Announcement

**Snowhog** · Mar 17, 2012, 08:28 PM

Limits have to be established for attachments - we don't have unlimited space on the server. That said, most of the current size limits are 'defaults' and haven't been changed - yet. The 2Mb on the .pdf was set today so I could upload a reference file in the moderators area.

I'll bring up the issue with the other Administrators and see if we can come to an agreement on a suitable file size limit on the types of attachments that we are allowing.

**Frank616** · Mar 17, 2012, 09:01 PM

SnowHog:

The 2Mb on the .pdf was set today so I could upload a reference file in the moderators area.

Aha! Caught 'ya!

Caught you also needing bigger file attachments. So I'm not the only one.

I realize that disk space is an issue, and it costs. Where can I contribute?

At the same time, 19K for a screenshot is pretty tiny. Surely a meg is not too big, is it? Screen shots are sometimes the only way to get the information across clearly and simply. Others can actually see what is going on.

Thanks for considering it.

Frank.

**Ole Juul** · Mar 17, 2012, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by Frank616 View Post

At the same time, 19K for a screenshot is pretty tiny. Surely a meg is not too big, is it? Screen shots are sometimes the only way to get the information across clearly and simply. Others can actually see what is going on.

One meg is pretty big for web use. It's generally considered bad form to go much over 100K. One of the reasons is bandwidth. In my case I can only get wireless and a lot of pictures take the fun out of it. In North America over 10% of people are on dialup too, so big files are definitely not a lot of fun. Another consideration is that one has to log in to the forums to see the attachments which is inconvenient. If you click on it, vBulletin gives you a bit of a go-around too.

Anyway, sometimes a larger file is indeed needed for detail, such as reading chip numbers on a mother board. You can solve a number of problems by simply not using attachments, and just uploading them elsewhere. If you don't have any space with your ISP, then use something like Photobucket, which is free (and they pay for the bandwidth). I tend to use a mixture, depending on the file and who it's for.

**Frank616** · Mar 18, 2012, 08:40 AM

Ole Juul:

One meg is pretty big for web use. It's generally considered bad form to go much over 100K. One of the reasons is bandwidth. In my case I can only get wireless and a lot of pictures take the fun out of it.

I understand. However, things are getting more graphics oriented all the time. The two screen shots that I wanted to post were only 160K each. A half-page screenshot from the PDF manual for my camera that I posted in a photography forum was 360K. A full screen shot on this 1920 x 1080 laptop is 610K. Those are no longer big by today's standards. If you are on limited bandwidth, you are not obliged to download the attachment. I can see your argument if this were a case of huge avatar or signature files which you HAVE to wait for while they download. Attachments, however, are optional.

and just uploading them elsewhere. If you don't have any space with your ISP, then use something like Photobucket, which is free (and they pay for the bandwidth). I tend to use a mixture, depending on the file and who it's for.

I don't see the argument here. If you are on dialup, then whether you download the file from this forum, or from photobucket, you still have to download the same amount. The location changes, and the user has to jump through more hoops to post in a second location, but there is no net gain. There would be an advantage to the forum itself in that its storage needs go down, but not to the end user.

I'm willing to contribute cash to help out. How can I do that?

Another consideration is that one has to log in to the forums to see the attachments which is inconvenient.

And posting the attachments to another location so that they can be found and viewed here is more convenient? Sorry, you lost me.

Frank.

**Snowhog** · Mar 18, 2012, 12:24 PM

I still do understand, but again, our concern is one of space. I have to deal with this all the time, and it was so running KFN on the previous service/server. png files are by their nature, large. When I need to upload/attach such to a forum (here), and the .png image exceeds the limitations set, I just open the image in Gimp and resize and save as .jpeg image, which greatly reduces the image size, usually way below the imposed limitations. For the purpose of uploading/attaching an image, a .jpeg made from a .png image looses so little in quality as to not be noticeable.

That one, at times, must take extra steps in order to accomplish a task is, well, what we have to accept -- at times. If our hosting service provided *unlimited space* and *fixed costs* for *unlimited bandwidth usage*, and the performance (speed) to our members and quests wouldn't be impacted, then sure, we could/might remove any limitations on file types and sizes. But they don't, and we can't.

