Quoting Pictures |
  |
| *Steven* |
 Dec 23 2007, 02:07 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Guest  |
What if I wanted to quote to compare/contrast pictures? If I remove the image tag then people have to highlight the link and post it elsewhere, then switch back and forth. La la la la lalalalalalalalal
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 03:44 PM
Post
#2
|
|
 DDR \\ I'm Dee :)  Group: Mentor Posts: 8,662 Joined: Mar 2006 Member No: 384,020 |
Hm, edit the pictures into one? Personally, I don't have an issue with people quoting pictures, as long as they aren't huge pictures. Being a dialup user and waiting longer than I have to for a page to load because a lot of people have quoted an image is a pain in the ass.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 04:50 PM
Post
#3
|
|
 i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
steven, it's not as if her post was 309483942 posts above yours. it was like... 2 or 3 posts above yours, and they were huge and annoying to look at to begin with. i just didnt want people to have to look at her ugly pics twice in a row. her name showed up in your quote; people knew what you were talking about.
|
|
|
|
| *Steven* |
Dec 23 2007, 05:29 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Guest |
But people like me are too lazy to scroll up and the convenience would just be amazing!
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 05:30 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
no one wants to look at her pics twice in a row. no one. it's not like they're gonna have to scroll back and forth to compare/contrast. they see it once and they get the punchline, steven, i promise you.
|
|
|
|
| *Steven* |
Dec 23 2007, 05:32 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Guest |
Oo quick response. BTW I'm bringing this up as a generality, not that specific instance last night or this morning (whenever it was Oo). Say it's not a post or two before, then is it kay? Assuming the pictures aren't like 1920x1200 or something.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 05:33 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
 EDIT:// yeah i'd be okay with it if you quoted a pic like from the page before yours for a compare/contrast; because then i would see the purpose of quoting it. |
|
|
|
| *Steven* |
Dec 23 2007, 05:36 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Guest |
I EDITED
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 05:40 PM
Post
#9
|
|
 Tick tock, Bill Group: Administrator Posts: 8,764 Joined: Dec 2005 Member No: 333,948 |
I thought at one point we were going to be lenient with img tags unless the images were super huge or something.
//edit, nevermind, I was thinking of something else. Still, I'm not sure how strict we should be on this. It's annoying, sure, because it takes like little time to remove them. I don't think it's a big deal for mods to remove the tags but I'm not sure if it merits a warning. Meh. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 05:52 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
QUOTE(Steven @ Dec 23 2007, 02:36 PM)  I EDITED ME TOO. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 06:04 PM
Post
#11
|
|
 Cornflakes :D Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 4,541 Joined: Dec 2005 Member No: 322,923 |
I didn't read any other posts beside the first post..
personally I could care less if others quote the original picture, it was only made a rule for dial up users not to have to go through harsh loading times..but really it doesn't slow it down at all. All of the copies of the same picture will load at the same time..the only way it would make things slower was if people were saving the pictures and uploading them elsewhere. |
|
|
|
| *Steven* |
Dec 23 2007, 07:04 PM
Post
#12
|
|
Guest |
SOOO UNLESS ITS A FEW POSTS BACK WE CAN QUOTE IMAGES?!
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 07:14 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
what's so hard about removing one letter from the img bbcode? seriously. it's not a lot to ask. unless you actually have a purpose for having the photo there again, such as a compare/contrast then i dont see why anyone should have to look at the same photo twice. it's not that it loads more slowly, but its just annoying in general.
