Posting Pictures - A How To

Davydd,

I do recall that thread, but it doesn't look like you were able to make a clickable photo that leads back to the flickr page.  I am not sure why it is in flickr's T&Cs (other than to increase their own click-through volume) to use the first set of HTML, but since these forums don't use seem to support standard HTML coding, it doesn't seem like it is possible to use here.  Perhaps there is a setting somewhere that would allow that option?

If not, perhaps someone can post the code that does work from photobucket?  Then - maybe between the three or four of us to whom this is important - we can figure out how to make it work.

Most all message boards do not allow true HTML code. They are using a subset called BBCode. I didn't explore clicking on thumbnails that lead back to another page, especially a page filled with Flash player advertising like Photobucket.com. Harley figured that out and showed an example here already. I will say this, a lot of trip reports have had dozens of photos and if I ever encountered one that was all thumbnails I would quit reading it immediately. It simply does not make sense, does not save time or cut down internet traffic if you don't have to do it (and you don't have to here), and it disrupts reading the text in the message in a fluid manner bouncing around different pages, IMO. If one wanted to do that it would be better just providing one link that would send someone to a slideshow web gallery to view the images.

How are thumbnails important here? That part I do not understand. Harley said because you could do it. Well, I can do lots of things but that would not be a reason to do it.

I don't disagree with you at all.  Maybe it is just my bizarre fascination with knowing how to do things that I cannot do! 

My plan was not to offer just thumbnail versions of the photos.  But, if I uploaded a 640*800 photo, and made it clickable to my flickr page, someone could (if they wanted to) go and view the larger, full-res version more easily than they could otherwise.

I would set up a one click to web gallery for a trip report so one could look at full res if they desire rather than click on each photo.

Personally, I will never upload a full res photo to the internet with public access. That's like giving it away free to use by anyone and I already have enough problems with people stealing my BPT photos and claiming them for themselves. That's why the largest file I ever posted to Photobucket.com was only 800 x 600 pixels converted to medium quality JPEG. That's generous for viewing online but hopefully not much else.

On Facebook I go no larger than 640 x 480 because Facebook is going to resize them down anyway for the Wall page.

The web gallery is a good idea, too.  I will look to add something like that the next time I do a trip report (which could be sometime next June!). 

Up until now, I have not much been worried about someone using my photos.  If anyone asks, I always tell them to take whatever they want, as long as it is for personal use.  I was, however, recently contacted by GQ magazine about using one of my photos on flickr (how is that for name dropping?).  They wanted to use it in their "for profit" publication and yet offer me nothing but a pat on the back for its use.  I declined their offer.

We've gotta wait till June for your next Trip Report, huh, Travelin' man ?!?

Seems like there's less and less Roadfooder's traveling lately, or at least less of us reporting on it...
(as for me, I'm way behind on my reporting)

Hey, Travelin' Man, can you send me that follow-up link today, since it looks like you have a little more free time?
(That first post you sent SO quick, you spoiled me)
All is good ......just looking forward to seeing it...

OK...I think I got it.  Yes, when I do decide that I want to figure something out, I really won't stop until I found the solution - whether it is helpful or not!




That should be a thumbnail shot of my most recent burger picture, with a link to the larger almost full-resolution shot.

This is what I really wanted to do, though....




Which, if I wrote the code correctly, should be a "medium" sized photo, which links back to the original flickr page.  Unfortunately, the code writing on the top photo is much easier (could substitute the medium size for the thumb, for sure). 

As Davydd pointed out, now that I know how to do it, doesn't mean that I WILL do it this way.  The gallery link may still be the better way to go.

And, if anyone is interested in where I came up with this information, it was from one of flickr's help threads.

That seems easy enough to do. It is the same as linking a web site with a name instead of the actual url address showing except you used another small jpg image instead of text.

The thumbnail is just way too small to appreciate looking at without need to click on it for a better view. That's what I would never do or recommend. The second photo is large enough to appreciably view without needing to click on it to see a better photo, but if one wanted to they could go to a higher res photo. I'm not sure why though. Going to a web gallery would be OK though I think like you did with the second photo. Unless you added "click me" to the photo I bet the masses would not catch the subtlety.

I see your largest size is 1024 x 768. Are you shooting in your camera at that resolution or are you prepping down to upload? I shoot all my photos at full 3648 × 2736 10 mega pixel resolution so I have to pre-prep to upload usually at 800 x 600 which is maximum size here or mostly 640 x 480.

