Previous news story    Next news story

New image viewing options for forums

By dpreview staff on Jan 4, 2013 at 23:57 GMT

We know how important sharing images is to our forum users, so we're really pleased to launch the latest enhancement to our forum software. The screenshots below should explain what it does (and you can of course just play around with it yourselves). The key differences are related to how we deal with larger images.

Images within posts are presented exactly as they before. If the original image is smaller than 560 pixels we'll use the original size, if it's larger we'll scale it down. Click on an image to launch the new viewer.
The image will now open in the new viewer, which fills the current window. Again we'll only downsize images that are larger than your browser window - we don't upscale.
If there's more than one image in the post, use the overlaid arrows (or left and right arrow keys) to cycle through them. There are two viewing options. The image will open in 'fit to screen' mode. Click on '1:1 View 100%' to see the original, pixel-for-pixel.
At the bottom right hand corner of the window you'll see the current scaling. 100% means no scaling (the original pixels). When you're viewing at any scale smaller than 100% you can activate the loupe tool.
The loupe displays pixel-for-pixel 100% view of the original image. You can click anywhere in the image or just drag the window around.

To get out of the image viewer click outside the window, click the close box (top right) or just press escape.

Comments

Total comments: 163
12
voider
By voider (Jan 10, 2013)

Great Job! Thank you very much!

0 upvotes
billorg
By billorg (Jan 9, 2013)

Please change the forums so that we can post from mobile ios devices! Since you changed the forums, you must use Flash now and we can only read not post - get with the times people!

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Jan 10, 2013)

There is no Flash requirement at all.

0 upvotes
guinness2
By guinness2 (Jan 9, 2013)

Thumbs up. Well done

0 upvotes
Docno
By Docno (Jan 8, 2013)

So are there ideal sizes for the originals we upload that will give optimal image quality when downsized, or does it vary according to the size/resolution of the screen each of us use?

0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Jan 9, 2013)

Large images are being thumbnailed to 560px (width of the forum) for viewing without the image viewer, 960px (medium), and 1600px (large). The latter two are used in the new image viewer.

In the new image viewer, we use the first image size that is larger than your current viewing frame, and then use the browser to constrain it to your viewing frame.

E.g., you have a monitor that's 1920 x 1200. Your viewing frame is 1800 x 1150 (after all the browser, taskbar, scrollbars are factored in). We will load the 1600px thumbnail and then that will get proportionately constrained so its height is 1150px. If the image was 1000 x 1000 pixels originally, there would be no resizing in the viewer.

Either we resize / let the browser constrain images and image quality is not 100%, or we display every pixel for pixel and you have to scroll the browser window (which is offered in the new image viewer).

0 upvotes
Docno
By Docno (Jan 13, 2013)

Belated thanks for the explanation, Richard. (Was off the grid for a while)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 8, 2013)

Is it my imagination, or are the Gallery images are more heavily compressed? For example there is now heavy posterization in areas solid areas like skies.

0 upvotes
Rick Knepper
By Rick Knepper (Jan 8, 2013)

Yes, this is what lead to my recent experience (detailed below).

0 upvotes
Charles Pike
By Charles Pike (Jan 7, 2013)

Rick Knepper are you sure about that? Fad in the Documentary/ Street Photography forum said my shots were too small, so I deleted the photos from the gallery and then reloaded the gallery with larger images. Now when I look at my old post, the photos are gone.
www.photosbypike.com

0 upvotes
Rick Knepper
By Rick Knepper (Jan 7, 2013)

The image quality is poor for images within posts and the images are embedded permanently in the posts. Deleteing the images from DPR galleries do not delete the image from the post. When I discovered how poor the resolution was when viewing images within the post, I attempted to delete the image without success.

0 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 7, 2013)

They are deleted, but there's a delay due to caching

1 upvote
Rick Knepper
By Rick Knepper (Jan 8, 2013)

Thanks! What is being done about IQ? My images are generally Post processed for the 1800x1200 image size viewed from 18 to 24 inches away. Any resizing affects IQ for this viewing distanc e but poor resizing really affects it.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Rick Knepper
By Rick Knepper (Jan 8, 2013)

Charles, Simon explained. I was just too desparate to remove those images to wait.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Jan 9, 2013)

1920 x 1200 resolution monitors account for ~7% of traffic, with all other resolutions in the top 10 being smaller than that. If your uploaded image is smaller than the viewing frame, then it should be presented as you uploaded it, without any resampling or resizing.