i dont want to undermine anything holly just said, but she said herself she didnt read the whole thread here. i juat dont see a point in revising the rules once again just so people can quote images, when really it doesnt benefit anyone, and it's annoying to everyone who has to look at it. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 08:05 PM
Post
#14
|
|
 Photoartist Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 12,363 Joined: Apr 2006 Member No: 399,390 |
I usually leave [img] tags in when I compare/contrast, it's just cooler that way. It's usually only one on one though.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 08:11 PM
Post
#15
|
|
 Miss DIY Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 2,251 Joined: Apr 2004 Member No: 11,294 |
Well, how about quoting images from a page before? That honestly would make it easier :/ I can understand why the tags should be removed if they're on the same page, but having to go back to another page is irritating.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 08:24 PM
Post
#16
|
|
 That's what she said. Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 3,559 Joined: Apr 2005 Member No: 130,200 |
I admit, sometimes I find myself too lazy to just remove those dang img tags, but now that I think of it, as long as they're not HUGE images that stretch the forum, I'm fine with it. I really have to stop using so many commas.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 09:11 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
i did your boyfriend Group: Official Designer Posts: 3,335 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,071 |
QUOTE(sweetasphyxia @ Dec 23 2007, 02:33 PM) EDIT:// yeah i'd be okay with it if you quoted a pic like from the page before yours for a compare/contrast; because then i would see the purpose of quoting it. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 09:35 PM
Post
#18
|
|
 Senior Member Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 3,645 Joined: Feb 2004 Member No: 4,975 |
I agree with Holly.
I see no problem with it. I think the rule is stupid anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 09:52 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
DDR \\ I'm Dee :) Group: Mentor Posts: 8,662 Joined: Mar 2006 Member No: 384,020 |
QUOTE(Insurmountable @ Dec 23 2007, 05:04 PM) I didn't read any other posts beside the first post.. Lol, it still takes forever for them to load on my computer. If there's a ton of the same image they load a hell of a lot slower. Sadly, I can't get faster internet where I live, so you all have to live with my bitching personally I could care less if others quote the original picture, it was only made a rule for dial up users not to have to go through harsh loading times..but really it doesn't slow it down at all. All of the copies of the same picture will load at the same time..the only way it would make things slower was if people were saving the pictures and uploading them elsewhere.  |
|
|
|
|
Dec 23 2007, 10:01 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
t-t-t-toyaaa Group: Official Member Posts: 19,821 Joined: Apr 2004 Member No: 11,270 |
I'm pretty much in agreement w/ what Trish and other's have said before. Its if on the page before its understandable. If its on the same page people can just scroll up if they want to see , if they are too lazy that's their problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 24 2007, 10:40 AM
Post
#21
|
|
|
That's what she said. Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 3,559 Joined: Apr 2005 Member No: 130,200 |
Its just us lazy Americans these days. Letting them quote the pictures on the page before only seems like the better idea. But will they be in their [img] or non?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 26 2007, 01:24 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Cornflakes :D Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 4,541 Joined: Dec 2005 Member No: 322,923 |
If your on dial up..its going to forever to load in general..not just because people quoted the same picture.
I don't think there is a need to revise the rules again, if your quoting the picture to compare to another, Fine. But other than that its not hard to ask to remove the image tags. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 28 2007, 10:18 PM
Post
#23
|
|
 This bag is not a toy. Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 3,090 Joined: Oct 2007 Member No: 583,108 |
As far as I understood, the way it's always been is that the image quoting rule existed only in Members' Photos - and that's just because of people posting like five pictures and then getting quoted several times - it got pretty ridiculous having to scroll past the same pictures over and over again.
I know people used to get warned for it, but I don't think they should unless they seriously, seriously know better and are just being lazy. And in any other thread in any other forum, I don't see what the big deal is - as Holly said, it has absolutely nothing to do with load times unless the pictures are on different pages. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 29 2007, 02:28 AM
Post
#24
|
|
 <3 Group: Official Member Posts: 1,369 Joined: Jun 2007 Member No: 539,187 |
I agree^
I don't think it's a big deal, if the photo isn't that big. If it's a bit large then I understand why there's no need to quote the image, pity the poor dial up users, but also there isn't much point if the original is only a few posts above. I guess the opinions are going to differ from person to person. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 30 2007, 11:25 AM
Post
#25
|
|
|
Tick tock, Bill Group: Administrator Posts: 8,764 Joined: Dec 2005 Member No: 333,948 |
General question, are people still being warned for not removing image tags?
I think (with the exception of dial-up users) that everyone here is pretty much agreeing that if a picture from a different page is being quoted it is fine, but if a picture from the same page is being quoted then not so fine? I wonder sometimes if the whole same picture being quoted on the same page is more of a personal annoyance of some than an actual legitimate concern. |
|
|
|
|
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: