#13 weeks ago
Last edited by spaminator; 3 weeks ago at 05:09 PM..
2399 others browsing the Canadian Forums! Join us!blue marble 2012
#3
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks ago
Did you know that the picture is 16 Megs????
Anyone on dial-up......will take 2 hours to see it...
Anyone on dial-up......will take 2 hours to see it...
#4
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper
sorry, i wasn't aware of that. i just thought it was a pretty nasa pic of earth and wanted to share with everyone. too bad.Did you know that the picture is 16 Megs????
Anyone on dial-up......will take 2 hours to see it...
#5
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by spaminator
That's OK...Its good for viewing on your desktop being 8000 X 8000 pixels, but the forum will just shrink the viewing dimensions.sorry, i wasn't aware of that. i just thought it was a pretty nasa pic of earth and wanted to share with everyone. too bad.
I usually use Microsoft image resizer, you just download the one for your operating sytem, Right click on an image or images and one of the choices is "re size picture".
I found that 800 pixels is a good size for forums and emails
+1
#6 Top Rated PostRe: blue marble 2012
3 weeks ago
The colour of the US makes it look like a deforested desert.
#7
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper
according to the properties option the pic that i posted has been risized by vbulletin to 720 x 720 pixels.That's OK...Its good for viewing on your desktop being 8000 X 8000 pixels, but the forum will just shrink the viewing dimensions.
I usually use Microsoft image resizer, you just download the one for your operating sytem, Right click on an image or images and one of the choices is "re size picture".
I found that 800 pixels is a good size for forums and emails
#8
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by spaminator
Yup, that's the viewing dimentions automatic selection by the forum so that posted pics will not break the borders like it used to on old versions of the forum. (I think??)according to the properties option the pic that i posted has been risized by vbulletin to 720 x 720 pixels.
When you right click on properties check the number of bytes...17 million bytes about 16 megs
#9
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper
i see. i wasn't aware that pics took up so much memory and took so long to load.Yup, that's the viewing dimentions automatic selection by the forum so that posted pics will not break the borders like it used to on old versions of the forum. (I think??)
When you right click on properties check the number of bytes...17 million bytes about 16 megs
i found a smaller pic that is under the size you recommened for posting. hopefully the others who are on dial up will be able to view the smaller pic.
Last edited by spaminator; 3 weeks ago at 05:09 PM..
#10
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks ago
Spammy, you could have replaced the original pic by using the edit button. You still have more than 5 minutes to do so.
#11
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by Cliffy
i didn't realize i still had time to edit. i replaced the orginal pic with the smaller pic and removed the secondary pic from the later post.Spammy, you could have replaced the original pic by using the edit button. You still have more than 5 minutes to do so.
#13
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by Goober
no probs. the threads could be merged.Spam. My apologies, I posted the same thing.
#14
Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by spaminator
Thanks so much, Spaminator..............being on dial-up myself I would not have been able to view it.i see. i wasn't aware that pics took up so much memory and took so long to load.
i found a smaller pic that is under the size you recommened for posting. hopefully the others who are on dial up will be able to view the smaller pic.
+1
#15Re: blue marble 2012
3 weeks agoQuote: Originally Posted by Mowich
no probs.Thanks so much, Spaminator..............being on dial-up myself I would not have been able to view it.
Similar Threads
0
0