|
|
Olsen_Visions
Hot Prospect
Reged: Fri
Posts: 195
Loc: Giant Redwoods north. Calif.
|
|
Excuse me but Photobucket should not be casually dismissed as if any problems are due to it or its policies. Free account users are morons if they don't know what the limitations on file-size are. As for re-sizing pics over 512K, the result is excellent is the original is excellent, and crap if the original is crap. Since the original pic is resized and not just over-compressed, the result is fine. No problem. But.....those of us who can afford about $2.00 a month for a premium account, the max file size is 1 Meg. and bandwideth is unlimited. I've made dozens of posts from my PB galleries and no one has yet had any complaint. And no bandwidth problems either, I assume, since my site received 70,000 hits in one day about 2 months ago. So where is the problem?
If PB remains banned, I can't make anymore posts of my enhanced/restored images because I don't have time to be wasting establishing another image-gallery elsewhere (I have about 5-6,000 images at photobucket and I'm still stuck with a dial-up connection, being as I'm way out in the boonies, between a State & National Redwood forest and a National Recreation Area). So please give PB a thumbs-up (if you enjoy the results of my editing work.)
http://photobucket.com/albums/v77/arnash/DreamGirls/
Also, I think some important facts need to be pointed out concerning size and quality. I've downloaded tons of huge-file fotos that were poor quality because they were unsharpened or just plain lacking in any fine detail. Such pics can be restored and cropped and maybe re-sized to a size that matches the amount of detail and afterward they are significantly smaller files than the lower quality originals. Mostly this is true of pics from scans, not from super Hi-Res cameras. Scanners de-grade images due to old imperfect algorithms that are (unfortunately) still being used today. They sacrifice quality for the sake of speed, (which was a necessary evil way bad when processors were very slow and weak compared to today) Here's an example of a high-quality image that is under 500K. (1700 x 1441 436K)
Edited by Olsen_Visions (Sat Jan 28 2006 04:13 AM)
|
marathonmann
The Running Man
Reged: Mon
Posts: 2954
Loc: LG in NS in D
|
|
Quote:
I've tried Media Upload a few days ago. And I don't understand why it is on the allowed-list. Here are the FAQ! Or not? It is too complicated to handle. And I've uploaded a big picture and it looks like sh*t and is much too small at Media Upload.
Here an example. Sorry, the collage is not erotic but big and great:
Picture on Media Upload 
And to Photobucket:
I don't know Photobucket and don't know if it's reliable or not. But the smaller SMG-Pictures Char has posted look much better than the too big originals.
And imagecheck do resize the pictures too if they are too big.
|
JT
Philogynist
Reged: Mon
Posts: 36843
Loc: Miami Beach
|
|
mediaupload.com has been changed to mediaupload.net
It was a typo.
To Olsen_Visions, the following posts you made not too long ago with photobucket seem to have dead links:
Olsen Twins -3 new Wallpapers (2 NYM collages, 1 Fantasy)
http://forums.superiorpics.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/257763/an//page/0/vc/1
Olsen Twins -7 newly enhanced HQ pro-portraits
http://forums.superiorpics.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/225271/an//page/0/vc/1
MichelleTrachenberg -exquite Photo-Art portraits & close-ups
http://forums.superiorpics.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/215921/an//page/0/vc/1
That is not a good sign and good case for photobucket.
--------------------
Everyone VOTE FOR SP HOTTEST GIRLS of 2008!
^ Click Here then cast your votes before Christmas!
|
Olsen_Visions
Hot Prospect
Reged: Fri
Posts: 195
Loc: Giant Redwoods north. Calif.
|
|
to quote myself: "So please visit my site or my old posts to see that there is no problem (though I do sometimes put pics in temporary albums and later break the links when I move them to permanent albums.)"
I just recently moved those pics to permanent albums so the links are now broken in the post. I figure that almost no one is viewing posts that are 3-5 weeks old. I put newly added photos in temp albums so that when people visit my galleries (which are "open" to everyone) they don't have to wonder what is new and where it's located. The "temp" album is first in the list with its post-date in the title.
---repeat from earlier reply---
Quote:
Photobucket is being mis-perceived here. It has no pop-ups (they eliminated them over a year ago and they never existed for premium account holders) I've made dozens of posts without any of the imagined problems associated with lousy hosting sites. In fact in the final 31 day period of '05 my galleries received over 800,000 hits with over 20Gig of data tranfer. I've not heard of any problems at all. Check-out http://clik.to/wonderland
|
JT
Philogynist
Reged: Mon
Posts: 36843
Loc: Miami Beach
|
|
From the top post:
Quote:
This is where you can post an imagehost for us to consider within Rule 5.
We'll take a look and if it is acceptable we may allow it.
It must be STABLE, it CANNOT have popups, it CANNOT be used for monetary gain or viewership gain (such as imagecash or your own startup imagehost), and it must be somewhat popularly used in other sites/forums.
OV, your posts are not stable because you are moving the pics around after a few weeks. Alot of members use the Search function to find old pics.
Besides, it does not take long to reupload a few pics to one of the allowable imagehosts, members that contribute do it all the time.
In a way photobucket might be fine for a paid user like you OV, but to a casual member that sings up for the free account, their limits suck, limted bandwidth and smaller max image size.
--------------------
Everyone VOTE FOR SP HOTTEST GIRLS of 2008!
^ Click Here then cast your votes before Christmas!
|
Olsen_Visions
Hot Prospect
Reged: Fri
Posts: 195
Loc: Giant Redwoods north. Calif.
|
|
"It does not take long to reupload a few pics to one of the allowable imagehosts"
Not exactly true when dealing with uploading to two sites instead of just one and doing it via a dial-up connection. I sacrifice too much of my time editing images and uploading to just my one site, so I guess I won't be posting here anymore, unless I'm given a special dispensation. As for "stability", if post-editing weren't locked after a short period I could update my old posts, but that isn't currently possible. So I guess it's the forum members who will be getting the short end of the stick 'cause I will be personally benefiting by having more time to devote to all the other projects in my life.
