Attachments: Thumbnails or larger images?

Joe Blow · 2 May 2008

There has been a bit of debate about the use of thumbnails instead of full size images and I thought it best to start a poll to get a feel for how the ASF community feels as a whole. Or at least those who care enough about it to vote.

As I see it, here are the positives and negatives of both:

THUMBNAILS

Positives:

1. Can attach much larger images. The maximum image width is currently set to 1200 pixels wide. If we used full size images the maximum width would be around 800 pixels wide.
2. Threads load faster as full size images don't have to be loaded by everyone, just those who want to view them.

Negatives:

1. Thumbnails have to be clicked on to view the fuill size image.

FULL SIZE IMAGES

Positives:

1. No need to click on them to see them in full size.
2. Can see the post content and attachment at the same time.

Negatives:

As detailed above:

1. 800 pixel width maximum may make detail (text etc) hard to decipher, especially if the attachment has been resized from a much larger image.
2. Slower thread loading times.

Taking all that into account, please vote in the poll and share your views. I have decided I will go with a majority decision as there is no point forcing what I want on the ASF community. It has to be a decision ASF's members make.

Pat · 2 May 2008

Excuse my ignorance Joe, but how was it before? that way worked very well.

doctorj · 2 May 2008

What about larger thumbnails?

Would having thumbnails at 500-800px be a good compromise for people that want to see the images in the post and people that want them at the dimensions the poster intended?

Joe Blow · 2 May 2008

doctorj said:
What about larger thumbnails?

Would having thumbnails at 500-800px be a good compromise for people that want to see the images in the post and people that want them at the dimensions the poster intended?

Interesting idea. This is a possibility also.

Joe Blow · 2 May 2008

Pat said:
Excuse my ignorance Joe, but how was it before? that way worked very well.

Before was larger images. Now it's clickable thumbnails.

Pat · 2 May 2008

Larger images then, but what do I vote for, larger thumb nails or full size images?

Thankyou so much for requesting and taking members feedback onboard.

Makes ASF a better site every day!

Cheers :bier:

treefrog · 2 May 2008

Joe Blow said:
Interesting idea. This is a possibility also.

voted for the larger thumbees because:

1) so much to poke through on this site and large pics u don't want to see but are forced to can be frustrating
2) small thumbees are too small to get a rough idea of what is being said and bringing them all up by clickclick is ..........ummmmm, a little bit of a drag

tech/a · 2 May 2008

As I post a few charts---

Larger Thumb nails

One of the restrictions with posting a full size chart is I cant post full size.
Its shrunk and often detail becomes un readable.
By allowing a fullsize image to open clarity isnt lost and the page doesnt become to big for the forum.
Looks neater to I think in a thread.

Whiskers · 2 May 2008

I went larger thumbnails also, because I find it better to load faster and not have to scroll over heaps of stuff that I have already seen.

But Joe, what if full size images just beat the others, but total thumbnails + larger thumbnails is > large images?

nomore4s · 2 May 2008

tech/a said:
As I post a few charts---

Larger Thumb nails

One of the restrictions with posting a full size chart is I cant post full size.
Its shrunk and often detail becomes un readable.
By allowing a fullsize image to open clarity isnt lost and the page doesnt become to big for the forum.
Looks neater to I think in a thread.

I agree.

Good compromise imo.

tigerboi · 2 May 2008

Full size is the only way to go...tb

Trembling Hand · 2 May 2008

Very smart idea! As one of the original complainers about the change I think this is a good way to go. Larger thumbs up to the max that the forum layout isn't compromised. Great way to go.

tcoates · 2 May 2008

Think current size is fine. If I want to view the image I can (just click on the image). If I don't want to, its very easy to skip over.

At least in Firefox, the images open in a new tab

Tim

Agentm · 2 May 2008

thanks for the thread, i think its well worth looking at, my preference is for how it was before.. full images..

thanks again..

wildkactus · 2 May 2008

Thumbnails for me,

Makes the site faster to load, especially when i'am travelling and can't get a high speed connection.

pan · 2 May 2008

Joe Blow said:
2. Threads load faster as full size images don't have to be loaded by everyone, just those who want to view them.

It's helps to have your page load faster when your in the country or travelling and can't get broadband!

Joe Blow · 2 May 2008

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of 800 pixel thumbnails. It combines the positive aspects of both. 800 pixels will be big enough so that many people wont have to enlarge it any further and those who wish to see it in it's original size just have to click on it.

Worth considering.

Timmy · 2 May 2008

Joe Blow said:
The more I think about it the more I like the idea of 800 pixel thumbnails. It combines the positive aspects of both. 800 pixels will be big enough so that many people wont have to enlarge it any further and those who wish to see it in it's original size just have to click on it.

Worth considering.

Agree - good one.

2020hindsight · 2 May 2008

advantages of thumbnails over full size .. easier for posters putting up several jpegs - because you don't have to plan the widths eg to get three across the page adjust width to 270 each - to get 2 across the page adjust width to 420 each etc (assuming you want it to look neat) - all unnecessary if you use thumbnails.

also thumbnails more efficient on space. - can only be a good thing

PS when you look at thumbnails , double click to magnify the thumbnail - then maximise the window to get more magnification still.

My vote is bigger thumbnails. (although the current size is also ok)

PS :topic there are two standard messages people add to emails
1. IMPORTANT! - if you get this email in error then eat the thing ! - do not forward it on or you're in big sh!! - etc etc etc (bs bs) - complete waste of time even reading the thing - and as for being "Important" - you gotta be joking

THe second message :-
2. "Consider the environment before printing this email" - I like that one

So_Cynical · 2 May 2008

I like the full image....its great to be able to post pics to support what your saying.

sounds like the 800x thumbs will pretty much do the same anyway

Attachments: Thumbnails or larger images?

Thumbnails or full size images?

Thumbnails

Full size images

Larger Thumbnails

No opinion

Joe Blow

Administrator

Pat

doctorj

Hatchet Moderator

Joe Blow

Administrator

Joe Blow

Administrator

Pat

treefrog

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

Whiskers

It's a small world

nomore4s

Commonsense isn't that common

tigerboi

Trembling Hand

Can be found on the bid

tcoates

Agentm

wildkactus

pan

Joe Blow

Administrator

Timmy

white swans need love too

2020hindsight

So_Cynical

The Contrarian Averager

Similar threads

Attachments: Thumbnails or larger images?

Thumbnails or full size images?

Thumbnails

Full size images

Larger Thumbnails

No opinion

Administrator

Hatchet Moderator

Administrator

Administrator

No Ordinary Duck

It's a small world

Commonsense isn't that common

Can be found on the bid

Administrator

white swans need love too

The Contrarian Averager

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency