Do you want to share better quality photos within your report? Resize them first!

This forum software has a kilobyte size restriction on attachments, and during the upload process it heavily compresses your photos. Therefore by resizing your photos before uploading, you will reduce the negative effects of this automatic compression, and your photos will end up looking better. More like the girl as you saw her.


The Photos in Your Camera are BIG, Too Big to Share
Your camera shoots big pictures in terms of pixel size. Of course, since when shooting you want to capture the moment in most detail and best quality. When you download the photo to your computer it is still in its best and largest quality format. When sharing the photos with others, unfortunately we still have to consider boring bandwidth and storage limitations.

So when sending your photos to others to see, it is best and polite to resize them first. But resizing your images does not necessarily mean loss of quality. In fact, with the sex141 forums your photos will end up looking much worse if you do not resize them first. Why is that?

The 141 forum tries to compress all attachments to a much lower kilobyte size. Therefore the large pixel size image of your favorite girl is being crammed to a smaller kilobyte size within the same pixel size. This will result in compression artifacts or pixelation of the image, which practically means that your image is still the same size in pixel width and lenght, but your girl looks like she is made up of pixels like Super Mario. Don't do that to her.


Let's Make an Example:
You are a painter with a limited amount of paint (= your 141 kilobytes upload limit) and a small canvas and a big canvas (= pixel size of your image). And you want to paint the same image of a girl to both small and big canvas by using the same amount of paint.

• When painting an image to the small canvas, you can paint the same proportioned image in higher detail because you can use more paint in less space.
  
• When using a large canvas, you have to spread around your limited paint in order to cover the whole canvas, and have less paint available to paint details in the image. Thus your girl is less detailed.
  

From this we learn that by first resizing your photo to a reasonable pixel size, for example 800-1000 pixels wide, and uploading it after that, your photo gets more detail and less pixelation. Your girl's skin will look much smoother. Won't you want that for her?


Forum Software Scales Down Large Pictures on the Fly to Fit Your Monitor
This sounds like it's a good feature, but it serves an ill cause as members keep uploading pictures from their camera to reports in their original large pixel size without resizing them, and since the forum is scaling these large images to everybody's screen size on the fly, it just looks like they are normal sized. Most users will not realize that they are looking at large pixel size images that have been scaled down by forum software. You can recognize a scaled image on your screen if you move your mouse over it, and it is clickable with alt text "Click here to open new window".

What happens? Each image attachment uploaded to the forum has some javascript code that checks your computer screen resolution and compares it to the attachment width. If the image width in pixels is higher than 70% of the width of your screen resolution, the image gets scaled down to 70% of your screen size on the fly to fit your monitor.

• Resolution 1024x768, image scaled down if wider than 716 pixels
  
• Resolution 1280x1024, image scaled down if wider than 896 pixels
  
• Resolution 1440x800, image scaled down if wider than 1008 pixels
  
• Resolution 1680x1050, image scaled down if wider than 1176 pixels
  
• Resolution 1920x1200, image scaled down if wider than 1344 pixels

Since the original pixel size of photographs in your camera is in the range of thousands of pixels width and length, for example 3189x2392, it means that if you attach a photo like this without resizing it first, nobody will see it in its original size in any case. The forum will just scale it down on the fly down to 70% of the user's screen size. So any advantage of a higher pixel size is lost.

Couple this with the lesson that the forum compressing a large pixel size image results to a worse quality image than compressing a resized image, then we'll see the logic that uploading any image with pixel width over the common screen resolution scale down thresholds is a waste. By first resizing your image to around 700-1000 pixels wide and then attaching it will result in a higher quality image that others can actually view in its real size, without the forum software scaling it down.


How to Resize Photos?
Every image viewing software has a selection in its Edit or Image etc menu called Resize. Select that, and set the resized image width so that it comes down close to 1000 or less in pixels. After that, save your photo as JPG file type, which is best for photographs, and upload the photo to your report.

While there are many programs for editing images, almost everyone has Microsoft Paint with their copy of Windows, so let's use MS Paint as an example (as nerds with other operating systems don't need this guide).

1. Open you photo in Paint.
   
2. Click the #1 Resize button in top bar.
   
3. Check that 'Maintain aspect ratio' checkbox is selected, as you want to keep your photo in proportion.
   
4. Choose #3 radio button Pixels.
   
5. Enter the #4 Horizontal or Vertical pixel size you want to resize your image to. As you have maintain aspect ratio selected, the other value will be automatically changed in same proportion.
   