--------------------
Discover an amazing Photo-Gallery ~Celeb Optimized-Images, & personal digicam photos, collages & Panoramas @ http://clik.to/wonderland/
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I'd say we can probably put imagehigh back into the list, it has opened its gates again, and with a 2Mb limit and a 25 image uploader, its pretty good I feel.
|
KenyaGruv
Hardcore
Reged: Tue
Posts: 2084
Loc: ^^Inside E
|
|
Quote:
I'd say we can probably put imagehigh back into the list, it has opened its gates again, and with a 2Mb limit and a 25 image uploader, its pretty good I feel.
That sounds good. 
People that register are even able to upload 35 pics in a row. No pop-ups nor ads, no resizing, manipulation of filesize etc...Fast upload and download...so far stable. 
If it had compatibility with DTA and would show the resolution under the thumbnail I'd say it would be the perfect imagehost.
--------------------
KenyaGruv's Top 20 List: 01 Esther Baxter 02 Sofía Vergara 03 Charlize Theron 04 Petra Nemcova 05 Roselyn Sánchez 06 Thalía 07 Jessica Alba 08 Eva Longoria 09 Salma Hayek 10 Mélissa Theuriau 11 Monica Bellucci 12 Heidi Klum 13 Adriana Lima 14 Halle Berry 15 Beyoncé 16 Kim Kardashian 17 Stacy Keibler 18 Lucy Pinder 19 Mariah Carey 20 Christina Milian
http://www.tookie.com/
|
ChickenMan
Up and Comer
Reged: Thu
Posts: 73
|
|
http://www.picuploader.com allows 10 uploads at the same time great for mega posts, saves tonnes of time.
--------------------
PicUploader.com - Please show your support by using PicUploader.com 100% UpTime guaranteed!
|
JT
Philogynist
Reged: Mon
Posts: 36843
Loc: Miami Beach
|
|
Quote:
http://www.picuploader.com allows 10 uploads at the same time great for mega posts, saves tonnes of time.
It will be looked at. But please dont ever change the thread title in a reply.
--------------------
Everyone VOTE FOR SP HOTTEST GIRLS of 2008!
^ Click Here then cast your votes before Christmas!
|
JT
Philogynist
Reged: Mon
Posts: 36843
Loc: Miami Beach
|
|
Thumbnail size looks mighty small. You say it has 10 upload max? So does imagevenue. and Imagehigh has I think 25. It doesn't work with downthemall, (only imageshack does though). But imageshack is best for others downloading megaposts because of DtA.
 VS  
 VS.  
I don't see it used in other sites or forums either. My vote would be no at this point.
--------------------
Everyone VOTE FOR SP HOTTEST GIRLS of 2008!
^ Click Here then cast your votes before Christmas!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I tried it with 8 images close to 1Mb and it just timed out, no from me until it get more accepted in other places and is proven reliable
|
SeymourHersh
Veteran
Reged: Mon
Posts: 1375
Loc: Stockholm
|
|
www.imageknockout.com is a fantastic imagehost. It's free, it's fast, no pop-ups, no resizing, file size limit is 5Mb but if you register you can upload even larger photos and, best of all, you can upload as many pics as you want at the same time according to the owners. I tried with 80 pics and it worked just fine.
--------------------
-CREDIT TO ORIGINAL POSTER, CAPPER, SCANNER, PHOTOGRAPHER, SITE
http://www.xenu.net/
|
KenyaGruv
Hardcore
Reged: Tue
Posts: 2084
Loc: ^^Inside E
|
|
Quote:
www.imageknockout.com is a fantastic imagehost. It's free, it's fast, no pop-ups, no resizing, file size limit is 5Mb but if you register you can upload even larger photos and, best of all, you can upload as many pics as you want at the same time according to the owners. I tried with 80 pics and it worked just fine.
Hey that's funny Sey I wanted to post it too but unfortunately their thumbnails didn't show up. So I mailed them and their reply was:
Quote:
Ask forum mods, or look for their custom bb code, some forums dont
follow the standard [img][/img] tags.
Datum empfangen am 11.02.2006 17:32:41 Uhr
Betreff Re: Thumbnail option buggy?
KenyaGruv wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> it doesn't work on one larger forum (members: 45 K) that I visit regularly. I'll attach a pic for you.
>
>
>
> http://imageknockout.com/uploads/thumbnail-test2068117314.jpg
>
>
>
> Besides that the service you offer is nice.
>
>
>
> With best regards,
>
>
>
> KG
>
>
>
--------------------
KenyaGruv's Top 20 List: 01 Esther Baxter 02 Sofía Vergara 03 Charlize Theron 04 Petra Nemcova 05 Roselyn Sánchez 06 Thalía 07 Jessica Alba 08 Eva Longoria 09 Salma Hayek 10 Mélissa Theuriau 11 Monica Bellucci 12 Heidi Klum 13 Adriana Lima 14 Halle Berry 15 Beyoncé 16 Kim Kardashian 17 Stacy Keibler 18 Lucy Pinder 19 Mariah Carey 20 Christina Milian
http://www.tookie.com/
|
SeymourHersh
Veteran
Reged: Mon
Posts: 1375
Loc: Stockholm
|
|
Crap! I really liked them. I posted on another forum and it worked out just fine but it doesn't work here at SP. Sorry about that.
--------------------
-CREDIT TO ORIGINAL POSTER, CAPPER, SCANNER, PHOTOGRAPHER, SITE
http://www.xenu.net/
|