If you want to reach more people with your optimal post-processing, maybe consider using a smaller resolution (1200 x 800?). If not, then viewers will still be able to view the image by clicking "Download image" (being renamed to "View original") and scrolling.

We are doing away with the additional margins of the image viewer, so that will help you get more towards the 1800px across, but the 1200px will still constrained if "fit to screen".

1 upvote
aftab
By aftab (Jan 7, 2013)

Great job. I would like you to do something else as well. Something like Gmail or Flickr where you don't need to scroll all the way up to access important links such as 'Forums', 'Reviews' etc when you are at the bottom of a page.

0 upvotes
Ubilam
By Ubilam (Jan 7, 2013)

Very cool. Hope the planet has the speed to see it?

0 upvotes
JuGnO
By JuGnO (Jan 7, 2013)

Great Work :)

0 upvotes
Oery
By Oery (Jan 7, 2013)

great job..... :)

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Jan 7, 2013)

May I suggest a 50% view button? I find this is a much more realistic way to judge an image most of the time.

1 upvote
dennismullen
By dennismullen (Jan 7, 2013)

One nice thing to loose would be the scroll bars when they aren't needed. They distract from the image.

Cheers,

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 6, 2013)

Nice! This is a great improvement and it is much appreciated.

As for those who are so concerned about their images being downloaded, if they want to use your website to promote and protect their business interests, they should pay for special privileges. And in addition to that, if they actually sell anything, charge them a royalty.

2 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 6, 2013)

Respect for copyright is not about business interests.
I don't mean to sell images through DPR.
Respect for copyright is about authorship.

5 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 6, 2013)

In that case the burden of protecting your property is YOUR responsibility - not DPRs.

No one is obligated to post any of their images here. If anyone wants special privileges, they should at least be willing to pay for them.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 6, 2013)

Excuse me?
Respect for authorship is not a special privilege.
It is a natural asset of anyone who creates.
You got things quite a bit upside-down, I'm afraid.
And that is what worries me about the current state of looking at authorship of images.
In the analogy that I used below (please look below): if I participate in a car show, I don't think I should be paying the organizers for not letting a visitor drive off with my car.
It really is that simple.
Roel

6 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 6, 2013)

@ jimmy
I don't know why you would think that this is a matter of 'promoting my business interests'. The point is dpr explicitly suggesting to every viewer of my photos here that it is okay not only to view those pictures, but to download the original file. 'download original' connotes ownership to most people, regardless whether it is the camera original file or a smaller, edited version.

In the world of pinterest, tumblr, "curatorship", etc., it is misleading to suggest that any viewer is welcome to take the original file for their own use, without a link to original context. Facebook made this exact same error (created 'download original' button out of control of the photographer) a year ago. Given photographers' reactions to that, it is simply inexcusable that dpr has made the same mistake, and taken the choice of approving downloads out of the hands of the photographer.

It is very simple: a photographer's site should facilitate viewing, not appropriation of, photographs.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Manic Tuesday
By Manic Tuesday (Jan 6, 2013)

calm down roel, copyright is a made up concept, it is nonparallel with ethics or morality, and your autoshow analogy only demonstrates how ridiculous the whole thinking is. if you insist on using the autoshow as an example, then enforcement of copyright is like telling people they can't tell anyone what they saw.

2 upvotes
Manic Tuesday
By Manic Tuesday (Jan 6, 2013)

@xtoph
look buddy, wouldn't it be so much safer to keep your photos to yourself? just keep it on your local hard drive, don't show it to anyone, not even your mother, and you're guaranteed the sole and exclusive appropriation of your photograph. what do you say?

