Has the image size changed?

[MassArt Images]

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/757576/

This image is larger in width than normal. I believe it is 1600 wide. Is this just a glitch or the new normal?

[Decapod401]

Originally Posted by MassArt Images

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/757576/

This image is larger in width than normal. I believe it is 1600 wide. Is this just a glitch or the new normal?

It's the not-so-new normal. The limit was changed from 1200 to 1600 quite a while ago.

[Milepost 58]

I'm a relatively new user here. The RP limits were 1600, and I looked around and saw that most of what I was looking at appeared to be that or near it, so that is the number I chose when exporting from lightroom. I'm never really sure what I should use. Is there a size that would be better?

[TedG]

Originally Posted by Milepost 58

I'm a relatively new user here. The RP limits were 1600, and I looked around and saw that most of what I was looking at appeared to be that or near it, so that is the number I chose when exporting from lightroom. I'm never really sure what I should use. Is there a size that would be better?

1600 px is perfectly acceptable. As Doug said, the maximum was increased some time ago. I will say that, with my monitor/browser/settings, I can't see the entire 1600 px photo, unless I reduce the browser zoom to <100%. Some users, I think, choose a smaller width in order to (partially) thwart thieves.
/Ted

[Milepost 58]

I noticed that i couldn't see the whole picture either at 1600, which is why I thought I was doing something wrong. 80% seems to bring it all into view. I think it's what I've used for all of mine from the start.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by TedG

Some users, I think, choose a smaller width in order to (partially) thwart thieves.
/Ted

Unfortunately, that's what keeps a lot of us from uploading larger images.

[wds]

Lately my interaction with the forums, as with the main site, have migrated to more of an observer than a participant. Therefore when the change to 1600px maximum and I also had to view at less than 100% I didn't really have much to say about it save for one post in which I whined that nowadays with my aging eyesight I couldn't read the remarks or comments or anything without having to resize it back to normal (or larger) to read what the photographer or any commenters had to say. When nobody else piped in I just resigned myself to accept the "new normal" even though it still annoys me. Okay, I could always get myself a new 80" monitor but I do most of my surfing these days on a laptop from my bed. That would be somewhat cumbersome!

Anyway Hi folks! Yes I'm still around, I just don't have much to say anymore! Hope this finds you all well in these trying times - and a Merry Christmas to all (should you choose to accept it) and to all a Good Night!

[Milepost 58]

I may experiment a bit with sizes. 1200 just looked too small to me, but I can see where having to reduce a browser size is more trouble than it's worth.

[RobJor]

There are probably a good number of members with the later large high quality screens and faster Internet and sure the 1600 appeals to them. My Internet slows down after a certain amount of usage so my tendency is not to view that many images after that happens

I leave the screen on 100 pct, and scroll if I need to see more. Generally images could be cropped tighter anyway. I think reducing screen size is a negative?

Bob

[Milepost 58]

Thanks for the input. I will stick with 1600 then. There's usually not much around the fringes to see, I agree.

As for the photo referenced in the in the OP, I really wanted to crop it but couldn't find any way to do it without making it look really awkward.

[JimThias]

Originally Posted by TedG

1600 px is perfectly acceptable. As Doug said, the maximum was increased some time ago. I will say that, with my monitor/browser/settings, I can't see the entire 1600 px photo, unless I reduce the browser zoom to <100%. Some users, I think, choose a smaller width in order to (partially) thwart thieves.
/Ted

I just do a quick click and "view image" and it automatically reduces the image to fit my screen. Been doing that for a long time on RP.

[Mgoldman]

Originally Posted by JimThias

I just do a quick click and "view image" and it automatically reduces the image to fit my screen. Been doing that for a long time on RP.

Where's "view image"???

I don't see it on my desktop, haven't checked my cell phone, but it is quite annoying that it does not resize automatically. I have to "Ctrl -" to see images larger than 1200X800 on my desktop and then "Ctrl +" to get back to my typical screen resolution. On my cell phone, I believe some images I can not even do that, resorting to scrolling the scene.

I remember way back when, I was like everyone here, posting at 1068!


Good to hear from you WDS! Glad to hear all is OK. And I can sympathize with you on your "aging eyes". I guess there's no... so I'm told, such thing as "catching it early" - when things start to get fuzzy, they get fuzzy fast. Prior to jumping back into the swing at RP after a break, I didn't need glasses to edit pics. Sigh. Happy Holidays!

/Mitch

[miningcamper3]

Originally Posted by Mgoldman

Where's "view image"???

Firefox!

I also use IrfanView. I never have to resize unless I want to!