[SI] panos/mosaics question

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

--
Troy Piggins

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

On 2010-10-06 18:30:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

Hi Bowser, it would help me a lot if you could suggest a max. limit for
image width/height in pixels in addition to the file size limit.

--
Pete

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 20:11:47 +0100, Pete
wrote:

On 2010-10-06 18:30:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

Hi Bowser, it would help me a lot if you could suggest a max. limit for
image width/height in pixels in addition to the file size limit.

I thought about that, but struggled to make it work logically. There
are some people who prefer larger images and they're willing to save
at lower quality settings which results in smaller files. And PBase
doesn't care about pixel dimensions, only disk space. That's why I
abandoned the dimension restriction and focused on file sizes. The
reality is there isn't a direct correlation between dimaneions and
file sizes. There are so many options to "webify" your pix it didn't
make sense to limit the shooters by image dimension.

On 2010-10-06 20:56:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 20:11:47 +0100, Pete
wrote:

On 2010-10-06 18:30:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

Hi Bowser, it would help me a lot if you could suggest a max. limit for
image width/height in pixels in addition to the file size limit.

I thought about that, but struggled to make it work logically. There
are some people who prefer larger images and they're willing to save
at lower quality settings which results in smaller files. And PBase
doesn't care about pixel dimensions, only disk space. That's why I
abandoned the dimension restriction and focused on file sizes. The
reality is there isn't a direct correlation between dimaneions and
file sizes. There are so many options to "webify" your pix it didn't
make sense to limit the shooters by image dimension.

Thanks for your reply, I'll do some experiments for the November SI...

--
Pete

On 10-10-06 16:23 , Pete wrote:
On 2010-10-06 20:56:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 20:11:47 +0100, Pete
wrote:

On 2010-10-06 18:30:14 +0100, Bowser said:

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

Hi Bowser, it would help me a lot if you could suggest a max. limit for
image width/height in pixels in addition to the file size limit.

I thought about that, but struggled to make it work logically. There
are some people who prefer larger images and they're willing to save
at lower quality settings which results in smaller files. And PBase
doesn't care about pixel dimensions, only disk space. That's why I
abandoned the dimension restriction and focused on file sizes. The
reality is there isn't a direct correlation between dimaneions and
file sizes. There are so many options to "webify" your pix it didn't
make sense to limit the shooters by image dimension.

Thanks for your reply, I'll do some experiments for the November SI...


Offhand, I'd suggest no more than 800 - 900 pixels high and let that
decide how wide it would be (eg: 800 x 2400, 800 x 3600 etc.).

--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

* Bowser wrote :
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:19:59 +1000, Troy Piggins
wrote:

Please forgive me if this was asked and answered in the mandates
threads, I would have lost it amongst the noise.

What size is proposed for the submissions. IIRC last time it was
larger than normal to do the panos/mosaics justice. Something
like 1400px or 1600px reasonable? More? Less?

Good question that I should have addressed earlier. How about a limit
of 2 images per shooter with a 500K per image? Would that work?

Sounds reasonable to me. 500kB aint nothin these days.

--
Troy Piggins

* Alan Browne wrote :
On 10-10-06 16:23 , Pete wrote:
[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 29 lines snipped |=---]
file sizes. There are so many options to "webify" your pix it didn't
make sense to limit the shooters by image dimension.

Thanks for your reply, I'll do some experiments for the November SI...

Offhand, I'd suggest no more than 800 - 900 pixels high and let that
decide how wide it would be (eg: 800 x 2400, 800 x 3600 etc.).

That sounds reasonable too.

--
Troy Piggins

On 10-10-06 18:54 , Troy Piggins wrote:
* Alan Browne wrote :
On 10-10-06 16:23 , Pete wrote:
[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 29 lines snipped |=---]
file sizes. There are so many options to "webify" your pix it didn't
make sense to limit the shooters by image dimension.

Thanks for your reply, I'll do some experiments for the November SI...

Offhand, I'd suggest no more than 800 - 900 pixels high and let that
decide how wide it would be (eg: 800 x 2400, 800 x 3600 etc.).

That sounds reasonable too.

How dare you accuse me of suggesting anything reasonable!

--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

* Alan Browne wrote :
On 10-10-06 18:54 , Troy Piggins wrote:
[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 7 lines snipped |=---]

Offhand, I'd suggest no more than 800 - 900 pixels high and let that
decide how wide it would be (eg: 800 x 2400, 800 x 3600 etc.).

That sounds reasonable too.

How dare you accuse me of suggesting anything reasonable!

Sorry. Won't happen again.

--
Troy Piggins