• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

TEST - handling of quoted images

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
I hate to infest another section with this sort of thing, but I need to make sure that the difference sections don't have different properties with respect to the matter I am working on: how are images in quoted messages handled.

So this will be the starting message in a test thread.

++++++

The victim here is Keddy, a stalwart in our former community theater company and now part of its successor, a "murder mystery" company. We see her here during rehearsals with the old group. The file will be uploaded and embedded as a "full image", then centered.

349


Douglas A. Kerr: Keddy at rehearsal
Best regards,
Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This is a simple reply to the prior message, allowing the whole thing to be quoted

++++++

I hate to infest another section with this sort of thing, but I need to make sure that the difference sections don't have different properties with respect to the matter I am working on: how are images in quoted messages handled.

So this will be the starting message in a test thread.

++++++

The victim here is Keddy, a stalwart in our former community theater company and now part of its successor, a "murder mystery" company. We see her here during rehearsals with the old group. The file will be uploaded and embedded as a "full image", then centered.

View attachment 349

Douglas A. Kerr: Keddy at rehearsal
Best regards,
Doug

Ostentatiously yours,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This time, the image will be left at the left margin:

351


Photographer unknown: Natalie Wood

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This time I will place the image by way of a link to an external host. The victim is motion picture actress Merry Anders:

Merry_Anders-z9001.jpg


Photographer unknown: Merry Anders​

We'll see how this quotes.

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This is a basic reply to the prior message, which is quoted in its entirety.

++++++

This time I will place the image by way of a link to an external host (my host, which is provided by an AT&T operation). The victim is motion picture actress Merry Anders:

Merry_Anders-z9001.jpg


Photographer unknown: Merry Anders​

We'll see how this quotes.

Doug

++++++

Doug
 
Last edited:

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Aha! This time we get a "compressed" quotation but with the image in it "inline".

I think the pattern is beginning to form.

I will give my report to the Attorney General, who may or may not reveal it to you, or may or may quote from it accurately.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Well, the Attorney General has read my report on this matter, and he tells me that what I said was more-or-less this:

Based on just a little bit of testing, it seems that:

• With regard to images that are uploaded and then placed inline in a message, when the message is quoted (image and all) in a reply, in the reply the image does not appear inline but there is instead a link which, if clicked upon, opens the image in the browser using the browser's normal image "viewer" (not in some alternate viewer that is a creature of the forum software).

• With regard to images that are hosted on an unrelated site and then placed inline in a message by reference to their URL, when the message is quoted (image and all) in a reply, in the reply the message appears inline just as in the original message.

I think that in either case, the forum software may take the entire quoted message and provide it in a "teaser" form with a "link" inviting the viewer to see the whole thing.

Of course, my actual report may say something different.

Best regards,

Doug
 
Last edited:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Doug,

This “ Report” is fine, except:

All the pictures you have shared were already in the public record. It’s the ones you won’t show that we believe have the most evidentiary value on how pictures of women impact us!

Asher
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
But if you have insights and/suggestions on how we might do it better, let me know!

But at least everyone can find a way they can post images to their liking!

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,
Doug,

This “ Report” is fine, except:

All the pictures you have shared were already in the public record. It’s the ones you won’t show that we believe have the most evidentiary value on how pictures of women impact us!

This report was not about how pictures of women impact us.

Perhaps the pictures of women in my test messages impacted you so much that you didn't read what the report was about!

Next time I will use pictures of cinder blocks.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Of course I know what your post were about, Doug! ? I was merely continuing on you parody of the Mueller investigation, LOL!

Your studies were well conceived and executed. I enjoyed every word and assumed you knew how I would for sure love it!

We just had the release of the Mueller probe and I imagined you also had secrets too wonderful to release.

I admit I have a few myself!

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Of course I know what your post were about, Doug! ? I was merely continuing on you parody of the Mueller investigation, LOL!

Oh, I'm so sorry - I missed that entirely! I guess at the time my mental fires were already banked.

Your studies were well conceived and executed. I enjoyed every word and assumed you knew how I would for sure love it!

