Forum: F-16.net feedback

That new 500x338 size suckks big time!! Way to small!! This is really a sad turn for the worse.. 640 minimum, otherwise it's no good as a reference but just a blur.. and don't give me that crappy excuse of bandwith... Bang Head

F-16.net Sponsor

Yeah I noticed it also. For sure I'll be missing these high-res pics Sad

JanHas,

Which area are you talking about? On the forums I believe the reason for the 500 pixel width is so that the image doesn't show up so large that you have to scroll right and left to see it. That way, it keeps the page nice and neat for everyone viewing.

I may have a workaround for you. If you're using Windows and Internet Explorer, right click the image and go to properties. At the bottom of the properties dialog box, you'll see the actual path to the picture (something like http://www.f-16.net..... .jpg for example). Copy that link and paste it into your browser's address bar, click "go" or hit enter, and you should see the full size picture Smile

.

He's talking about the new gallery. In the old one you could access the pics in their original res, now we can't.

DeepSpace,

The last time I looked, the largest available size was 640x48o in the drop down box on the lower left. JanHas was referring to something 500 pixels wide which is why I thought he was talking about the attached pics in the forum. We'll have to wait for a response from the Admins on this one...

Normally the size in the gallery should be 640pix wide. What you where referring to as being able to watch the original res in the former gallery is just not real. Only admins can see them in the original size. However, with the switch to the new gallery, we experienced some permission problems. So it could be that you were unable to see the 640pix wide pictures. But that should be resolved now.

Greets,

Hey guys,

Thanks for the feedback - looks like there are some issues left.

First, the reason for the switch to the new galelry (G2) is that the old one (G1) was "full". Due to various technical limitations (mainly memory or RAM usage) G1 only supported about 10,000 pictures and we had reached that limit. So we had no choice but to upgrade to G2.

That being said, while G2 has many advantages (it should be faster, and also easier to integrate with other sections of F-16.net) it's a new release and has some kinks that need to be ironed out.

Second, we have tried to set up G2 with the same restrictions as G1. This means:
- standard picture size is 640 pixels
- smaller sizes are 500/400/300 (for pictures that are smaller than 640)
- access to 1024 and 800 versions for wallpapers

The reason for the 500/400/300 sizes is a quirk in G2. If a photo is smaller than the default size (640), then the picture will be rescaled to the largest matching size (so 533 would be rescaled to 500px).

So if you see a picture that's only available in 500px, it means it wasn't large to begin with. However I have to agree that in G1 you were able to access the "533px" version (or whatever the exact dimensions are).

However, most pictures (I estimate 95%) are larger than 640px so they should be OK.

In any case, what is not possible (and was not possible in G1 either) is to access the full-size originals (e.g. 2 megapixel files). The main reason for this is that we simply can't pay the bandwidth costs (unfortunately enough).

If you have any suggestions for the gallery, please let me know. I really want to make the Gallery as easy to use as possible. Also, if you notice any really small pics or you think something's wrong, please post the link here. Since it's a new system and I'm still working on the integration, it's perfectly possible there are still some bugs in it.

thanks again, and sorry for the inconvenience

stefaan

Thanks guys! That's really good news!! Great Site!! Not Worthy

Forum: F-16.net feedback

Picture size