Reading mode: Light Dark

Scrollin' around

Go to last post
R

Richard Goulden

Senior Member
Messages
2,379
Reaction score
0
Location
London, UK
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
 
Richard Goulden said:
Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?!
Click to expand...
And if you want people to see your photo in all its glory, post a second hyperlink (don't forget the trailing semi-colon!) to the full-sized JPEG that people can choose to view or download separately.
Richard Goulden said:
Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.
Click to expand...
Inserting reply text before the quoted text makes no sense to me... the real problem is lack of editing. People are content to simply bang out their reply, and not bother editing the amount of quoted text the software includes. You only need enough quoted text to provide some continuity and local context for your reply. There is no need to quote the entire message!

It even says so underneath the editing window: "Please trim as much of the quoted (> ) message as possible (anything that's not relevant to your posting)." I guess most people are just too lazy.
 
HI Brian,

Lazy is probably right but it makes my blood boil!

You will note that I have trimmed this message. Probably too much....

Regards,

Richard
Brian said:
Richard Goulden said:
Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?!
Click to expand...
And if you want people to see your photo in all its glory, post a
second hyperlink (don't forget the trailing semi-colon!) to the
full-sized JPEG that people can choose to view or download
separately.
Click to expand...
 
Richard Goulden said:
Gripe 1
Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!
Click to expand...
Agreed... as a newcomer to this group, I'm trying to work out the optimum size for an imbedded image. If,as you say, it is under 400 pixels on the horizontal, I'll use that value. I'm also interested in the syntax of the hyperlink that would allow me to display the imbedded image and then to select that to go to the full size image
Richard Goulden said:
Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.
Click to expand...
Bottom posting has always been the norm when posting to Usenet / discussion groups etc. It is entirely logical to make your comments after the item to which you are referring. When someone top posts, you have to jump to the bottom to see what he/she is on about!

My one observation about this group is that very few bother to trim/snip the excess verbage, resulting in some extremely messy threads.

I hope you enjoyed your lunch :)
 
HI Bruce,

It was a good lunch....

If the excess detail (and pictures!) were trimmed it would be dead easy to scroll to the bottom. Because people don't bother you can spend two minutes scrolling to the bottom on a long thread.

That's the only reason I prefer it at the top.

Regards,

Richard
Bruce Paterson said:
Richard Goulden said:
Gripe 1
Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!
Click to expand...
Agreed... as a newcomer to this group, I'm trying to work out the
optimum size for an imbedded image. If,as you say, it is under 400
pixels on the horizontal, I'll use that value. I'm also interested
in the syntax of the hyperlink that would allow me to display the
imbedded image and then to select that to go to the full size image
Bruce Paterson said:
Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.
Click to expand...
Bottom posting has always been the norm when posting to Usenet /
discussion groups etc. It is entirely logical to make your
comments after the item to which you are referring. When someone
top posts, you have to jump to the bottom to see what he/she is on
about!

My one observation about this group is that very few bother to
trim/snip the excess verbage, resulting in some extremely messy
threads.

I hope you enjoyed your lunch :)
Click to expand...
 
Hmmmn - tetchy eh!

kind of agree all the same - specially with respect to the large pics.

jono

p.s. hope you had a nice lunch
:-)
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
 
How about when, somewhere in the bottom 1/3 of some monster thread, you get that guy who has the entire thread to date quoted, and neglects to add anything? Who is this pinhead? He hits "reply", gets distracted picking his nose, and drops the hash pipe on the mouse which is hovering over "post", I guess. I get so twisted up I have to search the whole thread for those three to five words that confirm my suspicions about his heritage.
 
I've been wanting to get it off my chest for a while now and have never found the time.

Tetchy - YES! Large pics are daft to somebody with a 15" monitor!

By the way, if I download an image from this forum to get a better look at it in PS, it downloads as an .asp or rsr file that I cannot open.

Any ideas?....

Regards,

Richard
Jono Slack said:
kind of agree all the same - specially with respect to the large pics.

jono

p.s. hope you had a nice lunch
:-)
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
HI Erik,

Nosepicking should be made illegal when replying to posts on this forum!
Erik Ehudin said:
How about when, somewhere in the bottom 1/3 of some monster thread,
you get that guy who has the entire thread to date quoted, and
neglects to add anything? Who is this pinhead? He hits "reply",
gets distracted picking his nose, and drops the hash pipe on the
mouse which is hovering over "post", I guess. I get so twisted up
I have to search the whole thread for those three to five words
that confirm my suspicions about his heritage.
Click to expand...
 
Richard Goulden said:
Tetchy - YES! Large pics are daft to somebody with a 15" monitor!

By the way, if I download an image from this forum to get a better
look at it in PS, it downloads as an .asp or rsr file that I cannot
open.

Any ideas?....

Regards,

Richard
Jono Slack said:
kind of agree all the same - specially with respect to the large pics.

jono

p.s. hope you had a nice lunch
:-)
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Member said:
Richard Goulden wrote:
Click to expand...
if I download an image from this forum to get a better look at it in PS, it downloads as an .asp or rsr file that I cannot open.

