I agree with that, but unfortunately, the majority of users wont be willing to “subscribe”. As I said above, people these days expect the internet to be “free with adds” and are not generally willing to pay out of pocket subscriptions to use the net.
6 Likes
The issue came from running out of storage space, not bandwidth limitations. Bandwidth for a site of our size would be “cheap” in the larger scale.
Also, ease of use. I can just host my pics off-site and embed them here, but that’s not easy plus I’d have to strip EXIF data.
But I might give the above method a go if I can make it easier than taking a pic and resizing it by 70% before uploading here.
2 Likes
I use a shell program called Image Resizer for Windows, right click, custom presets if desired and done in secs.
Saying that how many people actually zoom in on other peoples photos that are 5000+ pixels in either width or height and drag the image around as the native display rate or your device is lower, like seriously… yes i want to see that dust or hair particle in minute detail from a whole plant shot, or see those finger print details or minute reflection in trichome heads so well i know what you look like 
…
Btw VGA res rates “640x480” only really started coming out in what 1987 and that isn’t even being discussed so @anon32470837 saying going to 1980 res rates is being a little overdramatic.
As an example i resize all my photos to a 1920x1920 or under dimension size. What super fine quality am i losing when actual camera practices such as stability, focus depth and not being blurry come into play or even cropping those pictures down to what i want to show, and resizing from there to be under those metrics…
How many times do you click on a photo then click again to see the full image but then have to back out cause its to big for your display i doubt its that often for 90+% of the members here, and more often than not those pictures are blurry up close anyways.
Picture example where it was Reduced to 1920px and under.
Saying that i have no objection to a server side resize/compression, so long as it somewhat keeps pace with as others have mentioned tech advancement. Good example of that not happening is ICMAG and there 1024px max res uploads, and why years ago when i was on there id use external picture hosting sites “imgur” and the likes to get past that.
6 Likes
Like some examples of said bad blurry but larger photos from the free you budshot thread, no offense to those photos i borrowed
Native res for that 2419x3225 at 1.7mb with link for full size image
https://overgrow.com/uploads/default/original/3X/7/e/7e32268d087ba729fe24c77d11b3db14f9a8703b.jpg
Native res 2304x4096 at 2mb link for full image
https://overgrow.com/uploads/default/original/3X/a/9/a982afbb8e5d4b6003de8eaa7fbe16aabfa3d8e4.jpeg
3 Likes
I do.
Yer budshos r real lofi. All of thems poor examples. Compression is too high n trichs not in focus n overexposed.
I agree w @anon32470837. 3840 is lowest rez 2 see trich color n mites on non-cropped shots. Compression is the answer not resizing errr limiting rez. Use max weight of 15 or 20mb or a max per post.
Joe put in compression server-side n EXIF removal. Give subs @ > $10 a month a option 2 turn off compression.
4 Likes
Given shots for given purposes come on, and its not like the good majority of people use a “flash” to “overexpose” their trichomes to make it look frostier than under normal light
3 Likes
You call it Overexposing, I call it highlighting
3 Likes
Sorry bub. I calls em like I sees em. The overexposure in yer pic dont appear 2 b flash related. It looks as if its just poor exposure w an overhead light source such as yer grow lights.
The level of detail in yer followup pic is the min lvl I prefer n I love 2 b able 2 zoom a normal composition photo to that level detail. I know lotsa others do 2 which is why I said compression rather than rez caps.
1 Like
Use advertising, either pay to get it removed or removed for member status. It’s not the content producers that should be forking out the coin to keep the site running it’s the content producers that get the traffic coming in.
The Googler and the lurker can see the ads and the content makers do not. I really don’t see why the members should be donating.
If the content uploaders need to jump through hoops and pay for the privilege the site will die.
Keep smiling.
6 Likes
I was uploading pics straight to the site but my images are high res and I kept getting max filesize error, so I uploaded them to an image hosting service and used the direct link from there to post them here.
3 Likes
Exactly!
Thats the way most of the “Free” apps work and it seems to be a good business model because they keep doing it.
3 Likes
Ok i will agree compression is better than downsizing, more my point was there is an education aspect in damn blurry ass photos that are posted that take up useless space at times.
5 Likes
Part of the issue is basically that suggestions are completely ignoring the camera used and it’s limitations 
For example my camera if I drop the MP to 9MP or 8MP it’s still in the 3-5MB range:skull: that’s the lowest my camera I capable of before everything is so out of focus I won’t even waste my time taking the shot let alone editing that blurry ass low resolution picture I would have gotten
This isn’t that hard to understand. With the main pull of the site gone it’ll die or fizzle out slowly as we all leave one by one. If we can’t figure out a way to fix this the site isn’t going to be used by a lot of people anymore.
I’m going to be extremely busy very soon and home even less, so once I take pictures I take one shot of each section i want in 16MP as that gets me the best clarity with what I have available to use. It usually takes me about 30 minutes to finish up in the tent when I’m home unless it’s watering day and then I take my time. As it is that’s probably going to change and I’m likely going to have to get a new setup to account for my lack of time at home almost always. For general updates to keep a visual journal I’m going to have to use another site or service now anyways. 800kb I can’t get with a 5mp shot🤪
Also not all of us have a computer. I don’t need one, so I don’t get one. I’m not going to buy a computer just to use Photoshop on a PC
5 Likes
We are currently allowing 3 MB uploads and I’m looking into solutions to allow larger uploads (those will be compressed on the server).
9 Likes
Thank you sir!
The majority of my up-loads will be less than that limit as long as I do at least some cropping. My current phone is only 6 MP, but its going to have to be replaced soon and the new phones look to have at least 12 MP. This new limit will make it much easier.
1 Like
Turned my megapixels down on my phone to help out with the server issues. Picture sizes are much smaller now.
3 Likes
My pics are all dimmed down to 1.35 megabytes.
1 Like
I take photos at 1080p or higher.
Compressing or cropping each photo before upload is getting old.
I find it inconvenient and borderline inaccurate. It makes me less likely to share photos.
When I look at cannabis photos I love to zoom in to view all the gory details. I’d like other users to be able to experience my photos this way as well.
Seeing the fine details of the structure and type of resin glands, flower structure, and leaf texture is just as important as wide shots of the overall structure, branching, and growth habits of the plant.
Is there any plan for an eventual site upgrade to support hd photos and media on overgrow?
Now that screens are moving up to 4k resolution, eventually the images on this site are going to seem pretty small and low detail.
this is a problem with most cannabis forums. I think hd photo support might give overgrow an additional leg up on its competitors.
7 Likes
Higher resolutions means bigger file size and more bandwidth and sever space to store them. OG has been playing with reducing the storage space on the server. More space = more cost to host the pictures. I’d love to see 4k pictures but the way the site is growing I think the picture resolution will decrease if anything
5 Likes
Even a built in or automated compression tool would be a massive improvement, especially if the maximum resolution or file size was further reduced.
4 Likes