Photo Gallery Updates

[420]

Photo Gallery & Photo Gallery Tutorial have been updated to be much more stoner friendly.

Please check them out and let us know what you think.

Clear your browser cache first on both desktop and mobile, to see the changes and performance benefits.

We're still tweaking things to perfection, but think most of the confusing structural and tutorial issues have been resolved.

We also restructured the hamburger menu on mobile, bringing the gallery closer to the top for easier access.

We could really use your feedback making sure everything works right and is easier to navigate.

We want to make the gallery so easy to navigate, our members will want to use it more than attachments.

It's so much more beneficial and convenient having all of your photos in one place to browse and share.

Max Size for Gallery Uploads: 20MB per photo and 40 photos per post.

Max Size for Attachments: 5MB per photo and 10 photos per post.

Please use "Attachments" for all non-420 related photos; like cars, landscapes and offtopic memes and keep them restricted to the Off Topic Forums.

We REALLY appreciate your feedback to help us get it dialed in perfectly

 

[NAGreengo]

Are video uploads going to be available on the site in the future?

 

[cbdhemp808]

Hey Rob, would you like comments here or via conversation?

 

[420]

Hey Rob, would you like comments here or via conversation?

Here please

 

[420]

Are video uploads going to be available on the site in the future?

We've been wanting to do that for decades, but it takes a LOT of money every month to host videos. We could have an extra $10000 to $50000 a month to pay in bandwidth if we opened that up. We're simply not at that level to handle doing it yet, but it's definitely on our bucket list too. Meanwhile we continue taking advantage of the ability to embed YouTube & Vimeo videos into threads.

 

[cbdhemp808]

Some feedback...

The only time I have ever uploaded to the gallery is because of the requirement for the Photo of the Month.

We want to make the gallery so easy to navigate, our members will want to use it more than attachments.

Are you saying instead of embedding images in our thread postings? How can the gallery possibly be easier than embedding photos in the thread?

Max Size for Gallery Uploads are 20MB per photo and 40 photos per post.

20MB is a huge photo. A 12 megapixel photo, 4000 x 3000 pixels, is about 8MB as a JPG image file (varies depending on image complexity). If such a photo was printed on a printer at 300 dpi, it would come out 10" x 13". Dunno why you would want a 20MB max.

Max size for Attachments is 5MB and 10 attachments per post.

It looks like the site automatically sizes down the attached images. An average 5MB JPG file is quite large, for example pixel dimensions something like 2500 x 1875. When I add images to my thread postings, I usually keep the longest dimension (tall or wide) to 800 pixel. So it seems 5MB is way too large – the site automatically sizes them down. I think this is how it works.

 

[420]

Are you saying instead of embedding images in our thread postings? How can the gallery possibly be easier than embedding photos in the thread?

Well technically, you have to embed a photo or an attachment into a thread, and the process takes the same amount of time. So it may never be easier, but our intention is to make it as welcoming and easy to navigate as possible. So if you have any suggestions on how to make the gallery process even better, please let us know

20MB is a huge photo. A 12 megapixel photo, 4000 x 3000 pixels, is about 8MB as a JPG image file (varies depending on image complexity). If such a photo was printed on a printer at 300 dpi, it would come out 10" x 13". Dunno why you would want a 20MB max.

It looks like the site automatically sizes down the attached images. An average 5MB JPG file is quite large, for example pixel dimensions something like 2500 x 1875. When I add images to my thread postings, I usually keep the longest dimension (tall or wide) to 800 pixel. So it seems 5MB is way too large – the site automatically sizes them down. I think this is how it works.

These sizes have all been tested over years of feedback from the members. Some people take huge photos by default on purpose, some do just because they don't know how to change the settings. Some people have older cameras, computers, phones, software, etc. There are a plethora of things that led to these sizes. When we tried to cut back, we had a lot of upset members who couldn't upload or attach, so it's stayed here for them.

 

[cbdhemp808]

We've been wanting to do that for decades, but it takes a LOT of money every month to host videos. We could have an extra $10000 to $50000 a month to pay in bandwidth if we opened that up. We're simply not at that level to handle doing it yet, but it's definitely on our bucket list too. Meanwhile we continue taking advantage of the ability to embed YouTube & Vimeo videos into threads.

One way to accomplish this is to host the videos on a secondary dedicated server, thereby not affecting the bandwidth use of your primary server, and potentially bogging it down. For $1,000/mo you could rent one hell of a dedicated server with plenty of storage and bandwidth. Of course, limit the file size of uploaded videos. Modifying the website to upload the videos to the other server would be a little tricky, but doable.

 

[420]

One way to accomplish this is to host the videos on a secondary dedicated server, thereby not affecting the bandwidth use of your primary server, and potentially bogging it down. For $1,000/mo you could rent one hell of a dedicated server with plenty of storage and bandwidth. Of course, limit the file size of uploaded videos. Modifying the website to upload the videos to the other server would be a little tricky, but doable.

Really appreciate your advice, and with all due respect, we know exactly what it costs, how to set it up and what's involved. This thread is asking for feedback on the Photo Gallery and Photo Gallery Tutorial, so please keep your blinders on to this

 

[cbdhemp808]

Well technically, you have to embed a photo or an attachment into a thread, and the process takes the same amount of time. So it may never be easier, but our intention is to make it as welcoming and easy to navigate as possible. So if you have any suggestions on how to make the gallery process even better, please let us know

I'm guessing you want to enrich the gallery with more images. One way to do that would be for the thread UI to automatically store the embedded images in the gallery – a merging of the gallery UI with the thread UI, more or less.

These sizes have all been tested over years of feedback from the members. Some people take huge photos by default on purpose, some do just because they don't know how to change the settings. Some people have older cameras, computers, phones, software, etc. There are a plethora of things that led to these sizes. When we tried to cut back, we had a lot of upset members who couldn't upload or attach, so it's stayed here for them.

OK, that makes sense. A lot of people don't know how to size images down. So, your site does the sizing down automatically.

 

[cbdhemp808]

Really appreciate your advice, and with all due respect, we know exactly what it costs, how to set it up and what's involved. This thread is asking for feedback on the Photo Gallery and Photo Gallery Tutorial, so please keep your blinders on to this

Somebody asked about videos, and you said it was way too expensive. I'd love to know where you are getting numbers like 10K, 50K... but I know you're a busy man, so forget it I guess. You are running a great forum here!

 

[420]

I'm guessing you want to enrich the gallery with more images. One way to do that would be for the thread UI to automatically store the embedded images in the gallery – a merging of the gallery UI with the thread UI, more or less.

The thing is attachments are worthless for our SEO, but gallery photos are valuable and bring us more traffic. Plus I see members all of the time talking about how they wish they could find that one photo they attached to a post years ago in a journal far far away. Makes it so much easier to find your photos when you have them in a gallery. Plus it makes for better viewing for members who just want to browse through photos all day and night. It's a fantastic resource for all of us collectively, just have to make it more appealing, accessible and easy to understand and navigate.

Just a few days ago @Joe Brewster reported the tutorial saying it was too confusing for anyone to understand. After I looked at it, I agreed and was shocked, upset and embarrassed to see that it was so confusing that I don't know how anybody could understand it. @Marc Ocean and I spent all weekend working on everything and are at the final stages where we want more perspectives and feedback to make it even better. We've updated icons, actions, locations, terminology, links, the works... but what have we missed?

I'll get the screenshots for the tutorial done as soon as we finalize the text.

 

[420]

Somebody asked about videos, and you said it was way too expensive. I'd love to know where you are getting numbers like 10K, 50K... but I know you're a busy man, so forget it I guess. You are running a great forum here!

Again, I ask that you please stay focused on topic, I do not have the time or energy to engage in discussions of anything other than what I am asking for right now. I'm already way behind schedule on things I need to finish, so please help me out here

 

[cbdhemp808]

Just a few days ago @Joe Brewster reported the tutorial because it was too confusing for him to use. After I looked at it, I was shocked, upset and embarrassed to see that it was so confusing that I don't know how anybody could understand it. @Marc Ocean and I spent all weekend working on everything and are at the final stages where we want more perspectives and feedback to make it even better. We've updated icons, actions, locations, terminology, links, the works... but what have we missed?

 

[420]

I'm guessing you want to enrich the gallery with more images. One way to do that would be for the thread UI to automatically store the embedded images in the gallery – a merging of the gallery UI with the thread UI, more or less.

Now this is an interesting idea, let me run it by Marc and see what we can find

 

[Krissi Carbone]

I think, as we discussed briefly yesterday, that it flows better and provides a more efficient way to like you mentioned, to find those photos we are always searching for in particular, especially for those of us, like myself, who upload often, frequently and with quantity.

That's all I have, thankful for all you and the team do to make sure we are oiled up well and moving in ways and speeds we should!

 

[Mudballs]

I can't stand it when some tech deficient poster spams 5 or more pics and each is unresized 8mb or more.
If the gallery pushes thumbnails or reduced size to client side in the forums threads then we click to see increased size...that would be a huge win....cuz some of you destroy bandwidth without considering others.

 

[420]

I can't stand it when some tech deficient poster spams 5 or more pics and each is unresized 8mb or more.
If the gallery pushes thumbnails or reduced size to client side in the forums threads then we click to see increased size...that would be a huge win....cuz some of you destroy bandwidth without considering others.

What do you mean unresized, can you please be more specific? Our gallery reduces the photo sizes when uploaded.

 

[Mudballs]

You dont know what an unresized 8mb photo is? It's usually 4000x3000 or thereabouts

 

[Mudballs]

...anyway, when people post in threads with big unresized images, it turns a thread into a 400mb monster bandwidth eater. My initial thought/post was oriented towards sending all 420 images to gallery and force the threads images displayed clientside to be a 1.2mb jpeg of same dimensions but not 8mb. Make us click to see the full res image