Author Topic: Way HUGE picture (** Important Image Information **)  (Read 1246 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Julia99

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Karma: +272/-722
  • My Fans are Legion
    • View Profile
    • Barnabas & Company
Way HUGE picture (** Important Image Information **)
« on: November 10, 2002, 06:14:20 AM »
How can i make the picture of Grayson I just posted "nude grayson" topic. . .smaller. . its HUGE!  its not [this BIG] on my site.???
Julia99

Offline Mysterious Benefactor

  • Systems Manager /
  • Administrator
  • NEW SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • *****
  • Posts: 16071
  • Karma: +205/-12187
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Way HUGE picture
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2002, 06:17:16 AM »
Quote
its not on my site.???
Well, the first question would be: Do you have permission from the person who runs the other site to post the picture on this forum? ;)

And the second question would be: If it's not your site, then why does your Earthlink username appear in the picture's URL? ;)


As for the picture itself, too bad Grayson didn't get to wear this costume until 1979 - just think of what Julia might have looked like if Grayson had worn it under one of the good doctor's dresses! [lghy]

Offline Julia99

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Karma: +272/-722
  • My Fans are Legion
    • View Profile
    • Barnabas & Company
Re: Way HUGE picture
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2002, 07:32:07 AM »
1.  The picture is from a magazine which I photocopied from the library today and scanned.

2. it is posted on my site but as i said earlier ..its not this HUGE on my site. . hence i don't understand why its SO big when placed here.

Enough info?

p.s. actually Grayson wore the outfit in 1971 right AFTER Dark Shadows. . the article was reflecting in 1979  on the Theatre company's successful productions. .
Julia99

Offline Mysterious Benefactor

  • Systems Manager /
  • Administrator
  • NEW SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • *****
  • Posts: 16071
  • Karma: +205/-12187
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Way HUGE picture
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2002, 08:04:37 AM »
Quote
1.  The picture is from a magazine which I photocopied from the library today and scanned.

2. it is posted on my site but as i said earlier ..its not this HUGE on my site. . hence i don't understand why its SO big when placed here.

Hmmm... perhaps there would have been less confusion on my part if your original point of "its not on my site.???" had been as clear as "its not [this BIG] on my site.???", which is how you subsequently edited it to read 1 hour, 19 minutes and 33 seconds after having first made your post. But I suppose we should all extend you the benefit of the doubt that that's the way you always intended it to read, but your fingers and brain were out of sync. [winkb] That happens to me more times than I care to publicly admit. [lghy]

However, when I copy and paste the picture's URL:

http://home.earthlink.net/~rjjamison/_uimages/TheScreens.JPG

into any of my installed browsers' (IE, Netscape, Mozilla & Opera) navigation windows (without coming anywhere near the forum in the process), the picture still comes up as being 1275X927 in every instance. If it isn't actually stored with those dimensions in your Web space, that's not only exceedingly strange, it's outright bizarre - and a phenomenon, in all likelihood, heretofore unseen in the history of the Internet. [wink2]

I'd actually like nothing better than to visit your site to check out this amazing situation further, but I don't seem to be able to locate a link that your post on Current Talk seems to indicate is somewhere below. :-/

Quote
p.s. actually Grayson wore the outfit in 1971 right AFTER Dark Shadows. . the article was reflecting in 1979  on the Theatre company's successful productions. .

Oops, my bad. :-[ I was so interested in checking out the photo and then so floored to see how huge it actually was that I didn't even see what you'd written at the top of your post...


Offline Julia99

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Karma: +272/-722
  • My Fans are Legion
    • View Profile
    • Barnabas & Company
Re: Way HUGE picture
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2002, 08:10:45 PM »
Quote
Hmmm... perhaps there would have been less confusion on my part if your original point of "its not on my site.???" had been as clear as "its not [this BIG] on my site.???", which is how you subsequently edited it to read 1 hour, 19 minutes and 33 seconds after having first made your post.


You're a man aren't you?


Here is the link to my "hold everything for later usage" website. . .click on RJ Personal Stuff to see the photo in questions:

http://home.earthlink.net/~rjjamison/index.html
Julia99

Offline Mysterious Benefactor

  • Systems Manager /
  • Administrator
  • NEW SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • *****
  • Posts: 16071
  • Karma: +205/-12187
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Way HUGE picture
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2002, 01:29:56 AM »
Quote
Here is the link to my "hold everything for later usage" website. . .click on RJ Personal Stuff to see the photo in questions

Ah, see, exactly as I thought: The HTML to display that picture on your page is written like this:

Code: [Select]
<a HREF="../_uimages/TheScreens.JPG" target="_blank">
<img SRC="../_uimages/TheScreens.JPG" BORDER="0"  WIDTH="200"></a>

the WIDTH="200" attribute of the IMG tag sets the picture's display width to 200 pixels (with the height equal to 145 pixels). However, after someone clicks on the picture to view the larger display, the 1275X927 pixels version comes up for them in a separate browser window.

When you read the "posting" page in the forum's Help section, or you read Luciaphil's "regarding pictures" topic on this board, you probably noticed that the YaBBC IMG tag takes both a "width" and a "height" attribute. Unlike HTML, though, both have to be specified for them to work properly.

Now, with a monitor's display set to 800X600 (the best setting to read the forum), the largest width an image can be without a portion of it disappearing off the right hand side is approximately 527 pixels. The easiest way to figure out the corresponding height is to try to resample/resize an image in whatever graphics software you might have on your computer. But if someone doesn't really understand how the resample/resize feature works, or if their software doesn't have that feature, the only other way to figure it out is to resort to a simple proportion equation. If you'd like the picture to display as 527 pixels wide in your post, you'd figure it out like this:

Code: [Select]

1275   527
---- = ---
927    x

927 * 527
--------- = x
  1275

488529
------ = x
1275

383.16 = x


We need a whole number. The .16 is lower than .5, so instead of rounding up to 384, we just drop the .16 entirely, and the dimension you would use for the Grayson photo is 527X383. So, in your post, you'd say:

Code: [Select]
[img width=527 height=383]http://home.earthlink.net/~rjjamison/_uimages/TheScreens.JPG[/img]
Now, aren't you so glad you asked how to make it display smaller? [wink2]

I've taken the liberty of fixing your post for you this time, as I also did back in April when a similar situation came up with the picture of Don Briscoe, Grayson and David Henesy in your "Have A Hunk" post, which is the second post on page 6 of that topic, which can now be found as the second topic down on page 47 of the Current Talk II board in the General Discussion Archive. (You might recall that photo is stored as 1458X2047 in your Earthlink Web space, and I resized it to 500X702 for you.)
Next time you're on your own... [winkg]

Offline kuanyin

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 690
  • Karma: +9/-92
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Way HUGE picture (** Important Image Information **)
« Reply #6 on: November 19, 2002, 04:07:07 AM »
Oy, suddenly, my head is hurting. Methinks I am not cut out to be a programmer...
"If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly, rather than not at all." G.K. Chesterton