| Author |
Message |
Gwiwer
Rt Hon Gentleman and Ghost of Oliver Bulleid
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Far away yet close at hand in images of elsewhere
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 3:15 pm
|
This might help Photobucket users.
I certainly don't experience those issues.
CEO Penhayle Bay Railway. Ferroequinologist. BA Hons (Honourable Bachelor of Aquatarts  )
The wise yet mysterious Sir Gwiwer Greybeard |
|
 |
duttonbay
Chief Commissioner
Joined: May 26, 2003
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 6:53 pm
|
| Gwiwer wrote: | This might help Photobucket users.
I certainly don't experience those issues. |
I didn't have these issues until a day or two ago either. The instructions you pointed us to say this:
| Quote: | 5. Beneath the thumbnail of each image there are four slightly different versions of its URL. Double-click on IMG Code (the last option) and check that a little window opens which says "Copied" or "Link copied" (the exact message seems to depends on your OS). Some operating systems only require a single click.
6. Open Railpage Australia™™ and open a reply window in the forum you wish to post to.
7. There is NO NEED to click the IMG button on the Railpage Australia™™ window - simply paste the copied link from your Photobucket page which will already have the IMG ... /IMG tags attached. This works the same whether you are using a "Post Reply" or "Quick Reply" window or even starting a new thread. |
That's precisely what I did to link the image I (attempted) to use earlier.
We should *not* have to follow a link which looks broken. We should be able to right click on a link and copy the URL, open open it a new window. Why does this new functionality not differentiate between left and right click?
|
|
|
Somebody in the WWW
Comeng Gunzel
Joined: Oct 08, 2004
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 7:14 pm
|
My whinge is that when someone provides a [url=] link within an [img] for one to click the image for a larger version or whatever on another site, that no longer works and clicking on it just shows the same sized image as is displayed in the 'image viewer' or whatever. Same for why it creates links to the viewer when the image is below the automatically resized size.
Such an example would be at http://www.railpage.com.au/f-p1054343.htm#1054343 - the two thumbnail-sized pics at the bottom are a link to a larger version on another site, which previously worked, yet now if you click on it, it just shows the thumbnail in the viewer thingy 
" The trains at Pennant Hills run roughly every half hour. Nobody in their right mind uses a service that shoddy. That so many do just proves how many dumb and/or desperate people there are in Sydney." - MrPC
Transport Textbook - My photos at RailPictures.Net |
|
|
wongm
Minister for Railways
Joined: May 26, 2005
Last Visited: Nov 28, 2008
Location: Geelong, Victoria
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 7:18 pm
|
Another example of how it roots up Fotopic images is here:
http://www.railpage.com.au/f-p1064979.htm#1064979
The image is already correctly sized, and is linked to the full size one. Clicking on the photo opens up the lightbox thingy with the exact same image as is embedded in the page, and there is no way to access the external link to the HTML page.
If I disable Javascript then I don't get the popup box, but then I just get a link to the photo that is already embedded in there. 
[EDIT] It's the same issue SitWWW noticed.
|
|
|
michaelgreenhill
Patron Saint of Alcohol
Joined: Jan 17, 1985
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lost Somewhere In Time
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:29 pm
|
The server resizes the images for you - that's why you can't right click on one to get the original URL. Once you open the lightbox, you can then right click and get the original URL.
Lightbox wraps the image in a URL tag which links you to the original picture - so if somebody has Javascript turned off, they still get access to the original picture. Hence why images wrapped in URL tags don't work now.
How's this for a compromise: if I create a new BBCode tag (something like [bigpic][/bigpic], and use Lightbox to shrink THAT BBCode tag, would that please everybody? People who fail to use this tag for large images will be warned.
|
|
|
drwaddles
In need of a breath mint
Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lifting the A-League trophy!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:56 pm
|
|
I'd still prefer automatic resizing by the server but instead of opening Lightbox when you click on the image, the full size image opens in a new window.
People who talk out their asre usually have bad breath.
|
|
|
michaelgreenhill
Patron Saint of Alcohol
Joined: Jan 17, 1985
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lost Somewhere In Time
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:02 pm
|
I've removed Lightbox from img tags, and created a new [bigimg][/bigimg] tag that resizes your photos, and opens them in a new tab.
Any problems with this? 
|
|
|
drwaddles
In need of a breath mint
Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lifting the A-League trophy!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:08 pm
|
|
I'll let you know once I experience it, Gunzhill.
People who talk out their asre usually have bad breath.
|
|
|
tbohlsennswssrg
Train Controller
Joined: Dec 19, 2005
Last Visited: Dec 1, 2008
Location: Roseville, Sydney, NSW
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:23 pm
|
Here is a test of the new tags:
Image opens in a new window
Edit: Fixed the size 
|
|
|
Somebody in the WWW
Comeng Gunzel
Joined: Oct 08, 2004
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:28 pm
|
I tried it out over in the test forum using a large image which I had handy and it seems to be working okay .
Is there any suggested maximum size that someone should use when posting pics? I usually don't go above 600px wide.
" The trains at Pennant Hills run roughly every half hour. Nobody in their right mind uses a service that shoddy. That so many do just proves how many dumb and/or desperate people there are in Sydney." - MrPC
Transport Textbook - My photos at RailPictures.Net |
|
|
drwaddles
In need of a breath mint
Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lifting the A-League trophy!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:33 pm
|
I use 800px wide.
And looking at Somebody's test image, that seems to be perfect Gunzhill. Thanks.
People who talk out their asre usually have bad breath.
|
|
|
michaelgreenhill
Patron Saint of Alcohol
Joined: Jan 17, 1985
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lost Somewhere In Time
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:50 am
|
It resizes them to 640px wide, IIRC.
You can post any size picture you like, as long as you use the bigimg tag if it's larger than 640px wide. Height really isn't an issue
|
|
|
sas85
Deputy Commissioner
Joined: Nov 19, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 1, 2008
Location: 9km 000m in the Mile End to Belair section
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:59 pm
|
|
Well it has my vote MGH™, I didn't mind lightbox myself but either way I appreciate not having to scroll pointlessly to read an entire page of postings!
|
|
|
greenkayaker
Minister for Railways
Joined: Sep 20, 2005
Last Visited: Nov 29, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 3:31 pm
|
The bigimg tags are great. I suppose if people use the wrong img tag's it will be easier to correct it for the mods too?
Might be good to have both the image tags together in the Reply window?
And then??????  |
|
|
drwaddles
In need of a breath mint
Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 2, 2008
Location: Lifting the A-League trophy!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:51 pm
|
|
Gunzhill, these bigimg tags are fecking awesome. Excellent move.
People who talk out their asre usually have bad breath.
|
|
|
|
|