**Frank616** · Mar 18, 2012, 12:53 PM

Snowhog:

When I need to upload/attach such to a forum (here), and the .png image exceeds the limitations set, I just open the image in Gimp and resize and save as .jpeg image, which greatly reduces the image size, usually way below the imposed limitations. For the purpose of uploading/attaching an image, a .jpeg made from a .png image looses so little in quality as to not be noticeable.

I can give that a try. The 600 MB full screenshot came in about 2/3 smaller at 207K. Still a whole lot bigger than the 19 K allowed.

I'll work with it if that is all there is. Just wondering if there is a tradeoff between increasing viewership and limiting what the user can do to that level. However, you would know that best, so I accept the decision.

Frank.

**Snowhog** · Mar 18, 2012, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Frank616 View Post

I can give that a try. The 600 MB full screenshot came in about 2/3 smaller at 207K.

Holly Carp Batman!! 600MB for a .png full-size screenshot!? What are you using for a monitor, a 60" Plasma TV? Or is that a typo, and you meant 600Kb?

I have a 17" screen on my HP laptop. I just took a full screen snapshot and saved it (default .png file type). The image size is only 204Kb. Opened in Gimp and saved as a .jpeg file (without changing the resolution size of the image) it grew (hmm) to 286Kb. Well, that's interesting. Guess I might need to retract my statement as to having the images reduced in file size with the changing of file type. I'm reasonably sure that this worked previously (.jpeg files created from .png files were smaller).

Again, this issue will be discussed with the other Administrators.

**Frank616** · Mar 18, 2012, 03:38 PM

Snowhog:

Holly Carp Batman!! 600MB for a .png full-size screenshot!? What are you using for a monitor, a 60" Plasma TV? Or is that a typo, and you meant 600Kb?

Ooops.

610.7K it is.

Again, this issue will be discussed with the other Administrators.

Understood.

I'd still like to contribute some cash. How do I do it?

Frank.

**Snowhog** · Mar 18, 2012, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by Frank616 View Post

I'd still like to contribute some cash. How do I do it?

Your desire to help support KFN financially is recognized. But at this time, our host has decided not to solicit financial support, although, that could change in the future. So as 'they' say, stay tuned.

Open Source has indicated to me that increasing the size limits for the file types we allow for uploading/attaching is 'not a problem.' I'm waiting on his suggestions/approval for what those sizes should be. As soon as I get the go ahead, I'll make the changes.

**Snowhog** · Mar 18, 2012, 05:06 PM

I've increased the file size limits to 1Mb on the supported file types.

**Ole Juul** · Mar 18, 2012, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by Frank616 View Post

However, things are getting more graphics oriented all the time. The two screen shots that I wanted to post were only 160K each. A half-page screenshot from the PDF manual for my camera that I posted in a photography forum was 360K. A full screen shot on this 1920 x 1080 laptop is 610K. Those are no longer big by today's standards. If you are on limited bandwidth, you are not obliged to download the attachment. I can see your argument if this were a case of huge avatar or signature files which you HAVE to wait for while they download. Attachments, however, are optional.

I'm sorry if I was confusing, I was just trying to be helpful. You were however talking about posting larger files. Attachments are optional, but they cannot be viewed without logging in so most people won't be able to see them. In my case I only log in when I post because I can't navigate the forum unless I'm logged out. In such a case clicking on an attachment causes trouble for vBulletin. From that perspective inline images are better. It's a tradeoff which I only see mitigated by using not-too-large (whatever one decides that means) images and hosting them elsewhere.

I don't see the argument here. If you are on dialup, then whether you download the file from this forum, or from photobucket, you still have to download the same amount. The location changes, and the user has to jump through more hoops to post in a second location, but there is no net gain. There would be an advantage to the forum itself in that its storage needs go down, but not to the end user.

It's not an argument. It's just information. The gain in using off-site storage is that it saves this site's storage, as you mention, and also the bandwidth of the forum server - not just the client. The choice is personal. Another benefit of hosting elsewhere is that you can display it inline, which again is a judgement call. I would also point out that posting to a second location is not really a lot of hoops. It can actually be as simple as a short ftp command. There are many services and they are not all difficult to use.

