New Rule

[flip]

Can we try to make/enforce a rule where you have to post direct links to images or post the images? I really don't like waiting for a photobucket page to load, because they take awhile. Same with imageshack pages, and flickr.

I mean, the pages have the direct link on it... why not just post the direct link?

[Sozo]

Seems a bit extreme to me. What about picture based games or SOTW like competitions? Following a link for each image seems like to much of a hassle to me.Now, a rule I would support is one restricting the size of postable images, say to 500x500, and encouraging the use of compressed JPEGs or PNGs to keep the file size to a minimum. Obviously, I think the Pictorium is an exception to either of these ideas.

EDIT: Upon re-reading, I see the real purpose of flip's post. I won't bother deleting this post though, as I still have half a valid point.

[Simon Brown]

@CS: I'm pretty sure he's suggesting forcing people to post direct links rather than linking to the image's page.

---

As for your suggestion:

1. As CS implied, what if the image they want to post is too large for the forum?

2. Would users be allowed to post links to images on websites that don't allow hotlinking but they can't be bothered to re-upload.

[flip]

1. As CS implied, what if the image they want to post is too large for the forum?

Then they post a DIRECT LINK to the image, not to a photobucket page with the image.

[KillerK]

ooo i getcha flip i tink do you mean posting http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... /Reach.png or ( but of course full size or thumbnail with direct link )

and not http://s588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... =Reach.png ?

coz i think i see where your comming from people that put those crazy azz spacescapes on their photobuckets lag it to timbuktu and back

[theonlychad]

that would be a good idea for people with slower connections. I have 6mbps internet connection with my own dedicated line so its pretty fast. I could see where this would be a good idea for people with slower connections though.

[Ash]

Either clickable thumbnails or direct image link, not photobucket page link, just like shown in KillerK's post.

Simple.

ooo i getcha flip i tink do you mean posting http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... /Reach.png or ( but of course full size or thumbnail with direct link )

and not http://s588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... =Reach.png ?

coz i think i see where your comming from people that put those crazy azz spacescapes on their photobuckets lag it to timbuktu and back

[KillerK]

In theory it's a great idea ... the practicalities are the enforcing bit.

I'm sure the Mods' have enough work without re-sizing images for people. Or asking people to do it ?

Plus all the extra PM's if people report the link ... It might make EER look for the ejector button before he settles in properly

... or is there a code that could be put in place that won't allow that sort of link ?

hmm, enforcing the rule would be tricky, although simply posting a line " please use direct links of images insted of the link to your photobucket " seems simple enough to just put on the end when your posting a comment about somebodys work?

and for the part about code im no master at this stuff but the two links are very similar ( atleast they are with photobucket ) so it may create complications with some links for other hosts or just your average joe site links.

[Rick Brewster]

This doesn't sound like a practical rule to enforce. Your web browser should have tabs -- use them. Ctrl+Click opens any link in a new tab.

[flip]

I have tabs. I don't think anyone knows what I mean.

Either clickable thumbnails or direct image link, not photobucket page link, just like shown in KillerK's post.

Simple.

ooo i getcha flip i tink do you mean posting http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... /Reach.png or ( but of course full size or thumbnail with direct link )

and not http://s588.photobucket.com/albums/ss32 ... =Reach.png ?

coz i think i see where your comming from people that put those crazy azz spacescapes on their photobuckets lag it to timbuktu and back

This.

[pyrochild]

A) Not all image hosting sites allow this

Not everyone knows what a direct link is, as evidenced by the number of people misunderstanding your proposal

C) Even those who do know the difference have to go to the trouble of finding it vs. just posting what's already in their address bar after uploading a new image

D) Does it really matter?

[KillerK]

A) right clicking am image and pressing copy image url ( in chrome ) copy image adress ( in safari ) gives you a direct link and i suspect the option will be in i.e and firefox

i agree

C) as i pointed out in a its simple

D) yes and no, if you compare the links in what i posted erlier the direct link loads 10x faster then the photobucket link, this may vary depeding on internet speeds etc and hosts, ( dev and photobucket are slow image shack isnt so bad ) the only major difference it makes is my willingness to see someones artwork they've taken time to create.

anyway ill stop posting here now time for bed

anyway final thoughts : its a good idea but itd be better suited as a ?moral? rule insted of set in stone as such, what i mean is that it wont mean your images get taken down but you may be asked to give direct links but you dont have to at your own choice, the only problem i forsee if the rule was setup that way is what welsh said about "mini-mods"

[flip]

A) Not all image hosting sites allow this

If that's true, that should be illegal. Besides, photobucket, imageshack, and (I'm not sure about this...) flikr, all allow it. And, I haven't seen any other hosts here.

Not everyone knows what a direct link is, as evidenced by the number of people misunderstanding your proposal

It wouldn't be that hard to teach.

