Off site image hosting

You don't obviously, I use a full size computer and I find the resolution of resized pics poor... YMMV

.
So get a smaller computer..... TOTB

No TX Allen, I think you have an id-10-t error and need a hard reset.. YMMV.

You don't have to look at the pictures at full screen size. Just resize them to look a good resolution. We do not pay a high enough membership to get super quality pictures. I suggest you learn to enjoy what we pay for.

Well said PeterD, can I join your chapter of the Flat Earth Society where we can extol the virtues of morse code... hehe

What has flat earth got to do with it? I do move with technology, I'm not against it. The thing is I am satisfied with what we have got and do not wish to expend capital for the ultimate technology. After all, I drive a Jap designed twin cab, I have no desire to get a Ram Truck.

The situation reminds me of something oft repeated by one of our instructors training us on test equipment. He used to tell us "if you realise the limitations of your equipment then you can do useful work with it."

I am happy to live within the limitations of what we have. How much capital are you prepared to part with to upgrade the forum and pay for the increased hosting capacity? If you want the ultimate in technology I'm afraid you will have to bugger off and find it elsewhere.

Larger pics require everyone to use more data whether they want to or not.
That costs some of us extra money.
If this was a specialist photography site, there may be a justification. It is not.
Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

>Peter n Margaret, you make a very valid point. with that in mind you could lobby for smaller pics and save a few bob more, something the owners would find useful

You probably have lost the message of the thread title.
It's all about offsite image hosting for the individual not the OE site.
ie, should they wish to share an image at high res then they link to the host and there you go.. QED no fault no foul.

So really if you never used or not sure what it's all about then maybe this wasn't the thread for you .

I was more interested in folk that have used image hosting and what is currently good value since everything changes over time along with any commodity

>Nomadic Nirvana, Thank you your sage advice from yesteryear.. some 'oldies are indeed goodies'- yours not so much.

You probably have lost the message of the thread title.
It's all about offsite image hosting for the individual not the OE site.
ie, should they wish to share an image at high res then they link to the host and there you go.. QED no fault no foul.

So really if you never used or not sure what it's all about then maybe this wasn't the thread for you .

I was more interested in folk that have used image hosting and what is currently good value since everything changes over time along with any commodity

>I was more interested in folk that have used image hosting and what is currently good value since everything changes over time along with any commodity<

I used one once and yes, you are right everything changes and they did too and all the pics I posted using them disappeared, never to return.
Never again.
If it is necessary to have higher resolution pics (of which I am not convinced) then they should be on the site in question that controls them directly, not with some third party.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

Hi Michelle, the size of my previous images is compressed to 1000x562 and 245KB and using W10 computer it leaves mostly black border..
Most social media compresses the same size upload to 2048x1151 and 792KB which gives full screen coverage at great resolution.
So far nobody seems to care and I guess that says it all.
You just had a photo comp and I thought it was time to raise the issue for more in the way of presenting images, as the world is moving away from blogs, in fact this site is the only place where I currently see blogs.

hehe... you can click as many times as you like, little pics(resized to1000 pixels wide by EO) will only stretch so far.

With one extra click you can have this;

>Frank P not with my ver of win 10 you can't and it was only updated a fortnight ago, hence my query..

Yep Frank, my Mac does that too.
Cheers
Jim

My OS is also Win10. Brand new, ver 1909, updated in the last couple of weeks, like yours.

Go to the magnifying glass icon in the top right of the black area on your screen near the X. On my large screen your image in full screen is starting to blurr but is way better than " just acceptable", IMO. On smaller screens it will be sharper.

Uploaded images that are smaller than yours don't fill the screen unless you click the magnifier multiple times. You will then get pixellation. It all depends on the size of the image originally uploaded. That is a function of the contributor, not EO, of course.

In regard to your question
"Is any body using an offsite image hosting site?"
I did consider it once, but after seeing a mate's collection disappear when a policy change came into effect and on other websites numerous photos linked to and which have disappeared, I think keep it local is better. We keep all our pics backed up on three hard drives, one of which is not in our home.

