Okay, wtf is with the new layout

[invisible]

The resizing feature flat out rocks. Thank you for introducing it so fast.

 

[Josh66]

Yup, gotta say - I like the auto resize a lot. I set mine to 800 wide & 700 tall.

 

[johngpt]

I've reset my skin to the old version, and with this macbook pro, set the horizontal limit to resize if wider than 1024 or taller than 700.

This is very convenient. Saves me having to open the image in a new window to see the entire image.

I'm glad I came across this thread, and can now understand more of what has been happening.

 

[ekool]

It really don't bother me what skin, advertising, colors or gadgets there are, but one thing I do not like is the resizing of photos.

As has been mentioned numerous times, you have full control over this. Please go to your User CP -> Edit Options and then you can disable it entirely.

 

[abraxas]

As has been mentioned numerous times, you have full control over this. Please go to your User CP -> Edit Options and then you can disable it entirely.

I make my photos at a specific size to be viewed at that specific size. I put a lot of effort into making them look the very best I can at the size I post them at -for everyone-. If it's been mentioned so many times, then I would think a hack to the code to something like, if width => 800 then resize would be a much simpler solution than the current "fix."

 

[ekool]

I make my photos at a specific size to be viewed at that specific size. I put a lot of effort into making them look the very best I can at the size I post them at -for everyone-. If it's been mentioned so many times, then I would think a hack to the code to something like, if width => 800 then resize would be a much simpler solution than the current "fix."

That's exactly how it's set up. Of course, the width that needs to be resized is going to be different for everyone. People run different resolutions, so we've picked the "lowest common denominator" and set it at 600 pixels wide, and 800 pixels tall as the "cut off point" to resize. You can of course, change this to your hearts content in the User CP, or disable it entirely.

I believe the current setup is absolutely perfect because it gives EVERYONE the ability to tailor it to their individual preference. I'm not sure how we can do anything better then that.

Want it to resize images only over 1500 pixels wide? Go for it. It's entirely up to you. Please see the previous discussion about it in the posts quoted below.

Yup, gotta say - I like the auto resize a lot. I set mine to 800 wide & 700 tall.

Very nice! When I started looking through some threads, I noticed the resize. I thought, hmm, wonder if it could be configured in the UserCP? I was going to ask/suggest and am happy to see this post I quote above. Awesome!

Now if there was only some way to configure it depending on which computer you were on (home vs. work), LOL.

Thank you. We have more additions to make but don't want to do everything at once, and as stated we are trying to make sure that you can enable/disable/change all the changes to suit your needs so that way everyone can be happy

Guys, we are going to get the auto-resize stuff installed and it will be user configurable from your User CP, that way you can customize it to suit your needs and resolution, or disable it entirely if you don't like it. That's the plan.

Just wanted to post an update, this has been completed. Users have FULL control over it as well. You can change the way the image gets displayed when you click on it (there are at least 12 different modes/choices), you can set the resolution of the image needed to "kick in" the resizing to your liking, or disable it entirely. This is really handy as each user has a different resolution that they run at and not every image resolution will break the layout, so you can tweak to your hearts' content. To change the settings, simply go to your User CP -> Edit Options -> Thread Display Options -- And you should see the choices there.

 

[abraxas]

Well, I've designed all my landscape oriented shots to look best according to the standards that have been in effect since I've been posting-- 800x600 max as have many others. I still suggest changing your variables to 800x600 to accommodate the years of work that have gone into other previous posts by others as well as myself rather than appeal to "the lowest common denominator."

 

[mrodgers]

Well, I've designed all my landscape oriented shots to look best according to the standards that have been in effect since I've been posting-- 800x600 max as have many others. I still suggest changing your variables to 800x600 to accommodate the years of work that have gone into other previous posts by others as well as myself rather than appeal to "the lowest common denominator."

I can see where abraxas is coming from. It has been stated in the rules, at least for as long as I've been around, to resize to 800 px on the longest side. For those who follow the rules and process their resizing to 800 px, it only seems fitting that the default would be 800 px rather than 600 px.

I argue that many PC users still use 1024x768 or 1152x864 resolutions, thus 800 px is the most you can have with those resolutions. If 1024 photos are uploaded, people rant "get a bigger display" if you say something, but 800 is stated in the rules.

I very much doubt that anyone is using less than 1024x768 res, so reducing the default down to 600 px on the long side is a bit off.

 

[Parkerman]

I would say make the default 800x800

 

[mrodgers]

Ha ha, I typed all that up there saying stuff like "I very much doubt that anyone is using less than 1024x768 res..." And then on my next login to the site, on a different thread about all this new look to the forum, I see this...

The new style displays incorrect layout with my monitor resolution at 800x600.

hmmmpfff, who knew?:scratch:

 

[Parkerman]

Ha ha, I typed all that up there saying stuff like "I very much doubt that anyone is using less than 1024x768 res..." And then on my next login to the site, on a different thread about all this new look to the forum, I see this...



hmmmpfff, who knew?:scratch:

I couldn't do anything with that... lol.

 

[JohnMF]

I've only just noticed the new look. Have to say, for me, I think it's a slight improvement. I've never been a fan of any of the default templates used here, as i've stated a couple of times over the years in the feedback thread.

Overall, a step in the right direction

 

[ekool]

If we are going to set the default based on the majority of the users, I think a poll is in order to see what the majority of the forum thinks the default should be at.

Temporarily, I have set it at 800 as has been requested.

 

[Parkerman]

If we are going to set the default based on the majority of the users, I think a poll is in order to see what the majority of the forum thinks the default should be at.

Temporarily, I have set it at 800 as has been requested.

I think 800x800 would be fine..


It honestly doesnt bother me to much...but then again I am use to this from the SRTforums. If I like a picture i will click it to enlarge it to see more detail.

 

[Josh66]

This has been interesting once I got by the fact that my photos aren't being displayed at the size they were processed to be viewed.

[...]

If you want to have some fun, go to your control panel and change your resolution to 800 x 600 and check out TPF to see what the 8%'ers see.

Even with my monitor at 1440x900, 800x700 is about the largest I can view on the forum without scrolling (really the vertical dimension is the limiting factor - I could go much wider than 800, but as you go wider you usually go taller too).

Assuming nobody has an extremely long user name, with the "TPF Default" skin my 'viewing area' on the forum is about 1180x 735 - anything bigger than that will not fit without scrolling.