This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you.

 Moderated by: chrisbet, Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3   
Image resolution   -   Page   3
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost



Posted: Wed Mar 26th, 2025 15:46
 
21st Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
chrisbet wrote:
And now the other posting has updated ..
OK so this is the hires version which should be ok..... maybe the letterbox framing meant I sampled it wrongly before posting?

Click here to comment on this image.



____________________
Eric
 




Posted: Wed Mar 26th, 2025 17:22
 
22nd Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Very slow first time loading of this file Chris.
Also same with Eric's.
New potential members will not be impressed.

Is the server side software resizing very large files?
Is there a max upload file size?
And/Or is there any limit on the longest side pixel size for image?
All these factors influence the user browsing experience.
There should be no need to load a 50MB JPG file as there is no monitor that can display it effectively, i.e. 8K (7680 x 4320 pixels).



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Wed Mar 26th, 2025 21:47
 
23rd Post
chrisbet



Joined: Thu Feb 7th, 2019
Location: Leigh On Sea, Essex , United Kingdom
Posts: 1518
Status: 
Offline
My testing has shown that a new viewer / guest sees the whole of the first page of woodland walks with all its images in just 0.12 seconds.

I have taken off the display resizing of large files - it degrades the IQ too badly.

Looking at the stats suggests it makes no difference - for 2024, before I added the large file resize, the returning visits were actually greater than so far this year with the resizing enabled/




____________________
If it is broken it was probably me ....
 




Posted: Thu Mar 27th, 2025 10:44
 
24th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
That speed must be down to some local network loop as it take a much longer time than that for me.
The whole page takes more like 5-8 seconds for a first time load.  I have 50MB/sec download speed.
Subsequently the page loads in the time you identify or thereabouts.   Maybe there is some server side caching of users last images or views.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Thu Mar 27th, 2025 12:14
 
25th Post
chrisbet



Joined: Thu Feb 7th, 2019
Location: Leigh On Sea, Essex , United Kingdom
Posts: 1518
Status: 
Offline
No server side caching - only your browser caches the pages visited.

I ran a network analysis using DSL throttling - equiv to a 50MB/sec connection - I cleared the browser cache and the page downloaded in 4.8 secs.



____________________
If it is broken it was probably me ....
 




Posted: Thu Mar 27th, 2025 16:19
 
26th Post
jk



Joined: Sun Apr 1st, 2012
Location: Carthew, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Posts: 6987
Status: 
Offline
Yes that is similar to my results then.



____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none
 




Posted: Thu Mar 27th, 2025 21:35
 
27th Post
Eric



Joined: Wed Apr 18th, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4572
Status: 
Offline
jk wrote:
Very slow first time loading of this file Chris.
Also same with Eric's.
New potential members will not be impressed.

Is the server side software resizing very large files?
Is there a max upload file size?
And/Or is there any limit on the longest side pixel size for image?
All these factors influence the user browsing experience.
There should be no need to load a 50MB JPG file as there is no monitor that can display it effectively, i.e. 8K (7680 x 4320 pixels).

In fairness Jonathan, my file was 80mb (uncompressed) and just a quality test.

I would normally resize files to <10mb before jpegging. That seems to work fine in terms of quality and speed. But the additional auto compressing that was operational since Christmas was really messing with files of even that size.


The cynic in me would say that I am not sure there are potential new members being put off by the slowness of the website. If they exist, they are more likely disinclined to stay being disinterested in what we are doing and saying.



____________________
Eric
 

Reply
1st new
This is topic ID = 2018     Current time is 03:30 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3     
Nikon DSLR Forums > All about Nikon DSLR Forum > Questions about the Forum software > Image resolution Top

Users viewing this topic

Post quick reply

Go to top
Go to end
Messages
Home
Recent topics
Unread posts
Last posts
Splash

Current theme is Modern editor



A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you.


Hosted by Octarine Services

UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0539 seconds (68% database + 32% PHP). 68 queries executed.