Uploading Photos

[8349]

Is there a trick to uploading photos? I've tried attaching and "dropping in" and I keep getting a "File to Large" message. Even using smaller, degraded photos. It wouldn't accept my 1.5MB photo, or the dumbed down 152KB version of it.

[6643]

No trick, really. The file size limit is around 450KB. Here's a thread with the gory details:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=972

Sometimes when you resize an image it doesn't properly resize the file on the disk. Just something to be aware of.

[8233]

No trick, really. The file size limit is around 450KB. Here's a thread with the gory details:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=972

Sometimes when you resize an image it doesn't properly resize the file on the disk. Just something to be aware of.

Is there a reason why the file size limit is so low? Is it a financial issue?

[2066]

No trick, really. The file size limit is around 450KB. Here's a thread with the gory details:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=972

Sometimes when you resize an image it doesn't properly resize the file on the disk. Just something to be aware of.

Is there a reason why the file size limit is so low? Is it a financial issue?

May be. It's been years since my involvement, but I believe that was an issue in choosing a workable, feature-customizable website -- Rob will know better, of course. It's always been a conservative financial "balancing act" for the Association to collect "just enough" to operate hence a focused need to keep costs to a minimum with related decisions (...unlike the "government", but I digress). With many (most??) members, Association officers and 120/140 admirers seemingly having migrated to FB, the entirety of the "official" website may need to be re-considered again at some point(?). John Cooper does an outstanding job of fielding inquiries and others do continue to share vital and interesting expertise/experience "here" as time allows but the increasing lack of posts, numbers and diversity is noticeable. FWIW & much more than you asked for . Mac

[6643]

Is there a reason why the file size limit is so low? Is it a financial issue?

Just some perspective: the allowable file size is bigger than my first disk drive....

But, yes, it's financial. Storage costs money, and, ironically, it costs a lot more when you're buying it for a web site than when you buy it for home. (I recently bought a 500GB SSD for less than $50.00 and a 1TB version costs less than that 360K drive I got back in 1985...)

The reason why so much of the old web site was lost is we ran out of disk space.

You can embed an image stored elsewhere (Microsoft One drive, Google Drive, etc.) by following the instructions in the last example in the how-to thread. Below is a 2.52 MB 4160 x 2340 image hosted on One Drive. Note that the forum still resizes it to fit the screen, but it doesn't take up space on our server.



For what it's worth, here, the web site is the product, not you.

[8233]

Thanks John for the response. I know about embedded pictures and I also run 2 websites as well so I understand the cost considerations. One thing I had to do a while back was to move providers. Cloud storage is getting insanely cheap and I voted with my feet.

Embedding from another source has 2 big disadvantages.

1. It is not easy for an average user and they won't want to go though the trouble to learn

2. Anything meaningful that is shared is lost when whatever source of the file goes away. I've seen a lot of threads in various forums where this is the case. The idea should be that information and files shared here should be all self contained so it can be preserved.

I'm sure I don't have the best deal even now and I pay $150 per year for 300GB of storage. It just seems the file size limit is too low and makes it cumbersome for people to want to post. As Mac points out, more people are going to Facebook in part I believe due to ease of use.

I also know running a site is a thankless job so I do want to thank you and Rob for all of your work here. I would like to see more contributions and I sorely miss the old posts that we have not been able to see restored. I had just started looking to buy a 120/140 when the site crashed and I remember the amount of content was great. I wish we could get more of it back. Getting the Neal Wright articles restored, for example, has been invaluable in my opinion.

[klyde sessna]

Just one of the benefits of the Association's Facebook page. Post away.

[6643]

Just one of the benefits of the Association's Facebook page. Post away.

Facebook is "free" because Zuckerberg can make more money off of your information and habits than the hardware and software needed to support the site. I choose not to support his efforts.

We have a lot of information from the old site, it's just not in a format we can post. I spent almost 3 weeks of my free time restoring this one thread. If anyone has a thread they'd like to see restored, post your request here.

[a64pilot]

I moderate “Cruisers Forum” a huge forum dedicated to cruising boats and cruisers, membership wise its huge, and we can post large Photos there.
But, here is the catch, the site exists to make the owner money, so it has advertising, and that advertising is truly obnoxious, it can be mitigated somewhat with software, but if I were to get a vote, I’d vote stay with small photos and no advertising.

I know advertising wasn’t brought up, but it’s one way to keep costs down.

I don’t Facebook, my Wife does pretty much against my wishes, I don’t as believe in “TANSTAAFL” There Ain’t No Such Think As A Free Lunch.

[2066]

John wrote: (RE Facebook) "I choose not to support..."; Jody wrote: "I don't do Facebook".
Mac is writing: "Amen! Me, too!! Clearly we're in the minority and we may well be supporting Zuckerberg & other social media purveyors + giving up personal info. in ways we're not aware. But, we don't "have to do Facebook" when a very practical alternative still exists. It's been expressed by several and still thought and appreciated by many -- thanks to you guys and the several others who continue to contribute significantly and consistently & make this a very valuable, comfortable, and (relatively) "safe place". Mac