Subject:
|
Re: Brickshelf going away???
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 3 Jun 2005 05:35:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6191 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote:
> > I personally think that the 2400x1600 pictures should go - or be resized.
> > One 2400x1600 picture is equivalent to four normal sized pics - they use up
> > as much space and bandwidth as legitimate sized photos. Even if there is a
> > legitimate reason for having a huge picture (like up close detail) - if it is
> > that important to you, you can use another image hosting service or pay for a
> > web server.
>
> Yeah, valid points. And I'm not really talking about cleaning out good stuff, or
> even ugly stuff. But upon inspection of my gallery, I may discover that I have 4
> photos of basically the same shot. 3 of those could go away easily.
IMHO another thing that I forgot to mention that gulps down a lot of space are
pictures of official LEGO sets. I have got no idea why this is REALLY neccessary
, since, if you want to inventory your collection, you've already got LUGNET,
AND Peeron. Some people just take images of sets they have from the scan library
and upload them into their gallery. That is just a space chewer! I HATE blurry
Bionicle pics, and would love to see them go away (1), but they are anyday
better than this.
Legoswami
(1) Although I know that would be stifling of creativity, and that's just not
the right way to go....
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Brickshelf going away???
|
| (...) Yeah, valid points. And I'm not really talking about cleaning out good stuff, or even ugly stuff. But upon inspection of my gallery, I may discover that I have 4 photos of basically the same shot. 3 of those could go away easily. Jake --- Jake (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jun-05, to lugnet.general)
|
125 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
