Pictures and the CB - Very Important - Please read

[WebmasterPete]

We have asked in the past that the posting of pictures on this board be kept within reason. There are technical reasons why large batches of pictures on the boards will create issues. To help alleviate that problem, we installed software on the DIS server to handle the uploading and display of pictures, it is located at http://www.wdwinfo.com/photopost/index.php That photo gallery allows you to upload photos and also has a discussion board set up of its own.

I am asking that you use that forum for posting pictures. A few pictures here and there on this board are not an issue, but when we have individuals posting 14 pictures in one post that consume 600k of bandwidth each time the post is viewed, that creates a problem. I'm asking everyone to please understand that it's not done to be mean, but in order to keep the servers running as fast as we can.

If the problem does not solve itself very quickly, I will not permit any images to be posted on the boards at all (including pics in signatures). I don't like doing that because we are all adults here (well, most of us), and I think a simple explanation like the one above should suffice. I know that everyone enjoys seeing pictures and I feel we've made a good measure of effort to provide that to you without it affecting the performance of the forums.

I ask that you all please cooperate in helping us to keep things running smoothly and without any further issues.

Thanks,
Pete

 

[CathyCanada]

I don't think this is an unreasonable request at all, Pete and thank you for saying it.

CC

 

[Pembo]

Thanks Pete. I didn't even know we had a Photo Gallery?!

 

[CathyCanada]

You can find it here Pembo!
CC

 

[Rajah]

So to clarify, it's okay to post a post with 3 or 4 pictures (not counting sigs), but more than that goes to the gallery instead?

Also, technical question: I'm trying to understand how this works.

If I have, say, 15 pictures totalling 600k and all 15 are housed on my server here at home, and I post using an [ img ] tag here, how does that effect bandwith on your server? I'm not questioning or trying to be argumentative (this question could come across that way and I really don't mean that ) I just want to understand how this works. It seems to me that it would use X bandwidth to get the thread code from your server, but the 600k of images would come from my server?

Also, another question. I don't know about everyone else, but I completely forgot the photo gallery board existed. Would it be possible to get a link to the photo gallery place put at the top of the CB or something to remind us that it's there and how to get to it?

 

[always quiet]

Every time I go to that site, or click a link in it, I get a pop up box telling me something about a "remote debug" and it asks me to click one of the 2 choices or enter an IP address? Something about Macromedia Flash 6?? Anyone else getting that message?

 

[olena]

Originally posted by Rajah
So to clarify, it's okay to post a post with 3 or 4 pictures (not counting sigs), but more than that goes to the gallery instead?

Also, technical question: I'm trying to understand how this works.

If I have, say, 15 pictures totalling 600k and all 15 are housed on my server here at home, and I post using an [ img ] tag here, how does that effect bandwith on your server? I'm not questioning or trying to be argumentative (this question could come across that way and I really don't mean that ) I just want to understand how this works. It seems to me that it would use X bandwidth to get the thread code from your server, but the 600k of images would come from my server?

Also, another question. I don't know about everyone else, but I completely forgot the photo gallery board existed. Would it be possible to get a link to the photo gallery place put at the top of the CB or something to remind us that it's there and how to get to it?

I'm also curious about this....

 

[dtuleya]

Thanks Pete, only problem is I don't have any pics to post!

 

[KathyTX]

If I may, please allow me to try to provide an extremely simplified answer to the bandwidth usage question:

If you have an image hosted on another server and you post a LINK, the link will look something like this in your post:
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid56/pcbdeb9bd67add2242d1e52b50698c465/fc75c106.jpg

This method will not use DIS site bandwidth to display that photo. Your post only contains the URL to the image, not the image itself.

BUT if you use an IMG tag to display the same photo in your DIS post, the DIS is getting that photo from the source, then imbedding and displaying it in the post. This is the use of bandwidth that becomes problematic. In this case, your post contains the actual image.

