What's preferred on IIS?

[bloodhound31]

How come so many people are posting links to pictures, rather than uploading the images to IIS?

Mike, do you prefer uploads or does that tax your server too much?

I personally prefer to look at the images here on the post, rather than go to an external link, unless there is more information to the photo that is too much for a simple forum post.

What's the general consensus?

Baz.

[RobF]

I guess the first reason that comes to mind is people wanting to show an image >200kb Barry....

[ballaratdragons]

I like to look at attachments in here first, Baz.
Then if the mood takes me I will open a link, but not always. Some times I see a link and think 'I can't be bothered' so I skip it :P

I suppose that is of no help to the poster, but often I just can't be bothered opening more links.

I also find many links have HUGE images which I have to scroll across and down to see the whole lot, and it is annoying not seeing the whole image in one. So in that sense, attachments are good coz they allow me to see the whole image in one hit.
But that's just me. I'm sure some will love links to bigger images :thumbsup:

But sometimes I like to open a HUGE linked image if I know it will have hundreds of galaxies in the background. I like to go in at full res and go galaxy hunting :)

Variety is the spice of life ;)

[iceman]

It doesn't worry me.

People post links for 2 reasons usually:
a) To post images larger than 200kb with less compression
b) To direct people to their site, where people may discover something else they like and stay for a while

It's up to the individual.

[sheeny]

Personally, I prefer the images uploaded to IIS. I'm on satellite so have limited bandwidth. I like to be able to see the thumbnail and make my own decision about whether to open it up or not. If its a link, it has to be something I really want to see to see for me to open it.

I would much prefer to have unlimited bandwidth and just look at the lot, but unlimited satellite bandwidth just isn't available.

Al.

[Deeno]

I to find that quite often a link will take you to an image that you have to scroll around to see a little annoying.

It wouldn't hurt to have preview pic with the original post........

[[1ponders]]

Here here Al. 2 Gig a month isn't much to play with ;)

Also being able to have multiple thumbnails on the one image page and being able to flick backwards and forwards through images on the same page when viewing the images instead of opening on different pages/tabs.

[erick]

Agreed - a preview pic is good. I'll go to a link if I want. As with Ken, I usually give image links a miss, if there are no preview pics to see. Especially if there are a lot of links.

But always give a link to your website. I've seen lots of interesting stuff that way.

[Ric]

I prefer the uploaded preview pictures as well. I am in the same situation as Al with satellite internet and limited bandwidth.

I agree with Eric, definitely post a link as well and give the viewers a choice.

[marc4darkskies]

A "linker's" perspective :)

I always post links to PBase but I always include a link to the small (preview) version of approx 150k (not many do this - but I think they should) to cater for folks with limited bandwidth.

The reasons I post links are:


I want to show everyone my images, not just IISers
I want to be able to post full res, hi fidelity images that showcase all the detail visible in the image
I want a one-stop online repository of my images that I can easily point people to who are interested in what I do.
I put all the exposure info in the PBase caption
It's easier to post a link than to attach an image that I first have to re-size

Cheers, Marcus

[barx1963]

I like to see the images in IIS, but I understand why links are used as larger files can show images to best advantage.
Marcus probably has the right idea

Malcolm

[astroron]

Ditto to all the above :thumbsup:
Even with the latest NBN satellite ,it don't go to far when someone posts a 15meg or more image file:shrug:
Cheers :thumbsup:

[scagman]

Hi Baz, I much prefer the images to be uploaded to IIS, esp in threads where someone puts up an image and others do a bit of processing then repost the image. It makes it a bit quicker/easier to view the differant images.

Regards

[bloodhound31]

Great feedback guys. Nice to know what people prefer so we can all do our utmost to make things easier on each other.

I find that if I process my images in Photoshop for various reasons, I always process, size and sharpen a copy at 800 x 533 for just such occasions as uploading to IIS and other websites, including my own. If someone wants a hi-res version because they really like it, then we can work something out I'm sure! ;)

Baz.

[RickS]

I think that attaching a small image to the post and linking to a higher res version satisfies just about everybody. That's what I've tried to do on the few occasions that I've posted images. I can understand people with limited download quotas and/or slower connections being reluctant to follow links to images of unknown size.

Cheers,
Rick.

[Lee]

One issue with links to photo sites is after a while they undoubtedly stop working when someone changes hobbies/deletes them.... so many sites are littered with dead links to photo sites/flickr etc.....

[Matt Wastell]

I do like to see the image attached - I like the preview. Links are great to see full res images and peoples sites.

[bloodhound31]

I just went and visited the image section of the forum, solar system and DSO's. Yeah, I really find it annoying to have to go to other links of unknown size, without first knowing what it may look like. All the ones with uploaded pics, I had a look at - while any with external links just made me click the back button without even thinking about it.