cost you another £2,000,000

Woody I've just spotted after your name you've got Top Gog. Gog is a name of a north walian as opposed to Taff who is a south walian. Didn't realise you were welsh mate. Nos da.

Welsh if you heard me talk you would know were I'm from me ol cocker it was Jim who gave me that name see Jim you bloody plonker

See Walter explains it all in laymen's terms for you how simple is that init?
Thank you young Walter.

They were all very good answers but the mathematical sum doesn't work.. I know it works for a bean counter but it doesn't work out for for my little engineering brain..

The physical size of the file that the 800x600 file takes up on my drive and anyone else's drive is exactly the same as a 600x800 file..

So it still doesn't work out.. I know bean counters can be creative but I think that one is a little too creative..

I understand that Jim has to keep tabs on what files he has stored on the forum but surely it could be either way around..

Grump.. I have enough software to fly a spaceship to the blo**y moon on my PC and Im fully aware how to re size the pictures .. :nonono: but it doesn't answer my original question.....

Ok to back to your original question the warning you are receiving has zilch to do with file size.
It's a warning of pixel sizes which comes back to what has already been explained 800 wide by 600 high max.
That means any more than 600 pixels high is not allowed simple init?
The link is for anyone who has difficulties which you obviously do, don't use it if you don't want, your choice.

Reading through this topic I am surprised that some of you can sleep at night (life's to short get a grip)

Woody said:

Welsh if you heard me talk you would know were I'm from me ol cocker it was Jim who gave me that name see Jim you bloody plonker

Click to expand...

Something amiss here Woody, all the other Top Dogs have it spelled correctly? Have you been playing about in your profile by any chance ...

Jim said:

Something amiss here Woody, all the other Top Dogs have it spelled correctly? Have you been playing about in your profile by any chance ...

Click to expand...

No Honest I wouldn't know were to start Jim unless I have touched something I shouldn't LOL I thought you had done it

This has made me have a look and have found out how to do it so I do apologise Jim I truly did believe you had done it for a laugh so its me who is the bloody plonker LOL