6. Save your resized image as JPEG file format, which is best for photographs.
   

[attach]27776[/attach]

If you want a bit more features than Paint but do not want to start studying Photoshop, I recommend a light (only 1.33 Mb) and free but hugely popular image viewing and editing software Irfanview. It is fast in opening and viewing pictures, and allows for easy and quick editing like cropping, resizing, color correction etc, from easy pull down menus that do not require you to be a graphics designer. If you also install the Plugins/AddOns pack from the index page, then the File menu gets an easy to use Save For Web... feature that allows you to save the image down to the Kilobyte size you want.


Example of Compression Artifacts
The attachment image shows compression artifacts in an image that has been uploaded to 141 in it's original pixel size of 3189x2392 before resizing. The forum software has applied heavy compression, and the 3189 pixel width image gets resized on the fly to 70% width of everybody's screen.

Should this photo been resized to a lower pixel size before uploading, the skin of her legs would look smooth.

[ Last edited by  SkinnyForum at 22-8-2010 14:49 ]

This is very informative.

If guys here don't mind - I'll probably "bumb" this thread up once a while as it is so informative and is probably very useful for guys who do want their pixs to come up looking great here.

It'd of course also makes pulling up threads smoother for us readers and connoisseurs of these great pixs!!

SEAJ

Thanks for creating this post, bro. If you don't mind, I'd like to link to this from the how to post real pics thread.

I posted this on the Selena thread (Hong Kong Reports), but I'll add it here as well:

In addition to reducing the pixel dimensions of an image to reduce file size (per SkinnyForum's post), you also want to reduce the resolution of the image (pixel density), usually expressed as "dpi (dots per inch)".

Most files straight out of a camera will be between 190 and 300 dpi, the standard for printing on paper. However, for output to the Web, 72 dpi is entirely sufficient, as most people won't discern any difference between 72 dpi and 300 dpi on their screen monitors. But the difference in the number of actual pixels displayed (and hence file size) is about four fold.

So in your image editor, reduce the pixel dimension (to about 1000 pixels wide) AND the resolution to 72 dpi. This will give you the highest quality image while minimizing file size.

(Yeah, it feels strange for me to contribute to this thread, especially since I don't yet have the proper reading access level to review pictures! )

[ Last edited by  thedarknight at 21-8-2010 19:16 ]

Am bumping this thread back up as Large size pixs are getting back on.

Hopefully some of these posters will at last read this thread.

Remember - ideal size is under 100 Kb.

Thanks

SEAJ

Slight correction. The downscaling of pictures done by the forum software is not based on Kilobyte size. It is based on the pixel width of the uploaded attachment in relation to your monitor screen resolution. So the threshold changes based on user's computer settings.

If the attachment image width is more than 70% of your screen resolution width, then you'll get shown downscaled images which can result in the 'jumping'effect of the screen when the images are being downscaled.

Images between 700 to 1300 pixels wide should fit in between many common screen resolutions.

The reduction in Kilobyte size will be achieved at the same time when pixel size is reduced first before uploading, and resizing will result in overall better image quality as an image resized to the size it will be displayed at will have more detail than a very large pixel size image that has been compressed and just downscaled by forum software to the same size to be displayed at.

To put this in common perspective, think of pixel width and height as the width and height in inches/centimeters of the frame of a real painting. And Kilobytes as the amount of paint needed to paint an accurate and sharp image to it. You will need more paint to create an as detailed image to a bigger frame painting than to a smaller frame painting. And as we have learned the forum software will in any case break the frame of your big painting and force it to a smaller frame, you might as well use your paint more economically and spread it on a smaller acceptable frame to begin with. If your paint is first spread thin on a big frame and the canvas then crumbled down to a smaller frame, it does not result to more detail.

[ Last edited by  SkinnyForum at 3-9-2010 02:30 ]

Ooops - sorry to pipe in wrongly!!

I use Microsoft Office picture manager, and when I go to the "edit" feature", I just click on the pre-defined width x height and click on "Document - large (1024x768 pixs)" to down -size.

SkinnyForum - does this produce an optimally sized picture?

thanks

SEAJ

Hope you guys don't mind - but I notice a few "large sized" pictures and thought I'd bring this thread back up-

As a reminder that you really do want to down size your pictures before posting it up if you want them to look GREAT!!