1 upvote
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 7, 2013)

@Manic Tuesday:
Hard to discuss with you if you do not seem to understand the basic concept of Copyright.
The word is quite self-explanatory.
COPY-right boils down to the exclusive right to make copies or other legally defined use of the protected material.
Sure : it I show anything, it can be viewed and talked about by whoever feels like that. But it cannot be COPIED. And the first and most important aspect of that, is that it cannot be downloaded for a use that I have no control over.
Roel

2 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 7, 2013)

RoelHendrickx,

Obviously you want to promote your work here. You claim you "don't *MEAN* to sell images through DPR" but nevertheless you are okay with such an arrangement. And you are quite right "respect for authorship is not a special privilege. However you don't seem to understand that posting images here is a privilege. To ask for anything more is a special privilege. Get it?

xtoph,

You've got it wrong too, expecting something for nothing. Follow Manic Tuesday's sage advice and you'll have nothing to worry about. It's really that simple.

0 upvotes
JohnyP
By JohnyP (Jan 6, 2013)

nice change....good job

0 upvotes
mgatov
By mgatov (Jan 6, 2013)

Thank you very much! I really appreciate all the effort you have put into making this a fantastic site!

2 upvotes
Joachim Wulfers
By Joachim Wulfers (Jan 6, 2013)

when I click on an image in a thread, in order to enlarge the picture, it shows me a full screen view, which is great. However I connot click again on the picture to get back to the thread. So I have to "go back" and I wind up in the respective forum and then click again on the thread I was viewing.
Am I doing something wrong or is this a bug in the viewing options?

0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Jan 6, 2013)

Forgot to add that. But in the meantime, there's an X in the top right, you can hit the escape key, or click in the darker margin around the viewer.

1 upvote
dennismullen
By dennismullen (Jan 6, 2013)

Why is the focal length left off the EXIF for toggle on/off but is there on the opening picture mouse over?

Cheers,

1 upvote
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Jan 6, 2013)

That's a bug. I'll look into this. Thanks.

0 upvotes
Doug
By Doug (Jan 6, 2013)

@ the users that misunderstand. Make your own site and then dpreview will understand and get your messages more clearly. Show them how it is done.

1 upvote
Sigimini
By Sigimini (Jan 6, 2013)

A fantastic improvement for image displays. Congratulations dpreview!

2 upvotes
Hubertus Bigend
By Hubertus Bigend (Jan 6, 2013)

Nice! But some criticism, too:

No problem with a "DOWNLOAD" button – it being 2013 and the WWW having come of age a long time ago, someone who uploads something in a forum can be expected to know that there is some danger of it being downloaded by others...

But "DOWNLOAD ORIGINAL" is misleading, especially to casual users who don't upload stuff themselves, because it suggests there really was a full-size, possibly unchanged out-of-camera JPEG to be downloaded, which it only is if the uploader really chose so.

Which is even more problematic as I don't see any information about the actual size of that "original". There should be a display somewhere showing the pixel dimensions of what is there.

0 upvotes
BG_CX3_DPREVIEW
By BG_CX3_DPREVIEW (Jan 6, 2013)

C O N G R A T S D P R E V I E W

This is a serious and real handy upgrade

I love it, so then thumbs up

1 upvote
Altruisto
By Altruisto (Jan 6, 2013)

Plain and simple, this is everything I wanted, and those who complain about upscaling, check the zooming in your browser, it should be at 100%. To be perfect, we would need less compression in original size, and the ability to compare two or more included shots in the post side by side. Thank you Dpreview!

0 upvotes
acahaya
By acahaya (Jan 6, 2013)

Images look horrible on retina displays, lots of ugly compression artifacts.
You really need to fix this, i have no problems in several other forums, flickr, .... but right now i try very hard to NOT look at pictures.

2 upvotes
acahaya
By acahaya (Jan 6, 2013)

too late to edit ...

Using Firefox on a desktop pc i have no problems and really like the new viewer. But unfortunately i'm rarely able to read dpr via the desktop, i.e. i'm visiting 99% via a mobile device with retina display.

0 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Jan 6, 2013)

Sounds like you have a bad apple.

1 upvote
acahaya
By acahaya (Jan 6, 2013)

Problem seems to be related to mobile provider settings plus maybe high resolution mobile devices. Images look OK as long as i view them via WLAN.
I used to have a similar problem with my provider where images were not shown at all on mobile devices on some websites but this was solved by changing some settings in my profile. I already checked but nothing changed regarding the provider.
I also checked other browsers on the iPad, same problem so it is not related to Safari.

