1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

What is the optimal image size limit for our forums?

Discussion in 'Help and Feedback' started by Amin Sabet, Oct 13, 2015.

  1. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    For a long time, when people would ask what size image to post in forum threads, I would advise a 1024px max. Now with displays reaching higher resolution, I've been advising a 1600px max, though I wonder if 1300px is a better compromise.

    Our forum software automatically resizes large images to fit the browser window, but this doesn't change the file size. Ie, if we had a 2400px limit, the images would still fit, but those on a slow connection will have larger files to download.

    The other issue is that our server port bandwidth is limited to 1Gbps, which means that if enough folks are browsing simulataneously and the images are large, overall site performance will slow for everyone.

    Currently our attachment system automatically resizes images larger than 1600px to 1600px. It does not resize externally-hosted (eg, Flickr, Zenfolio, Smugmug) proxied images, but that's something I'm looking into. We have members embedding full res images at times, and a thread page can literally jump into the 100s of MBs when this happens.

    In terms of guidelines, what do you think we should ask? 1600px? 1300px? 1024px?

    Again, whatever limit we choose as a guideline, I eventually hope to implement via software so that externally hosted images will automatically be resized.
     
  2. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I have my export set at 1500px (which I believe is what the old forum software required).

    I don't see a big reason to change it.
     
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    A lot of our members use Flickr, which doesn't have a setting between 1024 and 1600px. That's why I've been saying 1600px.
     
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Works for me! I don't see a huge issue with a limit. This is not an image hosting site.
     
  5. PacNWMike

    PacNWMike Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 5, 2014
    Salish Sea
    guess?
    I size to 1080 ht. since that is the native display of many devices.
     
  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Google Photos lets you input your file size manually when posting onto forums. All you need to do is change the image size number in the URL heading to whatever you like. At default it allows 800 as your maximum size.
     
  7. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Thanks, all.
     
  8. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    Assuming the servers can downsize external images and the system's not likely to be slowed down by a 1600 px limit that sounds fine to me.

    When large images slow down a page I just close it. If some one needs to show me their pixels rather than their picture they should include a link, not embed the image.
    Fred
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    I noticed the forum is stripping EXIF on uploaded images again, fwiw.
     
  10. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    I think it always has done so for images that are resized. This seems to be unavoidable in XenForo. If it's doing so for non-resized images, I may be able to fix that.
     
  11. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    I just uploaded 2 images at 1600px to
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/80846/page-2#post-822687
    (both have there EXIF replaced with "Comment: CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100")

    Thanks!
    Barry
     
  12. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Are you sure it wasn't always (since we changed to XenForo) this way with image uploads? I didn't look at this metadata issue until recently.
     
  13. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi, it probably has been since the switch, but I do remember it was working at one point (on the old forums probably).

    Thanks,
    Barry
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  14. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  15. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Thanks Amin.

    On another note, I've been noticing on my phone and iPad that images are sometimes getting cut off. I wasn't sure if it was hosted or proxied images, but today this (hosted) image did not fully load on the iPad, even if I refreshed the page or the image:
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/80741/#post-822248

    I'm using Chrome on the iPad, but Safari didn't load it fully either (although both Chrome and Safari apparently use the same renderer on iOS).

    I haven't noticed it on my PC; I think it only happens on slower devices (but the iPad is on my WiFi so the connection is not slower).

    Thanks,
    Barry
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  16. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    1300 is fine for most wide aspect photos (especially mobile viewing) but is inadequate for 16:9 or wider (1600 is okay), I can see those with 2K or 4K wanting more. For portrait aspect I actually prefer 960 tall - it's hard to rotate a desktop monitor and there are typically UI elements that eat up even more vertical space.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1