Any ideas?....

In IE5, if I right click and open the image in a new window, I can usually right click again and at least get it as a .bmp.
 
Maybe this was said, but with regards to people replying with no post - I've found that usually people do have a reply in there, but they mistakenly left the '> ' sign in front of their reply, so it blends in with the previous reply. Very irritating. Like this:
Member said:
This is JF's post, not Eriks.
Click to expand...
Regarding smaller image posts. This is a tough one. I personally have a 21" monitor, so doesn't bother me. The problem, I would imagine, is that people (including me), don't post an image for the sake of the content, but rather to display the sharpness and quality of the E10 itself. But as someone else said, perhaps a small image with a link to the full size is the answer.

JF
Erik Ehudin said:
How about when, somewhere in the bottom 1/3 of some monster thread,
you get that guy who has the entire thread to date quoted, and
neglects to add anything? Who is this pinhead? He hits "reply",
gets distracted picking his nose, and drops the hash pipe on the
mouse which is hovering over "post", I guess. I get so twisted up
I have to search the whole thread for those three to five words
that confirm my suspicions about his heritage.
Click to expand...
 
JF wrote:
I've found that usually people do have a reply in there,
JF47429 said:
but they mistakenly left the '> ' sign in front of their reply, so
it blends in with the previous reply. Very irritating. Like this:
JF47429 said:
This is JF's post, not Eriks.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That's what makes it so diabolical. I go hunting for the reply, which never emerges... Gotta run. Time for my meds. ;-)
 
Hi Erik
I think you're talking about me!

:-)

jono
Erik Ehudin said:
How about when, somewhere in the bottom 1/3 of some monster thread,
you get that guy who has the entire thread to date quoted, and
neglects to add anything? Who is this pinhead? He hits "reply",
gets distracted picking his nose, and drops the hash pipe on the
mouse which is hovering over "post", I guess. I get so twisted up
I have to search the whole thread for those three to five words
that confirm my suspicions about his heritage.
Click to expand...
 
Hi Richard

Yes - it's one of macintosh's wonderful stupidities - happens to me too - only I don't have any problem opening them in PS - save it to the desktop, open photoshop, and open it frm the desktop - works okay - but why it can't save it as a jpg like windows I dunno.

kind regards
jono slack
Richard Goulden said:
Tetchy - YES! Large pics are daft to somebody with a 15" monitor!

By the way, if I download an image from this forum to get a better
look at it in PS, it downloads as an .asp or rsr file that I cannot
open.

Any ideas?....

Regards,

Richard
Jono Slack said:
kind of agree all the same - specially with respect to the large pics.

jono

p.s. hope you had a nice lunch
:-)
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hi Jono,

I have just tried it and it works!!! When you hold the control key down on an image there are a few choices.

The .asp file will open but only if you open it from within Photoshop or if Photoshop is already open.

If you select the download image (not download link) it actually downloads the jpeg.

Another mystery solved!

Regards,

Richard
Jono Slack said:
kind regards
jono slack
Richard Goulden said:
Tetchy - YES! Large pics are daft to somebody with a 15" monitor!

By the way, if I download an image from this forum to get a better
look at it in PS, it downloads as an .asp or rsr file that I cannot
open.

Any ideas?....

Regards,

Richard
Jono Slack said:
kind of agree all the same - specially with respect to the large pics.

jono

p.s. hope you had a nice lunch
:-)
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Richard Goulden said:
Hi All,

I have a couple of gripes that I need to get off my chest before I
go and get some lunch.

Gripe 1

Why oh why do the various posters in this forum post images that
are three foot across?! I hate not being a position to see the
whole shot and getting the full effect - especially on a
particularly nice shot. 400 pixels on the long dimension is MORE
than adequate for pasting directly into a thread and we get to see
the whole thing with no scrolling!

Gripe 2

Putting a posting at the BOTTOM and not at the top. It drives me
absolutely crazy to have to scroll to the bottom when everybody who
has posted has done it at the top.

That's me done. I'm going to get some lunch......

Regards,

Richard
Click to expand...
 
Bruce Paterson said:
Agreed... as a newcomer to this group, I'm trying to work out the
optimum size for an imbedded image.
Click to expand...
I think the code provided to the browser will add scrollbars to the image if it is wider than 500 pixels.
Bruce Paterson said:
I'm also interested in the syntax of the hyperlink that would allow
me to display the imbedded image and then to select that to go to
the full size image
Click to expand...
You need two links... one as an inline image and the other as a clickable link. By default, URLs ending in ".jpg" will be inlined (might apply to .gif and .bmp and .png as well, but I haven't tried). Other URLs will be represented by a clickable hyperlink. If you want a JPEG to be shown as a hyperlink, add a semi-colon to the end of the URL. Thus, you can do something like this:



http://www.risc.org/Images/E10/into_the_light.jpg

The first URL goes to "sm-into_the_light.jpg" and the second goes to "into_the_light.jpg;" (different filename with the semi-colon). Easy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top