The large size photo comes out to 1024 x 768, but the size that they label as "original" is, in fact, 3468 x 2736 10 MP resolution.  I just copied and pasted the code as it was written in the flickr thread and just edited in my photo's details.  If you click on the photo that takes you to the flickr page (the "medium" sized photo here), you can click on "all sizes" and it will bring up everything from the thumbnail option through the original resolution.

As you mentioned, without labeling each photo as "click me," it would probably be lost on most.  But, if it became habit, some people may grow to know that the photos are posted this way and may choose (or not) to click through, and it may eliminate some of the complaints that some photos are too large (if the new software hasn't solved that problem already).

At the very least, it would seem that posting this way would satisfy flickr's terms and conditions, which, up until now, I am not sure that I have been in compliance with.

The Travelin Man
 
I was, however, recently contacted by GQ magazine

So let me get this straight.....  A man who showed up at a Roadfood gathering at the Cozy Corner in a "Rip 'Em Eaters t-shirt" was contacted by GQ Magazine.  If I subscribed to that magazine, I would cancel!

I cannot tell a lie.  Nor can I explain it.  They wanted to use one of my photos from Puerto Sagua.

My attitude is that if you want to use one of my photos for your own personal use - have at it.  I ain't Ansel Adams.  But, if someone wants to use a photo in a publication for which they make money, then I don't know about giving my stuff away.  I don't think I need to add "published photographer" to my resume any time soon.

GQ Magazine should have offered to pay you. I bet they have a standard scale and budget for doing so. I wrote a letter to the editor to a newspaper and they published it as a commentary with byline instead of in the letters column and paid me for it. I had no idea they did that sort of thing since I volunteered unasked with my comments.

Davydd


John A, I guess I am still not understanding. Cropping and resizing are two different things. Cropping is taking a portion of a photo but the resultant image is different. Resizing changes the whole image to a different resolution usually downward but is still the same. When you resize an image in Photobucket you have a choice to make a copy of the original and have both photos or you can simply replace the original uploaded photo with the newly resized photo.

Here is a photo I uploaded at 800 x 600 resolution. I uploaded it a little darker than I liked for a purpose you will see.
[deleted in reply]
I cropped that photo in Photobucket.com to about 640 x 480 resolution.
[deleted in reply]
Next I went back to the original photo again but resized it to 640 x 480 and also used the edit tools to enhance it.
[deleted in reply]

Now that I have referenced all three photos here I have to leave them in my Photobucket library so they show up here. Normally I would have done the resize and enhancement third photo and just replaced the original. Actually, I would have done all that first on my computer in my iPhoto application.

HELP!
So I have browsed these answers and admit I am not sure when the BIG forum format change happened but I need some assistance... if the answer is already here then I apologize for not seeing it!

In the old forums I used to be able to take the URLs of each photo I had loaded (then I used Flickr) and type them into a long trip report (I did it in Word and cut/pasted). It was the quickest and easiest way for me to get the photos in and post.

I have only posted once I think (a while back) in the NEW forum format and I also have run out of space on Flickr, so now am on Photobucket.

Two most important queries:
1. Which of the several URLs that Photobucket offers me should I use? "Email & IM" "Direct link" "IMG code"???
2. Can I still use html (i.e. "[img][/img]") to put the links in? The only post I did, I used the little link thing, also ctrl+G, and inserted the code there. It's a lot slower, am I stuck with that "new" method?

Thanks all!

ALSO: Can this subject (thread) be "sticky noted" or whatever they call it, in order to keep the topic on TOP?!?! That would be great.

When posting your new message, if you click on the little icon that looks like a mountain scene with the sun above the mountain...




a drop down opens and you can paste the URL for your picture.


I use the direct link url.

cecif

HELP!
So I have browsed these answers and admit I am not sure when the BIG forum format change happened but I need some assistance... if the answer is already here then I apologize for not seeing it!

In the old forums I used to be able to take the URLs of each photo I had loaded (then I used Flickr) and type them into a long trip report (I did it in Word and cut/pasted). It was the quickest and easiest way for me to get the photos in and post.

I have only posted once I think (a while back) in the NEW forum format and I also have run out of space on Flickr, so now am on Photobucket.