We just had the release of the Mueller probe and I imagined you also had secrets too wonderful to release.

Well, maybe a few!

I admit I have a few myself!

Well, I would hope.

Thanks so much.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This is a new series of tests regarding multi-layer nesting of quoted messages.

This is the original message, layer 1.

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
So, seemingly, we can only (automatically) quite one layer of earlier messages. That is usually OK, but is a problem if we are having some complicated technical or artistic or social discussion.

Perhaps the allowable depth of quote nesting is settable. If so, I would urge that it be set to allow at least two depth of earlier messages to be quoted.

Now, as promised, an embedded image:

381


Photographer unknown: Lana Wood, Natalie Wood's sister​

Best regards,

Doug

 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Oops! I put in the wrong image. My whole day has been like that.

The error is corrected here:

382



Concrete masonry unit (CMU) with rebar channel (photo courtesy of The Home Depot)​

Sorry for the error.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

But if you have insights and/suggestions on how we might do it better, let me know!

Well, at the least, it would be attractive if, regardless of the way an image was emplaced inline, it would be treated the same with regard to presentation when the message is quoted.

Now, with respect to which way that should be, one might argue that putting up only a link is good because it avoids, when a message had been quoted several times, having a long stream of images (all repeats the same) to scroll through.

But in the new OPF forum software, that problem is mitigated by the software using the "teaser" presentation ("click to expand") whenever the quoted matter is longer than some certain amount. So given that, perhaps the best way to deal with quoted images would be to always present them as inline images (like they were in the original message).

Best regards,

Doug
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks! So I will ask for constant treatment no matter how Image is brought in.

Then we ought to have a floating guide to tell us image limits too!

Asher
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Asher,

Thanks! So I will ask for constant treatment no matter how Image is brought in.

Then we ought to have a floating guide to tell us image limits too!

Limits on what property of the image? How do they affect what happens?

Thanks.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
This is a first test of uploading and embedding large images.

One observation is that for certain images with fairly large pixel dimensions, we can attach the file but are not offered to have it shown "inline".

If we click on the icon of filename shown in the "attachments" doodad, we see the image in the browser's basic image viewer. If we right click on it (Windows, at least)), we can do other things with the image file.

The example here is for a simple "filled red rectangle" image with dimensions 6000 px × 4000 px.

I note that the doodad reports the image file size in kiB (for this one, it is 705.7 kiB; 1 kiB = 1024 B), using the older and widely used convention of using "KB" for the unit 1024 B to distinguish it from kB (1 kB = 1000 B). That is certainly better than labeling it (incorrectly) as being in "kB".

I will not pursue this matter much further as likely the actual limits are known by (or knowable by) those working with the forum software.

If more practical testing is needed, let me know.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Attachments

  • Red-6000x4000px.jpg
    705.7 KB · Views: 191
Last edited:

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
On the other hand, for a file with pixel dimensions 5000 px × 3000 px, we can attach it and are offered the chance to "insert" it inline either in "Thumbnail" size or "Full image" size. Here I will do the thumbnail presentation:

388

Now, if we click on the thumbnail, we see the image in large size in the "alternate viewer".

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Here, I have first attached a simple red image with pixel dimensions 4000 px × 3000 px, with a file size of 396.5 kB. After uploading, I was offered to "inset" it inline, which I didn't do.

Next, I attempted to upload another image file. also with pixel dimensions 4000 px × 3000 px, with a file size of 10.3 MB. It was reported that "The uploaded file is too large". I was given the opportunity to cancel the upload, which I did.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Attachments

  • Red-4000x3000px.jpg
    Red-4000x3000px.jpg
    387.2 KB · Views: 204

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
For what it's worth, some rather basic tests here suggest that the limit on the "size" of an image involves both its pixel dimensions (maybe total pixel count, maybe not) and the byte size of the file (not a limit on each, but rather some function of both).

It has the smell of, "If half the weight of the package, in pounds, plus one-third of the length and girth combined, in inches, is over 27, then the postage will be per rate table B."

Best regards,

Doug
 
Top