0 upvotes
Den Sh
By Den Sh (Jan 6, 2013)

Please do support retina displays. The only way to really enjoy images on high resolution screen at the moment is to view originals.

Comment edited 9 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
dennismullen
By dennismullen (Jan 6, 2013)

I'm looking at a picture I just posted and when toggling between it and the original size it is plainly unscaled. Yet you claim you do not upscale the pictures.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50606729

0 upvotes
dennismullen
By dennismullen (Jan 6, 2013)

I found the Firefox zoom controls and set them to reset and zoom text only. That fixed the problem.

1 upvote
klburgess
By klburgess (Jan 6, 2013)

But still no options for displaying stereoscopic photos in 3D?
And essentially no coverage of photographic developments in stereoscopy. I love the site and it's phocus on fotography, but 3D is in the domain and there is a LOT going on that you guys appear to be dodging out.
Adding stereoscopic modes to the viewer would be a good place to start, we've got two eyes for a reason!

1 upvote
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 6, 2013)

i have not given anyone permission to 'download original' files of my photographs. dpr's inclusion of a dedicated button for this is bizarre, and suggests that i somehow do give such permission.

i am aware that people can copy my photos, but there's a difference between that being technically possible and it being actively encouraged and tacitly approved.

please change this. and shame on dpr, after facebook's photographer unfriendly changes (including a 'download original' button we have no control over) and the backlash against them, you would think that a photographer-centered site would have handled this differently.

10 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 6, 2013)

I'm kind of confused. You uploaded the original image to the forum post and we generally show it scaled down, with the option to the view the full original uploaded image. If it's a DPR gallery image you can disallow downloading of the original, and for all other images this button simply opens the original (unscaled) shared file in a separate window. It's up to you how big the 'original' is.

8 upvotes
RussellInCincinnati
By RussellInCincinnati (Jan 6, 2013)

Have never thought of DPreview forums as a place to attempt to advertise my photographs while also preserving their sale-ability. More importantly nor does DPreview intend for the general forums to be places where you get free advertising of thumbnails of photographs you want to sell.

Thus shame on you for complaining, that DPreview forums interfere with your plan to have DPreview generate free thumbnails and publicity of your for-sale photos.

Put more simply, if you aren't planning to sell any of your DPreview-forum-posted photos, i.e. if you aren't planning to misuse the forums to get free commercial advertising, what the heck do you care whether or not people download "the original resolution" photos you've posted.

3 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 6, 2013)

I already brought up this issue in a comment below.
DPR replied that the button just makes downloading easier, while it is already possible anyway.

I understand the technology bit.
What I don't understand nor like is the "just making that easier" bit. Why would DPR want to make that easier?

There is a culture emerging in which it is just common practice to download and use other persons's images, without respect for copyright.

I don't feel like DPR should encourage that. By including a "download original" button, DPR sends out the (wrong) message that images are up for grabs.

It's not because a clever thief knows how to open and jumpstart my car, that DPR should tell everybody that they can just take the keys and drive off, because I parked my car unguarded in their garage.

The point is that there should be a reverse in the culture change, back to more respect for the author of any copyrighted content. DPR could play a part by not encouraging or facilitating image theft.

9 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 6, 2013)

Simon--
I cannot tell if you are being facetious or just thick. Do you honestly not understand that a button labelled 'download original' implicitly condones stealing the image and doing with it whatever the person desires?
Of course this has always been technically feasible, but few people have to have it explained to them that the primary purpose of posting an image for viewing is viewing, while the word 'download' connotes possession.
It seems to me that a photographer-centered approach would enhance viewing and discourage stealing.

7 upvotes
acahaya
By acahaya (Jan 6, 2013)

@Roel: Like x 10!

1 upvote
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 6, 2013)

@russel-
If you don't care whether people download or steal your photos, that's you choice. My whole point is that it should be MY CHOICE whether my image posts are offered up as public downloads. As it stands with the latest iteration, dpr has usurped that choice.

Whether i sell my photos or not has no bearing on this discussion.

2 upvotes
am stram gram
By am stram gram (Jan 6, 2013)

@xtoph I don't agree: most of people do not really care in having the original picture for pro work. Some pro people do. Those pro people would know anyway how to download an original pic, either from the new or from the old interface.

