Forum Competiton Rules - Clarification Urgently Needed Please

[GwynnRobinson]

Hi the red text states that the new allowed image size is 800 px X 600 px and has no mention of file size but the rules actually state image size of 750 px X 600 px and state 128 Kb max file size.

For a complex scene at 800 X 600, at this slightly increased image size the JPG must be compressed more (in my case for my August entry to level 2) giving significant artifacts in the image, to ensure that it does not exceed 128Kb.

As the pixel size of the image has been increased can you confirm that the file size (KB) has also been increased. Personally I need 150Kb to ensure that my images at such an image size can be compressed to no less (or is that greater) than level 6 which is ok.

My present August entry is just under 150Kb but under the stated rules is over the old 128Kb limit. Do I need to replace the image with a smaller one or is the present image ok?

I am unhappy to enter a smaller image or a more compressed image as I feel that will put me at a disadvantage (and I need all the help I can get) 

 

[Melvin Nicholson]

Hi Gwynn, the rules are going to be updated soon as discussed with Ian recently.  The new sizes are 800 (landscape) x 600 (portrait) and a file size no greater than 150KB.
 
Hope this helps Gwynn.

[GwynnRobinson]

Spot on thanks. I guessed at 150Kb so all seems ok

[Rob Georgeson]

Am I right in assuming the file size only applies to photos hosted on the forum? Are larger file sizes, within the same pixel dimensions, hosted elsewhere (flickr, Photobucket) acceptable?

[Melvin Nicholson]

If you're referring to images that are uploaded on external sites looking correctly sized no here than I'll assume so as I do not host my images externally.  Try uploading a couple of oversized images on Photobucket and linked them to the Forum and let's see.  Of course externally linking your images to the Forum has a huge advantage as you're not taking up valuable space on here.  Sadly Ian deleted all of the images from the past 200 days (or so he says) but he has also deleted all of the competitions images from the last two years so I've had to go back and upload then all again.  I've completed last season's, just got 2009/10 to go now.

[Rob Georgeson]

Try uploading a couple of oversized images on Photobucket and linked them to the Forum and let's see.

I've tried it loads of times, I usually host external to the forum and a 800px image will be about 350kb rather than 128kb as restricted on here.

[Melvin Nicholson]

We've increased the file size to from 128KB to 150KB on here now.  Am I to assume (always a dangerous notion I know) that an image at 350KB hosted externally looks of a higher quality than say perhaps that same image hosted internally at 150KB?

[Rob Georgeson]

You tell me Mel. Here is an identical image saved at 126kb for forum hosting then at 327Kb for Photobucket hosting. The first is Photobucket, the second is PPS. Can you tell the difference?

[Rob Georgeson]

To answer my own question now that I've uploaded it, Yes you can tell a very slight difference if you zoom in and pixel peep. The externally hosted one does seem to have retained slightly more detail than the PPS hosted one. You do have to look pretty damn close to tell though.

The question is, are we going to force people to host on the forum and take up hosting space or encourage people to host elsewhere knowing that they can potentially display a slightly better resolution photo? My personal view would be to leave things the way they are and let everyone decide for themselves which hosting option they opt for.

[GwynnRobinson]

Right now this IS helpful.

So if an image is hosted externally then it can be larger than 150Kb. If I have understood this correctly then can we make this clear in the rules please.

[Paul Iddon]

I always link to my Canon Fodder site (and sometimes Photobucket for my photos (not often in the comps section of late, I'll admit) but the files vary depending on crop.

I usually set my images at 100dpi and 1024px for web use. That can create images of varying size. I did one yesterday of a butterfly which came out at 1.1Mb but that was because of the editing!

I don't use this sites own hosting - there is no need to use our bandwidth when others do it for free.

Paul.

[Melvin Nicholson]

Gwynn raises a fair point in that memebrs should be notified that they have the option of externally hosting their images, I'll have a word with Ian on this point.  Rob you're absolutely spot on, I couldn't tell the difference at all but the could I somehow link my images on Facebook to appear on here or is that not possible?  Paul once showed me how to embed some code on Photobucket but I haven't gone down this route for a couple of years now and wouldn't mind being reminded because I do tend to upload quite a lot of images.  Care to put up a paragraph Paul or Rob on how you host your images via Photobucket please?

[Paul Iddon]

From Photobucket, beneath your photo is a series of boxes (4 of them, unless you choose to hide any, I only have the image code box displaying).

The one you need to show your photo in a forum is in the box which has the "[" bracket, the letters "img" and then the "]" bracket, at the start. Click in the box and copy it via your right mouse button.

In your forum thread, just paste it into your text dialogue at the relevant point.


Paul.

[Melvin Nicholson]

Now I remember and I even have an account with Photobucket.  Cheers for the info Paul, I'll go and upload a few images from Preston Train Station that I shot a couple of weeks ago.

[Andrew Woodhouse]

You tell me Mel. Here is an identical image saved at 126kb for forum hosting then at 327Kb for Photobucket hosting. The first is Photobucket, the second is PPS. Can you tell the difference?

The only difference I can tell is that the Photobucket image has slightly higher saturation and contrast. At forum sizes any other difference in quality is negligible.