Regarding Graphics During Heavy Free Republic Traffic

[Balata]

Don't know if you've seen this one before. It's for your viewing pleasure. :)

[Right Brother]

THIS IS BETTER.......

[two23]

If any of you have a web publishing program, (like FrontPage) you can draft your post in that, switch to "View HTML" and then copy the html syntax and paste it into your post. Use the FR preview to make sure graphics load properly etc. (Resizing photo's, font size and color..hyper links, embedded sounds)
Your web publishing program creates all the html for you. SO much easier than trying to remember html!

[scott7278]

Iraq Already Printing Post-War Currency

[Admin Moderator]

Added information bump

[Admin Moderator]

Close, but not quite. ;-)

What you said is true enough, but in some situations it will still need to get the whole image.

Consider a thread with 7 graphics posts, and for the scenerio consider a browser that is set up to allow a maximum of five concurrent http requests. Imagine that the HEIGHT and WIDTH attributes were not used.

When the page loads, it won't even try to get the last image's http headers until after at least one of the other pictures completely downloads (even if the thread's html has finished downloading). And many browsers will stop rendering at that position.

We have many threads that end up with dozens upon dozens of images. The only ways to ensure that people don't get stuck waiting for pictures to download are for people to disable the loading of images, or for people to always use the HEIGHT and WIDTH attributes.

[djf]

While it is certainly true images do not necessarily bugger up the FreeRep servers, it still doesn't help the poor non-dsn non-T1 56K modem bound user. Maybe thread titles could contain a small blurb telling users the total size...

[djf]

non-dsn (sic)...
Non-dsl

[tomkat]

here's how to disable images in MS IE (internet explorer):

go to 'Tools' in the top menu bar, then clear the highlighted line.

[Fixit]

The image file that you originally linked to (in post 49) has a resolution of 312x475. If you open just that file in your browser you will see that the image is actually quite a bit larger than the 200x300 resolution that you forced it into when you posted it using the height=300 width=200 tags.

The image on the left in my post is a copy of the image you originally linked to BUT I scaled it to 200 x 305, put it on my own server, then linked to it AND the image that you posted (displayed on the right hand side of the screen.)

Sorry if this is confusing, I have a feeling that I'm not doing a good job explaining it.

The key is that in my post there are two different files linked to. The one on the right is the one you originally linked to, in the fashion that you linked to it.

The one on the right is a copy of that image that I scaled to a width of 200 and put back on the web on my own server, simply to show how much better images look at their original resolution.

[GATOR NAVY]

I do plan on working out these image issues (there are others) in due time.

I'm still hoping for a GMT time zone option...

[duckbutt]

Thank goodness I just got cable modem. I can now enjoy Diogenese's photo-torial pieces as well as "a day in the life of President Bush."

Folks if you can afford it, it's worth the acquisition!

[GATOR NAVY]

You have 56K? Wish I was that lucky-I only have a 28K connection at home.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

Oh gosh, her legs aren't lovely at all. I better change my screen name.

[TaxRelief]

C-Cooo-ool !!!

[TaxRelief]

2 questions:

Are you violating copyright laws if you move an image to your own server?

Can you just right-click and look in "properties" for image size and address?

[WKB]

Just trying it out for the first tme.

[Fixit]

Are you violating copyright laws if you move an image to your own server?

Possibly. The answer to that question is far beyond the scope of this message. On the flipside, it can be considered rude to rely upon others' bandwidth to supply images for your own purposes.

Can you just right-click and look in "properties" for image size and address?

You cannot rely upon that method to show you the "native" resolution of the image, only the size of the image as displayed on that page. You can rely upon that method (in Internet Explorer, anyway) only when you open the image in its own window. For example, check out this image from my server.

If you right mouse click the image to get the properties it will report that the height is 180 and the width is 155, but if you click on the image to open it in its own window you will see that the "native" resolution of the image is width=310 and height=360.

(To sum it up, IE's properties windows tells you only the displayed resolution.)

[Churchillspirit]

BUMP!

[blam]

Hey, that's pretty cool. I always wondered how to do that. Thanks.