In doubt, always upload a reduced version of your work.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Jan 6, 2013)

If are worried that someone might steal your images, then don't upload them to your gallery.

If you are worried that someone could steal a high quality original file, then just upload a low quality small file.

I'm pretty fortunate that I don't have this problem. None of my photos are worth stealing.

2 upvotes
am stram gram
By am stram gram (Jan 6, 2013)

Thanks Marty (aka Walter White). You made my day!

0 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 6, 2013)

It is bizarre to me to hear people tell me i should not be concerned whether people steal my image files. Surely it should be up to me if that's something i am concerned with?

Once again, i understand that it is always possible for people to copy an image presented on the internet. My objection is to dpr effectively telling one and all that it is perfectly okay if they want to steal that file. It is not okay, and dpr should not be facilitating it.

To those sagely opining that i shouldnt upload 'original' size files, my gallery photos are generally about 1100 px on the long dimension. Dpr still offers a button to viewers to 'download original', i this case the 1100 px file. No one should be downloading that file; it is for viewing, not offered to people to keep, use, or alter.

Some of you think it is witty to denigrate your pictures. Your choice. My photos are good enoth to care about. And i respect my subjects enough not to condone giving away photos of them.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 7, 2013)

When you 'download' it just opens in a browser window. This has been the same here for many years. You decide how big the image you share is. If its visible in a viewer's browser window it's already been "downloaded"

4 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 7, 2013)

simon: i don't need the operation of the browser explained to me. if you think it is 'no big deal', then it should be no big deal for dpr to change the misleading invitation to download the original file. as i said, most people who read that are not thinking 'oh, that just means to view the picture in my browswer'. they are already doing that, at 100% if they desire. if they click 'download original file', that clearly connotes taking possession of that picture file. and there's a difference between condoning that, and it being possible.

why would you not change this so as to cease to encourage people to steal photos--even if it was not dpr's intention to so encourage people?

i realize that it can be exhausting dealing with criticism of your every move that comes in from the web no matter what you do, it probably seems like. but this is a simple issue; you made a mistake. if you acknowledge that, change it, then we'll all move on and everyone will be happy for ever after, right?

2 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Jan 7, 2013)

@xtoph

What would make you happy? If they relabelled the button "Open Original' or 'View Original' or do you want to remove the ability to see the original altogether? Obviously removing the ability altogether would be stupid as what would be the point of sharing images for people to look at if they weren't allowed to look at it.

So the conclusion is your objection must be with the word 'download'. So lets concede you have a small point there and the word download does suggest copying it your computer (even though that happens regardless).

I personally find you are blowing that point way out of context:

It's a photographer site, we know who owns the copyright.

It's a website, we know how to steal the content if that's our intent. The stock advice for protecting images shared on a website is to watermark them with your copyright.

You have a CHOICE. Share from the gallery if you want to block downloads/views.

The noise you are making is vastly disproportionate to your small point.

2 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 7, 2013)

i would also add that as soon as this was raised i suggested what we could re-label it, got agreement and sent an email to the dev team. It was launched late friday, it's now the weekend. It'll change when we're back at work.

2 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Jan 7, 2013)

@simon--
Thank you for clarifying that you will change the label on the 'download original' button. It was far from clear previously that you agreed this should change, especially after your responses to my comments above.

I put a great deal of effort into dpr and have contributed a fair bit over the years to making it a better place, so i appreciate the responsiveness of dpr to fixing this misstep.

1 upvote
Hubertus Bigend
By Hubertus Bigend (Jan 7, 2013)

This is a weird discussion. If you don't want downloads from a public forum, don't upload to the forum. It's that simple. It wouldn't harm dpreview to rethink the wording of both "download" and "original", but there's absolutely no reason to change anything else.

2 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 7, 2013)

Thanks to Simon for changing the wording from "Download" to "View".
Even if the technical operation that ensues remains exactly the same, it still sends a different message.
Nobody can deny that in the world of today, "downloading" something from the web has a different connotation than "viewing".

2 upvotes
hflavo
By hflavo (Jan 6, 2013)

This looks like a really good system. Good work!

3 upvotes
photodan1
By photodan1 (Jan 6, 2013)

Thanks guys, great implementation!

