Moderator: Greg Downing

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 13 posts | 
by Tim Zurowski on Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:02 pm
User avatar
Tim Zurowski
Forum Contributor
Posts: 18881
Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Location: Victoria BC, Canada
Just wondering how or why there are a few image posts in the birds forum that are way larger than the allowable 1280 (horizontal) and 1024 (vertical) limits?  Here's one example, but there have been a few others as well.  viewtopic.php?f=3&t=267530   I was told that it was because they were linking to their own websites/servers, but when I tried that, the file size limit is still in effect. Not trying to increase the size limits, but just wondering how these few fell through the cracks.
 

by nclements on Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:48 pm
nclements
Development Team
Posts: 218
Joined: 16 May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Member #:99999
As a first guess people who do this are being sneaky (or as they would have it, "smart") and putting an image that matches the limits initially. Then they change the file on their server to be a larger image after the topic has been posted.
 

by Tim Zurowski on Tue Jan 03, 2017 12:23 pm
User avatar
Tim Zurowski
Forum Contributor
Posts: 18881
Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Location: Victoria BC, Canada
I was told that even "linked" images were uploaded to the NSN server, so I don't see how that could work. It even says the image posting size limits right below the URL choice for posting.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Jan 05, 2017 10:19 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Tim Zurowski wrote:I was told that even "linked" images were uploaded to the NSN server
No, that is not accurate.
 

by Gary Briney on Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:36 pm
User avatar
Gary Briney
Lifetime Member
Posts: 18291
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Location: USA
Member #:00336
This post  from 21 Dec 2015 indicates offsite images are copied.
Greg Downing wrote: "...To clarify the URL links etc. (not sure it's relevant to the question though) when using an image that is linked it will be copied to our server and presented the same as an image that is uploaded directly."
G. Briney
 

by Tim Zurowski on Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:49 pm
User avatar
Tim Zurowski
Forum Contributor
Posts: 18881
Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Location: Victoria BC, Canada
Gary Briney wrote:This post  from 21 Dec 2015 indicates offsite images are copied.
Greg Downing wrote: "...To clarify the URL links etc. (not sure it's relevant to the question though) when using an image that is linked it will be copied to our server and presented the same as an image that is uploaded directly."
So that was my point. If they are being "copied to our server and presented the same as an image that is uploaded directly." then how are they being displayed way larger.  Does no one have an explanation for this?
 

by nclements on Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:41 pm
nclements
Development Team
Posts: 218
Joined: 16 May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Member #:99999
Tim Zurowski wrote:
Gary Briney wrote:This post  from 21 Dec 2015 indicates offsite images are copied.
Greg Downing wrote: "...To clarify the URL links etc. (not sure it's relevant to the question though) when using an image that is linked it will be copied to our server and presented the same as an image that is uploaded directly."
So that was my point. If they are being "copied to our server and presented the same as an image that is uploaded directly." then how are they being displayed way larger.  Does no one have an explanation for this?

Yes, I do have an explanation but I don't want to share it in a public forum before a way to block it 100% is in place. At the moment a few people have found a way to game the system. If I give detailed instructions here on how to do it then everyone will be able to abuse it (I don't think many will but the potential is there) and I suspect Greg won't be happy.
 

by Greg Downing on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:25 pm
User avatar
Greg Downing
Publisher
Posts: 19318
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Maryland
Member #:00001
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Tim Zurowski wrote:I was told that even "linked" images were uploaded to the NSN server
No, that is not accurate.

Actually it is accurate. Images are copied to our server and then presented directly from there - they are not hotlinked. As Nicolas said some have found an unintentional loophole and we shall fix that as soon as we can. 

Thanks
Greg Downing
Publisher, NatureScapes.Net
[url=http://www.gdphotography.com/]Visit my website for images, workshops and newsletters![/url]
 

by Tim Zurowski on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:48 pm
User avatar
Tim Zurowski
Forum Contributor
Posts: 18881
Joined: 4 Apr 2006
Location: Victoria BC, Canada
Thanks very much for clarifying that Greg. My intentions were not to get those in trouble who used this "loophole" but rather just to understand for myself how it was happening. I thought perhaps this was the start of some new NSN posting and image size rules Sorry, if I created more work for you guys, not that you needed any :)
 

by Greg Downing on Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:49 pm
User avatar
Greg Downing
Publisher
Posts: 19318
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Maryland
Member #:00001
Tim Zurowski wrote:Thanks very much for clarifying that Greg. My intentions were not to get those in trouble who used this "loophole" but rather just to understand for myself how it was happening. I thought perhaps this was the start of some new NSN posting and image size rules Sorry, if I created more work for you guys, not that you needed any :)
No worries at all Tim - I appreciate you bringing this to our attention!

Thanks!
Greg Downing
Publisher, NatureScapes.Net
[url=http://www.gdphotography.com/]Visit my website for images, workshops and newsletters![/url]
 

by Gary Briney on Wed Jan 11, 2017 3:40 am
User avatar
Gary Briney
Lifetime Member
Posts: 18291
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Location: USA
Member #:00336
I question whether "gaming the system" is the issue -- see this image. Because of EJ's impeccable integrity, I suspect his image displays larger than the limit because of a bug in the lightbox logic.
G. Briney
 

by nclements on Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:14 am
nclements
Development Team
Posts: 218
Joined: 16 May 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Member #:99999
Gary Briney wrote:I question whether "gaming the system" is the issue -- see this image. Because of EJ's impeccable integrity, I suspect his image displays larger than the limit because of a bug in the lightbox logic.

I'm seeing the image as 1200x512 (full-size) which is smaller than the 1280 wide (for paying members), and that's with my screen/window size being ample for showing the image larger. If you're seeing something different could you PM me with your browser details (name, version), OS, screen resolution, browser zoom factor and so forth? Thanks.
 

by Gary Briney on Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:17 pm
User avatar
Gary Briney
Lifetime Member
Posts: 18291
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Location: USA
Member #:00336
I'm seeing 1800 x 768 on the lightbox. PM with the browser/OS info sent.

By the way, here are two more of EJ's landscapes

https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267721

https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267428

On these two images above, it seems as if when the displayed image is not constrained by the vertical dimension, then width > 1280 can occur.

---
Another from Wildlife (Robert Franz) which displays at 1516 x 1020 for me
https://www.naturescapes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=267863
G. Briney
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
13 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group