In reply to Alan.:
My Flickr photos
In reply to Elliott B:
Elliott B said:4. Default Picture Sizes - Currently there are no plans to change this. Showing large photos instead of thumbnails has a serious effect on page load speed for all users and is all but unusable on mobile connections. Currently 70% of our website users view the site via a mobile device. It's fairly standard practice across all websites to show small versions of images that can be clicked on when someone wants to see the full image. We've no reason to go against this.
Elliott, first of all thank you for your response and it's good to know that we might get a fix for most of the problems soon.
However, I have to register my great disappointment at the unwillingness to increase the default picture size. If we are only to have those small thumbnails as an upload option then I think that I will have to reconsider whether to bother uploading any further pictures. The default ought to be increased to something like 640 x 480 to allow the pictures to fill the panel. It is too time consuming to click on each thumbnail to see the detail of a photograph that someone has had the decency to share and then to have to click to close that down to look at the next one - far too time consuming. Up to now I have been happy to edit the html to make my posts as enjoyable and easy to view as possible but I am not prepared to carry on doing that. I for one have never had any trouble viewing on my mobile phone and although you quote a figure of 70% using mobile devices, are you actually aware of how many of those devices are 5 inch phones or 10 inch tablets.
If you don't increase the default photo size I worry that others may stop posting pictures - it's rather ridiculous to allow us to load a 4-5 mb picture and then display it at minimum size - and I can't see the Osprey fraternity being happy with clicking on every thumbnail sized picture at the height of the season.
Please reconsider, even if it means reducing the size of pictures down a little from 4MB.
My Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobs_retired_now/
Just tried again - no luck! This time, I couldn't even find a "reply" button anywhere, just a list of posts...
In reply to Karen B Suffolk:
Try using the the insert image box rather than drag and drop
not sure why you can't see the reply boxes, that usually means you aren't in the group.
In reply to Bobs_Still_Retired:
In reply to THOMO:
THOMO said:I’m afraid Bob when I first saw the announcement about this upgrade, I did post on these forum, my fears that this upgrade would make things much worse and sadly my fears have turned out to be true. There have been none of my posts about this upgrade replied to by any member of the RSPB staff not one and I’m very sad about this. I feel very strongly about this and I’m very upset that I’ve never had a reply from any of the RSPB staff about my concerns. Some members on here who have posted top class posts on these forums right from the beginning seem to have stopped posting and I haven’t seen them post well before December at the end of 2018 and I fear for the future and the demise of the RSPB Community Forums. Regards. Ian.
well in fairness to Elliott he has responded to a direct set of questions with a set of answers. In fact I notice that the viewing figures have already been reinstated, which is a very good thing. I also note that every time I have used "quote" this evening that has worked too.
As I said, my biggest bugbear is the restriction on the size of the thumbnail picture to be included in posts - it just will not be worthwhile and not fair on readers to expect them to open and close every thumbnail for a view of a decent resolution picture.
I think my view on the photo option is going to me at odds with most of us on here I'm afraid.
I for one don't mind the system as it is I've been altering mine to 550 and found no problem doing a thread that way, it may take a little longer but not much.
From what I can remember of other forums you can't post large size photos only proper thumbnails which are much smaller than the default on here.
I probably don't mind so much because I've always enlarged any photo I wanted to see anyway.
I like to open them to see the detail in the photos
The picture dimension default isn't an issue for me as I seldom upload images to the site - I link off to them on Flickr. That way everything seems to sort itself out and they're displayed full width on the screen. However, if the aim is to encourage engagement and promote reserves (which it does, I often talk to visitors who've checked out both blogs and forum posts before a visit), a default which gives the best experience for the user should be chosen. Interestingly, whilst a majority of users may use mobile devices, it doesn't mean they are on a slow connection. A majority of mobile use (especially browsing) is actually done at home in range of Wifi - most people's 4g data usage is limited to outside the home (where signals are generally better and throughput better).
ETA - the normal approach to page loading is to load a poor quality image (it normally looks like every other pixel's appeared) then the full image updates (ie the initially missed pixels fill in the gaps). This is what you see on the likes of Flickr. Overcomes any bandwidth issues yet avoids the user staring at a blank screen
Find me on Flickr / All about your camera - The Getting off Auto Index
Bobs_Still_Retired said:If you don't increase the default photo size I worry that others may stop posting pictures - it's rather ridiculous to allow us to load a 4-5 mb picture and then display it at minimum size - and I can't see the Osprey fraternity being happy with clicking on every thumbnail sized picture at the height of the season.
Alan. These I posted without increasing size, and they do not appear to be thumbnail... or is it me not understanding?
In reply to Sandra :
One on the front Beam then walks to Tray.... is this old prey on the Tray? 06.54
We spend 90% of net income on conservation, public education and advocacy
The RSPB is a member of BirdLife International. Find out more about the partnership
© The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) is a registered charity: England and Wales no. 207076, Scotland no. SC037654