Subject:
|
Re: Giant Brickshelf images...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Jan 2003 07:30:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1224 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Bram Lambrecht writes:
> BTW, what ever happened with this idea:
> http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=36139
> ?
I think that kind of went out with the bandwith.
Another, great idea, that was suggested is to make Brickshelf resize images in
the same manner as thumbnail generation. So you basically get three different
images sizes stored on Brickshelf, one thumbnail, one 640xY (or 800xY) and one
original. The idea is to use the thumbnails like today, the medium sized images
for the standard "Previous/Next" browsing and the original if you click the
image there, i.e. the .jpg URL.
I've tried to find the original post but was unable to so I'm sorry for not
giving proper credit to the suggester.
Now to the problem, an implementation takes work and thus time from Kevin and
the above suggestion would increase storage space nedded. Some intelligence
also is needed (in the scripts) to avoid making images larger when resizing to
800xY (or whatever is selected) and also to resize to height or width whatever
is largest. The benefit would be less load on the connection and thus a faster
Brickshelf.
I'm sure Kevin will do the updates he feel he wants to do when he finds the
time and inspiration to do so. In the meantime I suggest we get off his back
and appreciate the work he has done so far. I don't think we give him a good
work environment always suggesting to fix his free service and in a way
complaining. I realize I'm a double moral man since I re-suggested the above
and at the same time writes this :)
Thanks Kevin, love your effort!
/Tobbe
(remove SPAM when e-mailing)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