SEAJ

My apologies for bumping this thread back up again, as I've been noticing more over large sized pictures being posted up again.

MODS - how about putting this thread up in the "Picture posting guideline" sticky or somewhere where members would notice..... PLEASE??!!
edit - Cunning - Thought you had agreed to do this previously in #3?
Thanks
SEAJ

[ Last edited by  SEAJ at 2-11-2010 17:34 ]

Just bumping up thread for some people having problems loading images

thx to the original poster...just wanted to add my two cents.

most people think of photos in 2D, which they were before digital came around (4x6, A4 size, etc). but with digital, there's a third dimension: dpi. the most important number here is 72, as that's the highest the web can display.

i use a Mac so can't address Windows programs, but using the Export function in iPhoto (a standard free Mac app) will let you resize. i use Photoshop which gives you an Image Size function. this is good as it shows you what dpi your camera is shooting at (u can adjust this on the camera too, check the manual).

Photoshop uncompresses the JPEGs from your camera, so i save them as large TIFFs at full resolution in case i want to tweakthem later. these are huge files, don't upload! instead, make a 72dpi file and Save As a JPEG. this gives you full control over size and tells you what size your ultimate .jpg file will be.

as the OP mentioned, this is downsizing and results in a better image. also, while it's a TIFF, u can tweak brightness/contrast, or even use Auto Levels which often improves the image automatically. i will use the Diffuse Glow filter if sending a copy tothe gal (they LOVE it) but if you do this, please set graininess to ZERO and use a light glow effect (1-3) so you don't obscure details.

just a few pointers, photo-tweaking is an art and i'm not an expert. but, making sure you upload pix of >100KB means oueither ser yr camera to low-res or downsize in software. u can get a LOT of info in 100KB!

thanks for reading, bros.

JtB

I use a program called PixResizer and have done for a number of years now.  Nifty little program, no fuss that you can use to resize 100's of images at once instead of individually opening them in paint.

http://pixresizer.en.softonic.com/

Its free and does the trick, thought Id share

Here's another way that you can reduce the size of picture files using a Mac. After reading JackTheBat's post I tried exporting a photo using iPhoto and he is right. You can reduce the image down to less than 100kb with this software, especially if you use the "Custom" size option in the Export menu, but in most cases it will reduce the viewing size of the picture quite a bit as well. If you don't like the smaller picture size then I have found another application that you can use. It is called Quickscale and can be found here:

http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/18892/quickscale

        It does cost $9.99 but personally I like it better than using iPhoto. I think it is more used friendly. At the website listed above you can download the free shareware to test it out to see if you like it. The shareware version will put a watermark in the middle of your pictures though. If you want to use this software without the watermark then you have to buy it. I have found that Quickscale does reduce the file size of my images without affecting the quality as they claim it does.

        The Quality of the picture, using iPhoto only gives you the choice of low, medium, high, and maximum, where as using Quickscale you can reduce the quality of the picture by percentage, which again gives you more control over the actual size of the picture file. That way you can keep the viewable size of the picture as close to the original as possible. Also by using the percentage scale in Quickscale it is easier for you to get your picture as close as possible to the ideal size of 100kb.

        Another reason why I like using this software as opposed to iPhoto is that I don't want to keep the pictures of WG's on my iPhoto. I prefer these photos on a back-up hard drive, where they are safe in case anyone else uses my computer or if I want to show someone pictures on iPhoto. It could save some embarrassment.

        All you do with Quickscale is drag and drop, and then edit based on the options listed on the right side of the application, and the edited picture file gets dropped into the same folder as the original. I think the software is well organised in that respect.

        I reduced a picture from 4.3mb down to 139kb by only changing the percentge quality to around 49% and to be honest I couldn't tell the difference by looking at the two side by side. I honestly think using Quickscale is worth the $9.99 price.

        If you don't want to spend money then I totally agree with JackTheBat and stick with iPhoto, but I personally like Quickscale better. Hope this helps other Mac users! Sorry PC guys!

A bit of advice if you also use iphotos to upload onto Facebook....

RICO also uses iphotos to resize images but one time i remember dragging a few pictures which were intended for my report on Sex141 forum into iphotos to resize....

After exporting them out and attaching them to my report i logged out and did my hourly check on facebook...

To my horror the photos which i had dragged into iphotos were on facebook....