Two most important queries:
1. Which of the several URLs that Photobucket offers me should I use? "Email & IM" "Direct link" "IMG code"???
2. Can I still use html (i.e. "[img][/img]") to put the links in? The only post I did, I used the little link thing, also ctrl+G, and inserted the code there. It's a lot slower, am I stuck with that "new" method?

Thanks all!

ALSO: Can this subject (thread) be "sticky noted" or whatever they call it, in order to keep the topic on TOP?!?! That would be great.

Use the IMG Code choice in Photobucket. Just copy that code in Photobucket with the IMG tags and paste it here. It is that easy. The Insert an Image icon Tony mentions in this Roadfood.com editor assumes all you have is a URL address and then puts the IMG tags on it. Photobucket automatically takes care of that.

So if you are posting multiple pictures use a text editor of any kind and compose your message with all your comments and IMG codes for photos and then just copy and paste the whole message at once from your text editor to your post here.

Thanks Davydd. (And thanks Tony, though as Davy clarified, I know how to do that but am trying to avoid it!)

Obviously I will shortly be making a big post!

cecif


Thanks Davydd. (And thanks Tony, though as Davy clarified, I know how to do that but am trying to avoid it!)

Obviously I will shortly be making a big post!

 

Sorry I didn't read your question carefully enough! Glad Davydd was paying attention.

When I first started posting photos on this site I used a photo-album site that Bushie had to set up my photos before linking them to my post or report here.

Since then I have used the "Insider" to store the photos here. My format is this-

1. I upload the photos I want to use in a thread or report to the "Insider Storage Album". That used to be a slow repetitive process, but now it goes rather quickly and I make few mistakes in uploading these days.
2. Then I type the text of my thread post or report.  I try to estimate the location of the photos in the report and leave appropriate space between "sections"
3. I then make a list (on paper) of the sequence of the RF image numbers I will post. I copy and paste the first photo into it's correct location in the thread.
4. Then, rather than go back and forth from the insider album to the thread-post, I simply copy and paste the original (first) photo into each of the follow-up photo locations. That goes very quickly as I am not jumping from page to page and back. That results in a completed post....but with many copies of the original photo spread thru-out the text. SO I simply change the photo-log number from the original to the correct photo for that entry.
5. A check of the captions to make sure they match the photo that was inserted, and a proofread, and we are done...All in One Post.
 I don't think much of the process of "one post equals one photo" entries. All you have to do is use the edit button for the post and you can put 20 or more photos on one post and keep your report "rolling".

If you use a browser with tabs or just multiple windows (which I believe all do) you can simply have one open to Roadfood.com where you edit your message and one to your photo library such as Photobucket.com where you can copy. It goes very fast and I usually name my photos with plain English name descriptions instead of the cryptic numbers the camera gives them before I upload them so I can look at the URL address after I paste and instantly know that I have the right photo with the text.

mayor al

 I don't think much of the process of "one post equals one photo" entries. All you have to do is use the edit button for the post and you can put 20 or more photos on one post and keep your report "rolling".

Maybe in addition to posting photos we could use a tutorial on how to write a trip report.

I agree. When one post for one photo is made the scrolling gets physically disjointed as does the narrative itself by both the author and the chatter from viewers in between. It also wastes a lot of time for the reader having to repeatedly go back to view. I now tend to let a trip report "mature" a bit before I bother to even look. That has its drawback because sometimes they slide of my "Post Since Last Visit" radar and I miss them altogether.

This is a test… will erase picture shortly.
 
Photobucket IMG code should show pic here:
[and did! thanks and trip report coming soon!]
 
 

Davydd


I would set up a one click to web gallery for a trip report so one could look at full res if they desire rather than click on each photo.

Personally, I will never upload a full res photo to the internet with public access. That's like giving it away free to use by anyone and I already have enough problems with people stealing my BPT photos and claiming them for themselves. That's why the largest file I ever posted to Photobucket.com was only 800 x 600 pixels converted to medium quality JPEG. That's generous for viewing online but hopefully not much else.

On Facebook I go no larger than 640 x 480 because Facebook is going to resize them down anyway for the Wall page.

Davydd... call me lazy but I did not bother (or have time!) to re-size my photos to smaller sizes before posting on Photobucket. And I thought I understood the "limits". Today I got this message:

"Every free account with Photobucket is allotted 25 GB of monthly
bandwidth and our records show that you have less than 5 GB of
bandwidth left to your account."

