Photo Posting Question for users

[CAG76]

How is everyone posting their images that they stay nice and crisp and are fairly large?

When I post my images they come as thumbnails and you have to click one to make it lager, but when I see all other posts they are already as size when you read the posts. How is this done? Thanks for any help. When I look up on how to post images I seem to be doing it as they say, but when I look at my own posts it looks different from others.

If this helps anyone out on what I am doing. I am using the Manage Attachments method and posting my images. Are others using a different method?

-Christopher

 

[Jaszek]

It's because you are a subscriber so you can upload photos to the TPF server and when you attach them that is how they come out. What we non-subscribers do is upload to photobucket or frickr and put the

 

[CAG76]

Hmmm! I like that better. I do have photobucket and am about to get on flickr. They look so much sharper on Photobucket and on flickr. If I am going to have people critique my work I want it to be at it's finest. Ok thanks. I was thinking that is what people were doing but just wasn't sure because I've not done it that way yet.

-Christopher

 

[chrisburke]

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...hotos-flickr-photobucket-pictorial-guide.html

 

[mrodgers]

I've often wondered why attaching images directly in threads was a "benefit" to subscribing. It makes it much more of a pain for users to bother looking at the photos when non-subscribers are posting their elsewhere hosted images directly in the threads.

I much prefer the images to be posted directly in the threads as it is less for people to do to look at them.

 

[Kegger]

I prefer Flickr for my hosting as the compression is much better. Doesn't screw up your photos as bad.

 

[CAG76]

I just looked at your site! You did all of that with a Fuji S5700? Actually I would not be surprised. Point and shoots can take some great pictures! I have a Canon Powershot G9 which takes wonderful pictures!

About the earlier part. The only reason I like posting from another site than to do it direct is, posting direct makes my images look so low res and not its true sharpness. I've had a few people tell me something was out of focus when it was the bad resolution. But I do agree. If I want to post, I have to post on my photobucket site first, but then posting it here is so easy from there.

-Christopher

 

[dtornabene1]

I prefer Flickr for my hosting as the compression is much better. Doesn't screw up your photos as bad.

I agree, flickr is better than photobucket. On another note, still with the clown, huh. Interesting.

-Nick

 

[CAG76]

Ha ha ha ha ha gotta love the clowns! Yeah am actually going to put some on Flickr too. I almost did today, but I will. Just glad they are all free. There is something about flicker I like better and seems more people use it. I see everything on there. Plus people can reply on Flicker if they like your photos. Doesn't seem like photo bucket has that feature.

 

[Zed Twenty Ate]

guess i should try flickr...photobucket has served me well for a few years now...

 

[mrodgers]

I just looked at your site! You did all of that with a Fuji S5700? Actually I would not be surprised. Point and shoots can take some great pictures! I have a Canon Powershot G9 which takes wonderful pictures!

Me? Actually, the majority of photos on my site are done with a Fuji 2650 2mp camera I got in 2001 before I understood anything or even had photography thoughts at all.. I list what camera and what the settings were on the side (which the Fuji 2650 is auto only, a true P&S. I shoot the S5700 mostly manual and sometimes Aperture priority.)