PDA

View Full Version : So you're editing posts?



John_Reed
07-13-2004, 07:29 AM
Jeff, it seems like you're editing out images in posts. I find that strange, since that seems to be one of the most attractive features of your new site design. Allowing images in posts is what makes the difference in traffic between your site and dpreview, as one example, I'd bet money on it. A picture is often worth 1,000 words, and a point made with a picture loses its luster without it. If that's the way it will be, or if posting photos is some violation of your TOS, please let me know. Otherwise, your new site's appeal just dimmed for me.

Rhys
07-13-2004, 08:06 AM
Jeff, it seems like you're editing out images in posts. I find that strange, since that seems to be one of the most attractive features of your new site design. Allowing images in posts is what makes the difference in traffic between your site and dpreview, as one example, I'd bet money on it. A picture is often worth 1,000 words, and a point made with a picture loses its luster without it. If that's the way it will be, or if posting photos is some violation of your TOS, please let me know. Otherwise, your new site's appeal just dimmed for me.

Speaking from a personal perspective, I'd rather see images as hyperlinks that can be clicked than embedded because those of us on modem connections find the pages take ages to load otherwise. I use a 57k modem line which seems to run at anything between 50.6 down to 33.7. I imagine Jeff has to pay for storage space so embedded images could be costly - especially if they're stored there and a few weeks later nobody's ever viewing them.

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 10:20 AM
Speaking from a personal perspective, I'd rather see images as hyperlinks that can be clicked than embedded because those of us on modem connections find the pages take ages to load otherwise. I use a 57k modem line which seems to run at anything between 50.6 down to 33.7. I imagine Jeff has to pay for storage space so embedded images could be costly - especially if they're stored there and a few weeks later nobody's ever viewing them.
Maybe that's true, Rhys, but I'd still like to hear about this from Jeff's perspective, if you don't mind. There are workarounds for imbedded images, for example, an option that your link accepts or doesn't accept them, so they wouldn't display if you chose not to display them.

Jeff Keller
07-13-2004, 11:10 AM
Jeff, it seems like you're editing out images in posts. I find that strange, since that seems to be one of the most attractive features of your new site design. Allowing images in posts is what makes the difference in traffic between your site and dpreview, as one example, I'd bet money on it. A picture is often worth 1,000 words, and a point made with a picture loses its luster without it. If that's the way it will be, or if posting photos is some violation of your TOS, please let me know. Otherwise, your new site's appeal just dimmed for me.

That is a completely false accusation. I'm not editing anything. Are you using the proper tags to display images? Just put the link to the image in between IMG tags (with square brackets around them) or click on the insert image link in the WYSIWYG editor.

http://www.dcresource.com/specials/Fireworks2004/jeff/IMG_3828-pp.JPG

Awaiting apology...

Nick
07-13-2004, 11:59 AM
I've posted a few small images ( 65k or so ) in size and they're still quite there. I don't think Jeff would trawl 'round the forums just looking for things to delete.

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 12:38 PM
That is a completely false accusation. I'm not editing anything. Are you using the proper tags to display images? Just put the link to the image in between IMG tags (with square brackets around them) or click on the insert image link in the WYSIWYG editor.

http://www.dcresource.com/specials/Fireworks2004/jeff/IMG_3828-pp.JPG

Awaiting apology...
A post of mine was edited, and the image removed. It was the "Glass blowing" image I posted on another thread. The image was removed, the text was edited to make it appear that the image hadn't been there. If you didn't do it, who did? Do other "Junior Members" have editing rights?

Rhys
07-13-2004, 01:11 PM
A post of mine was edited, and the image removed. It was the "Glass blowing" image I posted on another thread. The image was removed, the text was edited to make it appear that the image hadn't been there. If you didn't do it, who did? Do other "Junior Members" have editing rights?

Hang on John. I just looked and you image is present. It's in the thread: http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132

And I think it's a nice photo :)

http://john-reed.smugmug.com/photos/5798519-M.jpg

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 02:30 PM
[QUOTE=Rhys]Hang on John. I just looked and you image is present. It's in the thread: http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132

And I think it's a nice photo :)

Well, when I looked earlier this morning, the image was gone, and the text was smoothed around the deleted image. I'm not saying this to poke fun, it really happened.

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 02:39 PM
When I looked, this is the text I found:
"IS, like Jake says, is great at allowing hand-holding of long telephoto shots. I've found that it's also great for short focal-length shots as well. On a recent trip, I was shooting indoor museum shots with my FZ10 routinely at 1/4, 1/5, 1/6 of a second, with sharp results. One 10X+ shot of a glassblower's work was sharp at 1/13 of a second! It's really kind of hard to believe how good IS is unless you experience the benefits yourself."
There was no image imbedded with that text, and when I originally wrote the piece, it did include the imbedded image, and the text was different, written to reflect the presence of the inserted image at that point.

Jake Conner
07-13-2004, 02:47 PM
The post with the picture is a couple down from that one... keep scrolling.

Jake

Rhys
07-13-2004, 02:48 PM
When I looked, this is the text I found:
"IS, like Jake says, is great at allowing hand-holding of long telephoto shots. I've found that it's also great for short focal-length shots as well. On a recent trip, I was shooting indoor museum shots with my FZ10 routinely at 1/4, 1/5, 1/6 of a second, with sharp results. One 10X+ shot of a glassblower's work was sharp at 1/13 of a second! It's really kind of hard to believe how good IS is unless you experience the benefits yourself."
There was no image imbedded with that text, and when I originally wrote the piece, it did include the imbedded image, and the text was different, written to reflect the presence of the inserted image at that point.

I look and it's post 7 of the thread. Each time I look, the image pops up nicely. Perhaps it's a browser problem? Which browser do you use? I'm using Internet Explorer 6 and it even works with Firebird.

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 03:10 PM
The post with the picture is a couple down from that one... keep scrolling.

Jake
You're right, it's there. I absolutely did not remember posting anything about the glassblower twice, but there it is, in black, white, and technicolor! It must've been memory myopia, and it's all my fault. So I apologize for even thinking that anything was out of order, and I humbly beg forgiveness, especially from Jeff, who would never let anything like that happen on his watch!

Jeff Keller
07-13-2004, 05:45 PM
No one except for yours truly has the ability to delete or edit the posts of others. The only time I remove posts is if the content is offensive or already posted in other thread.

John_Reed
07-13-2004, 06:00 PM
No one except for yours truly has the ability to delete or edit the posts of others. The only time I remove posts is if the content is offensive or already posted in other thread.
I'm sorry to create a stir, and I'll promise to be better in the future! :(