Spey Pages banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Posting Pics

I'll give my latest fly's picture a try to see what happens....Hmm...I guess after 2 tries there is a problem.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,571 Posts
The website told me a few days ago, for the first time ever after posting many dozens of pics, that the images were too big. I managed to post radically resized ones, but it was a pain. Up to now it seems that there was a resizing done automatically by the site. It seems that they played with the code, and NOT in a good way. Pictures are IMHO an integral part of the site, and it seems like the webmasters don’t get this. It can be pretty much of a pain trying to resize everything in advance, and this is just going to have and even greater chilling effect on people posting pictures. I would vote for them to either change it back, or else finally come up with a good, and TRANSPARENT solution to the issue of posting pictures, instead of making it both hard to figure out for a lot of people (as has been the case up to now) and now hard to post photos because they get rejected by the site engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts


Time for you guys to open an account on a photo-hosting site to embed instead of upload. That is just the opinion of one guy.
 

·
redneck swinger
Joined
·
623 Posts
Ya I use lensdump. It's a bit less user-friendly than photobucket was, but at least the pics aren't blurry like attached photos were

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,571 Posts
Yes, and a year or so (or a month) and every one of those pics will be a blank spot on the thread. Which of course is fine if it is just ephemera. But there has been some really good stuff lost forever, including photos of old data sheet on reels etc that is just gone. So NO, that is not the way to go if you like to read old threads with interesting information. The site should support picture archiving at some level. If you want to post your landscapes and stuff by all means post them how you like. But that IMHO is not how a site such as this should work. It shows a lack of understanding of both how these thing work over long periods of time, and it creates and amplifies the bandwidth issue that lead to the imposed photobucket limitations in the first place.

And I could also go on about the fact that when used this way photoarchiving services are not able to monitize eyeballs on the page in a way that scales with the number of hits, and this eventually will cause them to do exactly what photobucket had to do. It doesn’t make sense for them in the long run to serve up a crap ton of hits on a large photo that has to be sent over and over again to another site. But speypages makes money off the content we create here that DOES scale with hits, and so should provide reasonably decent, user friendly photo support. This has been diescussed many times already on here. So yeah, the issue goes a lot deeper when you actually get into it. Photo archiving sites, especially the free ones, have a business model that is incompatable in the long run with large scale social media. They are more designed for sharing photos with friends and family.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,331 Posts
I moved this thread to the Site Issues Forum so it could be tracked and updated.

I noticed that some members were having recent issues with uploading photos, so I have asked the Admins to check into the issue last week.
Recently, we had some updates to the Forum and I wanted to make sure the changes did not affect uploading photos. I know the IT guys are on the case.


Mike
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top