Even a built in or automated compression tool would be a massive improvement, especially if the maximum resolution or file size was further reduced.
That doesn’t really help though to identify plant problems or trichrome checks. Close up shots are often needed for these reasons. Its a catch 22
what I meant is that high resolution provides much much more detail within a close-up, not that it makes close-ups unnecessary.
It may not help members identify problems with another grower’s plant, but I think high resolution close-up photos still provide invaluable information about the genetics, structure, and performance of the plant in its grow environment.
Here’s a hypothetical to illustrate the point.
Think about the differences between an heirloom sativa with tiny trichome glands, stacked up in layers of resin, versus a modern polyhybrid with large capitated trichome heads distributed more sparsely on the surface area of the bud.
The polyhybrid may have better visual appeal, but the heirloom is actually the more resinous plant.
These subtle visual differences can tell us a lot about the genetics of a line.
If we could somehow make certain parts of the site able to accept the high rez pictures like when we check trichomes or the sex of a plant and the grow diaries convert to lower resolutions by the server somehow would work I think but I don’t know if that’s possible
for a short term solution it’s possible images can be hosted off-site on other servers.
i sympathize but reckon until we have OG ‘out of the red’ on ISP costs ('think joe said 400/month) it’s probably easier for the site as a whole (to host bigger files off site).
Uploads are now accepted up to 13 Megapixels or 10 Megabytes.
With last update there is now server-side compression that allows larger images to upload so you don’t need to compress the file on your side. There is no 3MB limit anymore.
You can now upload photos up to 13 Megapixels and they will be resized on the server. BUT it is still recommended that you compress the file yourself as a part of photo editing work if you have the skills because you’ll get better results and faster upload.
You can drag and drop no more than 5 images at once. We’ll yet see how CPU copes with it…
I completely agree. Two points.
Bigger resolution (and DPI) is needed for print. If you want photos to display on the monitor there is already plenty of information in 800kb of jpeg with 80-85% compression enabled. There is a reason why monitors haven’t been designed with higher PPIs until now… Human eye just can’t tell the difference.
The average computer monitor viewing distance is about 2.5 feet (762 mm). firstname.lastname@example.org is 89 microns or about 300 ppi/dpi. p@1 is 222 microns or about 115 ppi/dpi. Now you can understand why most consumer computer monitors are about 100 ppi, and most professional computer monitors are slightly higher, but not by much.
Of course there is the point with zooming the photos which is edge case but applies to our community for the reasons that many of you stated. I’d just like to point out that resolution in Mpixes is not everything. Producers are ramping up Mpixes in phones but the limiting factor is the lens. It is still the same cheap plastic crap as before. And it won’t get any better because you need big and heavy glass lenses to take more light (and more information) to the chip. How many of us do use SLR cameras?
So if we reduce Mpixes into something reasonable we can save on both disk space and bandwidth.
The solution I’m thinking about would be based purely on time. I think that the need for really high resolution is greatest at the time of the upload (because e.g. you want to diagnose some problem / pests) and decreases in time. We could lower the quality of the photos automatically after few months.
I still need to work on the calculations and projections of cost and this is definitely something I’ll be considering, also because few sponsors have demanded it.
Thank you very much. If everyone using galleries as a personal archive could support the site through our Patreon it would be much easier!
I will throw in @LemonadeJoe. When I get paid I’m going to make quarterly payments of 40 bucks.
To the site
We lost this site once because of legal bullshit, let’s do what we can to keep her going strong now. People are working hard to keep this community going. Where else do people gift beans out and priceless knowledge and experience for no cost. Every little bit helps.
Great, thank you for your pledge very much! I really appreciate it, @ubcchemo !
Have you not seen the Mars Hydro threads? What could possibly go wrong?
@LemonadeJoe is there no longer a need to resize pics then ?
I tend to think that resizing is always a good idea for the long term good of the site if and when appropriate. Why waste the space if high detail really isn’t important?
(First time using this new editor window. Where the heck did the cursor position indicator go?)
I agree that its good practice as a conscientious user to minimize the size of images when ever you can. I make it a point to crop images so that only the portions Im interested show up. That alone can save 20% to 80% of the image size. With some images, I dont really care that much about details, so I am happy to downsize them - as long as the reason for posting isnt lost as well.
However, I dont usually bother posting any images unless it is something I care about, so most of the time I want to keep the images at the original quality. I use my grow logs as grow logs - meaning I want to use them as a safe place to store the history of my growing. This is for future reference because my memory is not reliable - especially as far as the fine details go. In fact, as soon as I finsh this post, I plan to go back through one of my earlier grow logs to check when the roots got to a certain stage. If the images are not there at the same quality I originally posted them, then I wont be able to tell when they reached the stage Im interested in.
In other words - the details matter.
Same thing applies when you are looking through an old thread about plant leaf issue for example. If the images are dumbed down, you might not be able to tell for sure what the original poster was talking about or what the other people are saying might be wrong. What spots? What brown color? Is that a bug, mold, spot or just lint on my screen?
Anyway, thats where I am coming from. Be frugal with images when and where you can as far as posting. Support the site with at least a small amount of $ and then sit back and be happy
A post was merged into an existing topic: How to upload photos to Overgrow (from phone, tablet or desktop)
I think I should have read this thread before posting my first journal…at what point is it contributing less to the site community, than it is costing said community. Celebrating,sharing,bragging, pay-per-view? Should a personal med grower contribute as much as some of these ‘warehouse’ growers? Maybe user limits on total kb mb gb shit? I have no clue, i use a program from my dslr and just shift decimal to downsize. I don’t have a cell phone and am feeling like I did something wrong.? I don’t want to break OG, but I’d rather not just be a voyeur again. Just let us know when u decide on whats best for the site.
I have not seen any “wharehouse” growers on this site…Can you please point one out to me, so I can check out their page please? Also, why would it be forced for a “warehouse” grower, to PAY more than anyone else using this site? Not trying to be an asshole here, just wondering what that was supposed to mean?
Its OK , the “warehouse” comment meaning 500 square feet plus, there’s lots around, as opposed to someone growing in a 2x2 tent. thats my meaning. As per contribution, I don’t know what that means, is it pics is it likes is it advice is it money? IDFK…but ‘contribute’, to me means voluntary…who said forced? What made OG so successful? Go with that. I just want to make sure that the “contributions” (blurry pics, blathering on etc) in a thread I create actually adds to OG instead of taking up storage space. I have zero complaints about OG, I want to help it grow, I’ve contributed and traded seeds with members and I have a journal now, how else do I pay it forward? I don’t make money from growing weed…
Well said Buddy…I’m sorry if I came off rude there. Only reason I ask, is because I have a big shop, and am trying to figure out how to run the whole thing no-till… I despise what a lot of wharehouse growers do in this industry. I have not really seen any big shows on here yet, but, would like to see the odd one.
Once again, I apologize for my remarks, if it was a bit rude.
Have a good night man,
Its all good, no apology necessary. I love seeing the larger grows, they make me drool. The variety on OG is amazing and even though most growing styles and locations, have very little real info for me, I spend hours reading and viewing their posts. I love weed porn, and peoples passion. There’s almost nowhere else to get this kinda content, and I for one don’t want to see OG suffer. Thanks @Kobracom420 Cheers!