Is the viewing via the RF site affecting my "bandwidth allowance"...??? If so do I have to re-load all the pics smaller and re-link everything to keep it going??? REALLY frustrating. I thought I had this sorted. I might try getting free hosting elsewhere. Flickr always worked fine, no issues until I ran out of free space (which took a very long time).

Help.....?!?!

Cecif,

When you upload a photo to Photobucket, if you don't resize it yourself beforehand, you have a second chance by selecting a size in Photobucket to automatically resize the photo for you. If you are uploading photos with greater resolution than what is showing up in Roadfood.com then yes you are wasting bandwidth because if you don't resize them Roadfood.com is going to do it too but Photobucket will still be transferring more bandwidth than needed. Thus, you would be uploading and storing wasted bandwidth. Resize your photos. You can do it after the fact as well in Photobucket. The best size is 640 x 480 but never bigger than 800 x 600.

Another trick I do is when I resize on my computer I select a lower quality JPEG setting to get the bit size of the photo as small as possible. I have more control on my computer than what Photobucket will do.

Davy,
   Your comment on creating a tutorial for report writing struck home with me. However setting standards for photo-editing doesn't really inflinge on the 'creative prose' generated, but setting 'rules' for the text of a report is a difficult thing to do considering our individual likes and dislikes!. 

   The two extremes...one one end we have the review only that jumps from one restaurant/kitchen to another with nothing but the food entries in the review...on the other hand we have the Roadtrip journal that may contain only off-hand reference to food stops while the author describes the trip, it's high points, family reunions, favorite or non-liked locations and just general scenery. Each of us has our likes and dislikes and things we might include ( my dog photos for example) might be great for some folks and certainly not great for others.

While I have my preferences I don't believe that I should impose them on anyone. We will hope that folks will be willing to provide good consise reports that are focused on helping others locate good places to eat as they travel!

Davydd


Cecif,

When you upload a photo to Photobucket, if you don't resize it yourself beforehand, you have a second chance by selecting a size in Photobucket to automatically resize the photo for you. If you are uploading photos with greater resolution than what is showing up in Roadfood.com then yes you are wasting bandwidth because if you don't resize them Roadfood.com is going to do it too but Photobucket will still be transferring more bandwidth than needed. Thus, you would be uploading and storing wasted bandwidth. Resize your photos. You can do it after the fact as well in Photobucket. The best size is 640 x 480 but never bigger than 800 x 600.

Another trick I do is when I resize on my computer I select a lower quality JPEG setting to get the bit size of the photo as small as possible. I have more control on my computer than what Photobucket will do.

Thanks Davydd... I laboriously re-sized everything on Photobucket (phew!). Hope it helps. I'm really frustrated that I might have to move the pics. At least on Flickr it's just about the size period. People can then look at them a million times.   I should see if Kodak works, that's where most of my own stuff is, just have never marked anything 'public' there or tried to get URLs for individual pics.

Thanks again!

just testing. I used to put my url between the [img] [/img] tags but recently it doesn't work anymore. It just showed up as a clicable link with the tags.

It looks like this insert image thing will work. This is only a test. thanks!

crazybob


just testing. I used to put my url between the [img] [/img] tags but recently it doesn't work anymore. It just showed up as a clicable link with the tags.

It looks like this insert image thing will work. This is only a test. thanks!

crazybob,
I used to do that too and it was really easy. However, I followed Davydd's instructions and I just brought the IMG code from Photobucket and it looks pretty well the same to me. Hmmmm.

Here is the code from my first pic in my report, where to save it posting the pic I have inserted * into each end.  I'm sure it has nothing to do with the all caps, but I can't explain it. Looks the same to me as what I was doing before!!!

[IMG*]http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv44/ceciflinn/Kentucky%20Apr-09/P4240001.jpg[/IMG*]
Go figure.

crazybob

 
just testing. I used to put my url between the [img] [/img] tags but recently it doesn't work anymore. It just showed up as a clicable link with the tags.

Bob, I noticed that with the old forum software URLs between tags had to be enclosed with double quotes whereas with the new software the quotes aren't necessary.
 
Old: [tag]"URL"[/tag]
New: [tag]URL[/tag]
 
Could this be what's happening?
 
Brad