Cheers

>Frank P.. I agree you can click, zoom, magnify right in but the res is so poor it's best left at default size... because it's been reduced and compressed... there are no free lunches..

...and yes I get that re image hosting. I would never have only one copy of a pic on anybodies cloud( including here at EO), does no body back their stuff up in at least 2 different places?

In fact, I had several photo bucket accounts, then they were sold ect, they offered a grace period for you to download your archives, I surprised that none of the other hosts did the same thing.
Businesses are bought and sold and conditions change, for ever...

Hosts are available (IMO) to share, not store as you no longer retain control no matter how much you pay.

.
2208mate,

Mate, I don't think you took in what Michelle said..... "You're only looking at the thumbnail. Click to view the pic".

By clicking you are not "zooming in". You are changing from the thumbnail to the full pic. Look at the image 'info' and you will see that.

>Allan B.. Yes mate with w10 zoom is using the magnifier. As my example below.
...but it is useless if the pixels are not there because of the EO sites frame resizing and compression.
..and in most cases for a crisp, clear image it is best left to default with the big black borders..

I am trying Michelle's work around.

? Nothing's changed here and not planning to.

I think you mean “slow as a wet week”. :-)

Macca.

.
I was wondering what a "wet wig" had to do with it.
It went right over my head. LOL

Always been "slow as a wet wig" in my family, and many others. I had my origins in Western Queensland. I am told in the old days, a wet wig dried very slowly.

.
I believe it was originally an English term....."As slow as a wet week in Brighton" or some other resort town. Then morphed into "wig" in Queensland. (They tend to do things differently there)
After all, is a "wig" any faster when dry?

A lot of phrases become misquoted, such as "piggyback" meaning to carry something on your back. It was originally "pick-pack" then became "pick-a-back" before the pigs entered.
I ask, do you really carry things on a pig's back?

Always been "slow as a wet week" in my part of Queensland. Had never heard of "wig" until this thread.

Cheers
Jim

"Had never heard of "wig" until this thread."

Me either. South of the border, AFAIK, it's Slow as a wet week or slow as a wet weekend .

A couple of others that have been “corrupted”:

“The proof is in the pudding”. It is another old English saying, it should be “ The proof of the pudding will be in the eating”. Meaning that the only way you will know if the Brandy has been added to the pudding is when you eat it.

“He can talk the talk, but can walk the walk”. This should be “He can talk the talk, but can he walk the talk”. In other words, he says something, but can he actually do what he says he can.

Macca.

Or walk and chew gum ( F-rt )at the same time. :)
Dave.

Life is forever about change.
Remember when you could joke and nobody got offended?
Remember when you tune into the ABC and hear news?

No doubt some PC has gone too far Genny (as has the application of current mores to previous times) but let's not pretend that some jokes weren't extremely offensive to various people and groups in the past. We're thankfully now more aware of offence and the targets are far less reticent about speaking out.

Too much news on the ABC imo, but it's cheap content. Would love to see them do a radio version of SBS's old Front Up (Andrew Urban), although they already have the brilliant Conversations. Perhaps that could be expanded. Unfortunately such shows are expensive to make and as we know some conservative politicians and their supporters have been "champing at the bit" (or chomping on the bit according to some) to reduce the ABC's effectiveness as a national media organisation.

"I use imgbb, cos it's free."

There is one forum that is currently using that for its photo hosting. It went through a period where opening a photo thumbnail sent you to porn sites and you have to close the forum and restart it to get out of the porn sites. That is just one more experience in forums using hosting sites like 2208mate is suggesting EO use.

>Peter D... steady on old chap, gather all your neurons together in the same place and at the same time and quote me correctly, I can go along with that.....

The quote in my previous Followup came from Genny, the OP of this reply thread. The comment on your request for external picture hosting came from the OP of this whole thread "I'm thinking any larger pics needs to be linked to some host."