The fact of where the image is stored is a simple storage capacity (hard drive) issue. The image can consume bandwidth on any sites that are coded to display and "serve" it for viewing, regardless of where the image is stored.

Did that help?

(edited to try to clarify the link example.)

 

[Pin Wizard]

I couldn't get a thing except for a blue background at that site.

 

[KathyTX]

That link was just an example of what the text in your message should look like.

This should be clearer:

Here is a link to an image. This method does not use any significant DIS bandwidth:
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid52/pa00250db654c731a3a37d0e9671e6ad0/fc9a3e00.jpg


Here is the same image, embedded in this page using the IMG tags. This method DOES use bandwidth here:

 

[charlie,nj]

Forget about all this bandwidth talk..I think the more important question is…does the little guy in the picture still have all of his fingers?

 

[Rajah]

Well, in some ways that make sense Kathy, but it still doesn't make sense from an HTML standpoint. Because when I view the source of the page, the source of that image is still imagestation, nothing DIS. And HTML is processed at the client, not at the server. When code is sent to the machine, an image is not sent via HTML. The code that tells you where the *image* is, is sent via HTML. Then the client says "okay, let me go grab that image" and it goes to the address for where that image is stored -- in the example of your post, when I look at the source, the DIS does not come into play at all for the image location. So I still don't understand how it's an issue.

 

[jfulcer]

I agree with Rajah... not to question the issue of bandwidth, but as I understand how HTML works, picture posts do not consume bandwidth through the DIS servers - they consume bandwidth on the server they are hosting it from, and the person at the computer screen on the other side.

Now, if the image is hosted on the DIS's image galleries, YES, then it would consume bandwidth, but most of us large picture posters use imagestation or worldzone.

And (fearing getting spanked for this) but IMHO everyone should follow the clipart guidelines, as outlined in many helpful posts, even webmasters. (insert picture of a smiley hiding here)

 

[CathyCanada]

Jeff, if you are talking about mine, I am NOT a Webmaster and I did NOT put that picture there. But so as not to appear as I was breaking the rules, I have removed it. Happy?
CC

 

[jfulcer]

Originally posted by CathyCanada
Jeff, if you are talking about mine, I am NOT a Webmaster and I did NOT put that picture there. But so as not to appear as I was breaking the rules, I have removed it. Happy?
CC

Actually, Cathy I thought yours was fine.

It was webmasterpete's that I was talking about. And he owns the place, so shhhhhh

 

[CathyCanada]

I'm reporting him to the Webmasters! I can do that now.

 

[WebmasterPete]

Just to clarify a few points.

1) Yes, when an image displays here that does consume bandwidth on this server, despite where the image is being hosted. Our hosting agreement for these servers does not distinguish between inbound and outbound bandwidth for servers outside our network.

2) Bandwidth is only part of the issue. The larger issue is that the software that runs the boards must load the images. I'm sure every one of you has experienced a delay in loading threads that were image intensive. Take that and multiply it by several hundred, and that creates the larger problem.

Again, I'm hoping to avoid the issue all together. If people can act within reason, there will be no need to create a new guideline. Many have complained that these boards are 'over moderated'. Here is a great opportunity to show that the community can control itself. I've presented the reasons for the issue, and what my request is in order to correct it.

Pete

 

[Saffron]

... Many have complained that these boards are 'over moderated'. Here is a great opportunity to show that the community can control itself. I've presented the reasons for the issue, and what my request is in order to correct it.

I hear you , Pete, but you have to read this message in order to comply. I didn't even know this message existed until I saw it posted in a different thread! Is there a way to make this message or other "not to be missed" messages at the top of the board stand out from the other "locked up top stuff" so more people can see it?

So, does this thread and bandwidth issues or server loading issues have anything to do with the use of smilies? Seems like some of us can only use 2 smilies per post???

 

[dianeschlicht]

I feel like this might have been caused by my "logging on" thread. I will delete it if necessary.