And posting the attachments to another location so that they can be found and viewed here is more convenient? Sorry, you lost me.

Regardless of whether you think it is convenient or not, it is much done on forums. People often find it easier to maintain their own image or file collection. I would also like to reiterate that if you post your image as an attachment, I likely won't see it unless I want to respond - in which case I'll log in and then be able to see it. There are many people who look at this forum who don't participate by becoming members. This forum is a resource to the whole Kubuntu community. Non members will not see your image, so hopefully it is not needed for the comprehension of the post. In my opinion, this is worth considering.

Anyway, I was only trying to put a few ideas out there for you.

**Frank616** · Mar 18, 2012, 07:58 PM

Snowhog:

Your desire to help support KFN financially is recognized. But at this time, our host has decided not to solicit financial support, although, that could change in the future. So as 'they' say, stay tuned.

Let me know. It costs to host something like this, and I like this place. People should be willing to support what is of value to them.

Open Source has indicated to me that increasing the size limits for the file types we allow for uploading/attaching is 'not a problem.'

Hot Dog!

I'm waiting on his suggestions/approval for what those sizes should be. As soon as I get the go ahead, I'll make the changes.

Well, you already have my suggestion.

I'm really glad to hear this. I pay to host my business website, and I know what it costs. No offense, but IMHO, limiting files to tiny sizes comes across as somewhat unprofessional and perhaps even miserly. In a business situation, that is death. In practical ways, it is also a nuisance for long-term users. I've been on other forums where the only way to post a file is via links to other sites. Then the guy who posted decides he needs the space for something else, and the thread is now useless as the link is gone. What is the point of having [Solved] on a thread if the meat of it is removed because of a broken link or an erased file on a third party server? The archival value of the forum goes out the window, and you might as well delete old threads and save space that way. However, few forums do that anymore as the accumulated knowledge on boards like this becomes a valuable asset.

All of this to say that I'm glad you see it my way.

Thanks to you and the other sysops here for the hard work you do. I am assistant sysop in another Linux forum, but it is fading, so I'm looking for a new place to expand into. This forum is looking good!

Frank.

**Snowhog** · Mar 18, 2012, 08:13 PM

I'm personally glad that you like our forum. I've been here since 2007, shortly after installing Kubuntu Edgy Eft! The support I received here was instrumental in my transition from Windows to Linux. In my own way, I've have tried to repay that kindness by being and active member, and some while back, being permitted to join the ranks of those that help to administer KFN.

I've made a suggestion to the rest of the Administrators on a way to allow members to contribute financial support to KFN, while at the same time not being offensive to those who find 'requests for donations' not to their liking. I'm waiting on the discussion of that idea that will ensue.

**Frank616** · Mar 18, 2012, 08:17 PM

Ole Juul:

Anyway, I was only trying to put a few ideas out there for you. :arrow:

I understand. I just didn't see the relevance. Sorry.

Regardless of whether you think it is convenient or not, it is much done on forums. People often find it easier to maintain their own image or file collection.

Until the day they decide to reorganize and/or delete their remote images, and the link in the forum gets broken, and the thread then loses much of its value, or even all of its value if we accept your statement that the thread is of little value without the link.

I would also like to reiterate that if you post your image as an attachment, I likely won't see it unless I want to respond - in which case I'll log in and then be able to see it. There are many people who look at this forum who don't participate by becoming members. This forum is a resource to the whole Kubuntu community. Non members will not see your image, so hopefully it is not needed for the comprehension of the post.

At which point the lurker sees the value in becoming a member perhaps?

I would hope that the thread would be totally meaningless without seeing the linked file so that the fence sitters are encouraged to join.

It's not an argument. It's just information.

Sorry, that was meant as "I don't see the point here". I never considered this to be an argument. My apologies if I came across that way.

I'm relativley new here, so I hope that I am not making a nuisance of myself. I do serve as an assistant sysop in another Linux forum, however, so please don't judge me too harshly. I hope to get to know everyone here better as time goes on, and become an asset to this forum, rather than an irritant.

Thanks for taking the time to respond, You are obviously a contributor here. I hope that I can be as valuable as you as time goes on.

Frank.

Announcement

Attaching screenshots

Attaching screenshots

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment