Previous :: Next Topic |
Which do you prefer? |
Old very large size |
|
61% |
[ 24 ] |
New slightly smaller size |
|
35% |
[ 14 ] |
Even smaller size |
|
2% |
[ 1 ] |
|
Total Votes : 39 |
|
Author |
Message |
kleet meat tornado
Joined: 06 Feb 2002 Posts: 5303 | TRs | Pics Location: O no they dih ent |
|
kleet
meat tornado
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:54 pm
|
|
|
I'm okay with the new size, though I like the old size best for the same reasons stated above. Thumbs down on the smallest size (unless someone is posting 20 pics from their trip).
If some of the thumbnails in a TR look exceptionally nice, I'll click on them to view them full size. Or if it's a TR from some place I haven't been but have wanted to go, then I might view them full size. Otherwise I make due with viewing the thumbnails...so the bigger, the better.
A fuxk, why do I not give one?
A fuxk, why do I not give one?
|
Back to top |
|
|
Eric Peak Geek
Joined: 21 Oct 2002 Posts: 2062 | TRs | Pics Location: In Travel Status |
|
Eric
Peak Geek
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:40 pm
|
|
|
Seems to me like the whole point of a thumbnail is to conserve bandwidth. If you make the thumbs the largest of the three sizes then you pretty much defeat that purpose and you approach the point where you might as well just be putting them inline, assuming they aren't so wide as to mess up the tables on the page. The small ones are real itty bitty so I'm with goldilocks on this one, medium is just right. If the thumbs are attractive looking I'll click on them all anyway and let them load in the back while I read the trip report and then look at the pics.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:10 pm
|
|
|
Actually, bandwidth is not an issue from our end. Folks seem to be OK with the larger size, particularly dial up users, which is a surprise to me. A quick check indicates the larger size will add about 5K on average to each thumbnail which isn't much considering we trimmed 15-20K from the larger flickr thumbnails by doing it oursleves.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scrooge Famous Grouse
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 6966 | TRs | Pics Location: wishful thinking |
|
Scrooge
Famous Grouse
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:18 pm
|
|
|
Went back and looked at some of the photo-essay type trip reports. They were just plain more effective with the larger size. Even though the new size doesn't seem much smaller, it turns out to have a lot less impact. The pics no longer fit so smoothly into the story,
IMO
David
Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you....... Go and find it. Go!
Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you....... Go and find it. Go!
|
Back to top |
|
|
Backpacker Joe Blind Hiker
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics Location: Cle Elum |
I'd go:
1. Middle size
2. Large size
10. Smaller size.
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."
— Abraham Lincoln
|
Back to top |
|
|
Newt Short Timer
Joined: 21 Dec 2001 Posts: 3176 | TRs | Pics Location: Down the road and around the corner |
|
Newt
Short Timer
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:00 pm
|
|
|
I'm dialup. I like the larger size but I could live with middle size.
Like others, It's getting a decent view of the thumb without having to go full size. Viewing thumbs and reading along goes good and then view the ones you want full size after. Something has to catch my eye before I'll go full size.
I voted big but like I said, middle is ok too.
It's pretty safe to say that if we take all of man kinds accumulated knowledge, we still don't know everything. So, I hope you understand why I don't believe you know everything. But then again, maybe you do.
It's pretty safe to say that if we take all of man kinds accumulated knowledge, we still don't know everything. So, I hope you understand why I don't believe you know everything. But then again, maybe you do.
|
Back to top |
|
|
RayD the griz ate my pass
Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 1763 | TRs | Pics Location: Vacaville |
|
RayD
the griz ate my pass
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:32 pm
|
|
|
I voted "slightly smaller" but the original are ok too. The small are waaaay too small. And I'm on dialup.
don't believe everything you think
don't believe everything you think
|
Back to top |
|
|
Don Member
Joined: 25 Apr 2005 Posts: 2013 | TRs | Pics Location: Fairwood, WA |
|
Don
Member
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:55 pm
|
|
|
Broadband, but prefer the big thumbnails. Just MO.
BTW, what is dial up?
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sore Feet Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2001 Posts: 6304 | TRs | Pics Location: Out There, Somewhere |
Don wrote: | BTW, what is dial up? |
I think I read about that in history class one time. It's apparently some form of archaic (sp?) communication using a monocolor computer-like device and wires. *gag*
|
Back to top |
|
|
mgd Member
Joined: 27 May 2003 Posts: 3143 | TRs | Pics Location: Full Moon Saloon |
|
mgd
Member
|
Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:44 pm
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
WTCrocker Member
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 Posts: 211 | TRs | Pics Location: Between the 42nd and 49th parallels. |
I don't care what anyone says, size matters. Bigger is always better.
|
Back to top |
|
|
kayak77 Member
Joined: 25 Mar 2005 Posts: 52 | TRs | Pics Location: Kent, WA |
|
kayak77
Member
|
Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:39 am
|
|
|
Larger is better and after listening to the reasons from the dial-up users, it makes sense. I would've been ok with the small ones since I usually click on them to see the full size ones but the big ones are preferred.
On a different note, if you can keep the full size images 200KB or bigger, its preferred! I change my desktop image at work quite often when I can find nice higher resolution pics of places in the NW that I'd prefer to be at over my cube. I appreciate those folks that post the higher res pictures! Hope you don't mind me borrowing the image for a few days.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:09 am
|
|
|
OK, we are back to the larger size (and in some cases slightly larger).
|
Back to top |
|
|
iron Member
Joined: 10 Aug 2008 Posts: 6391 | TRs | Pics Location: southeast kootenays |
|
iron
Member
|
Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:09 am
|
|
|
is there any way to adjust the size of a thumbnail within a TR? for example, if i want to make the first picture of a report larger (like flow does), how do you go about that?
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17835 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:33 am
|
|
|
To do that, embed the szie you want as an IMG and wrap it with a URL to a non-image.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|