2 upvotes
Ed_arizona
By Ed_arizona (Jan 6, 2013)

should be called Pixel peeper Loupe :)

I like the upgrade, good job!

0 upvotes
rjx
By rjx (Jan 6, 2013)

Looks very nice!

1 upvote
charita
By charita (Jan 6, 2013)

Nice job, I like it. However the Toggle EXIF Data view omits the focal length used for the image, which however is present in the original image overlay. This is a useful piece of information which should be included.

4 upvotes
Nightwings
By Nightwings (Jan 6, 2013)

Nicely Done ..... The best photography related site on the planet just got better.

5 upvotes
PC Wheeler
By PC Wheeler (Jan 5, 2013)

Bottom example: Big Brother is truly watching me!

Phil

0 upvotes
Trafford
By Trafford (Jan 5, 2013)

A nice upgrade feature.

1 upvote
fad
By fad (Jan 5, 2013)

The problem with the "Download Original" button is that it makes it look as if the viewer is being granted permission to download someone else's work, when that usually is not the photographer's intention.

7 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Jan 5, 2013)

Would 'view original' be better? It really just means 'view original in a new window', but that's a bit wordy.

6 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (Jan 6, 2013)

@JS: might be a good idea... unless you guys want to stick your neck out and be held liable. ;)

2 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (Jan 6, 2013)

Good work guys. As suggested, I think "view original" would be optimum over "download original".

2 upvotes
fad
By fad (Jan 6, 2013)

Yes, 'view original' would be much better.

2 upvotes
RoelHendrickx
By RoelHendrickx (Jan 6, 2013)

"View original" is MUCH much better.
I upload and embed my images for viewing, not for downloading.

5 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (Jan 7, 2013)

@Simon Joinson

I think the best option would be "View Original Size" or "Show Original Size"

0 upvotes
mike kobal
By mike kobal (Jan 5, 2013)

awesome, thanks guys!

0 upvotes
jkrumm
By jkrumm (Jan 5, 2013)

This is the single biggest improvement to the forums I have seen (well the new moderators are good too). Love being able to pull up a larger version as a slide show, with the loupe if the photos are larger. Makes looking at the photographs more fun. Thanks, and nice job.

0 upvotes
Joe Huckleberry
By Joe Huckleberry (Jan 5, 2013)

Nice. One improvement might be to either (as someone suggested below) make the back button work, or make it easier to close the viewer, esc and the little x require either too much movement, or, too much accuracy :)

0 upvotes
Press Correspondent
By Press Correspondent (Jan 5, 2013)

Does NOT work properly with Safari on iPad 2 or with Internet Explorer (Windows 7). Works great with Firefox on PC.

3 upvotes
Hermann Baqué
By Hermann Baqué (Jan 5, 2013)

Great!

0 upvotes
atclen
By atclen (Jan 5, 2013)

Like it !

0 upvotes
Spilios
By Spilios (Jan 5, 2013)

Nice!!Thank You.

0 upvotes
Michael Landers
By Michael Landers (Jan 5, 2013)

Thanks a lot - a real perfect update for the best photo-forums -

I must say your service is absolute phantastic - thank you for all your service all over the years -

Michael

1 upvote
NileLily
By NileLily (Jan 5, 2013)

Terrific update. Thank you

0 upvotes
c2cal
By c2cal (Jan 5, 2013)

On a Macbook Pro using Chrome, full size image viewing does not support trackpad two-finger scrolling, both vertical and horizontal (as typical web pages do). I have to click and drag the image to scroll it. Please fix!

Also, I find the black framing around the image too large. I would like the option to fill my monitor size without the black frame and without seeing the full image size.

Also, it would be nice to enable the 'back' button to close the overlay, as it's not immediately clear if you're on the same page or not and this would provide a helpful shortcut.

Thanks!

2 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Jan 5, 2013)

When the images are shown inline with the text they look much softer than in the viewer. Is it possible to make the inline images appear just as sharp?

Thanks.

2 upvotes
Biological_Viewfinder
By Biological_Viewfinder (Jan 5, 2013)

Wow!!!

0 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (Jan 5, 2013)

Well done.

Thank you.

1 upvote
Total comments: 163
12