C) Even those who do know the difference have to go to the trouble of finding it vs. just posting what's already in their address bar after uploading a new image

On imagechack it's in big bold letters, and I don't know about other hosts. You can also right click on it, and copy image location. In IE, you can right click > properties. The link is there.

D) Does it really matter?

Depending on speeds of internet, it does.

[Simon Brown]

Besides, photobucket, imageshack, and (I'm not sure about this...) flikr, all allow it. And, I haven't seen any other hosts here.

DeviantArt - I think.

[Lance McKnight]

@(flip)...I do see what you are saying about the rule, but I think that's a little bit overboard. Crazy Man Dan has written a Pictorium Guideline, and he explicitly says to upload images to an image hosting site like Photobucket or Imageshack. Myddrin has written an excellent guide on how to use direct link.

My suggestion is to simply point the users to Myddrin's guide, and then leave it alone. I usually make two image files of the same thing, one the final enlarged version, and the other a thumbnail sized image so the user could see what they're going to see in the enlarged version.

This is what most of the users on the board do:

[url=link of big image file][img=direct link of "thumbnail sized image"][/url]

I think it's a matter of personal preferences.

Rick is right, this will be difficult to enforce, and may end up having a lot of locked topics all over the board, not very attractive at all. Welshblue brought up a valid point about people becoming a mini-mod, when simply pointing the users to Myddrin's guide or Crazy Man Dan's Pictorium Guideline should suffice.

[Ash]

This doesn't sound like a practical rule to enforce. Your web browser should have tabs -- use them. Ctrl+Click opens any link in a new tab.

It's not about new tabs or not, it's about speed.

Direct links to the image loads faster than loading the photobucket page.

Not everyone have super fast connections.

[flip]

This doesn't sound like a practical rule to enforce. Your web browser should have tabs -- use them. Ctrl+Click opens any link in a new tab.

It's not about new tabs or not, it's about speed.

Direct links to the image loads faster than loading the photobucket page.

Not everyone have super fast connections.

Yeah. I don't see what you were getting to, Rick.

[david.atwell]

If we don't understand what on the sweet green earth you're talking about, how the bloody potato* do you expect us to write it in the rules in language newbies will understand?

In addition, do you really think that more rules (especially this one, which really just amounts to a grudge rule for one person) are what we need? We need fewer rules, and more practical ones.

Sorry if I sound snarky. I just woke up. :-P

*Oh, yes. I went there.

[flip]

I'll just give a big explanation then. I really don't understand how you guys don't know what I'm talking about. It might just be me explaining it badly, but here we go.

See this? This is from welshblue's gallery: (I'm not saying is a super bad guy or anything, but I chose him because he uses photobucket pages.)

That page took about.. 7-8 seconds to load completely. Time it yourself. Plus, there are a lot of ads the expand and a lot of other bloody potato like that. Plus plus, I'm on a pretty fast computer. Not the fastest here, but... LINK.

Here's the thumnail that goes to the DIRECT LINK. The direct link is located on the photobucket page under "Share This Image." Time how fast this loads.

That took less than a second to load, and I'm sure it's the same for everyone else. This can save a lot of time for people with slow internet connections, people who are impatient like me, and for people who don't like ads all over the screen.

[david.atwell]

I understand what you mean. I've always understood what you meant. And I'm saying, yes, that's the ideal way of doing things. But making a rule would be way over the top. Especially since, if you have a slow connection, you know that you might possibly be getting into a slow-load situation when you click on external links anyway!

We try to make life on the forum pretty fast. We can't control anyone else.

And, on top of everything else...

Seven seconds? Really? You're complaining about Seven Seconds?

[Boude]

Maybe this could help you:

In IE8, mozilla firefox (don't know which version) and google chrome you can open a link in a new tab without going there immediately by pressing the mouse wheel and when you see the page is loaded you can see the beautiful image, without wasting time waiting.

[Simon Brown]

Plus, there are a lot of ads the expand and a lot of other bloody potato like that.

AdBlock Plus might reduce the delay.

[game_freak]

Plus, there are a lot of ads the expand and a lot of other bloody potato like that.

AdBlock Plus might reduce the delay.

If they were direct links people wouldn't have to worry about that..

and its just annoying having a whole page load when all your trying to do is look at one picture..

[david.atwell]

Okay, look. It doesn't do a bit of good trying to debate this ad nauseam - Rick already said no, it's impractical, it wouldn't have much of a viewable result. I understand the point, and yes, that would be preferred. But it really wouldn't work out very well in practice. Trust me, I've been a mod for a while. And the rules are a lot more difficult to enforce (especially those which are invisible on the surface whether you follow them or not). I'm going to lock this. It's pointless. If another mod has anything to add, go ahead.