Faces of a.org

[Seehund]

Glaucus wrote:

blobrana wrote:

Ummm...  I don't think so. The image scaling you suggested would scale the image in the user's browser AFTER they already downloaded it. The proper way to do what you suggest would be to scale the images on the server side, sorta like how we are forced to do with our avatars.

Look again.

But I agree with that it sucks to make the clients scale images. The width=x height=y is quite good to have there, as long as it specifies the actual size of the image (makes the layout rendering quicker, and you can see where there's supposed to be pictures if they're broken or you've got image loading turned off).

[bloodline]

cecilia wrote:
thank you for not forcing me to say it!

 :-D

I think you should post photos to confirm this fact, I have been know to be mistaken in the past. ;-)

[cecilia]

bloodline wrote:
I think you should post photos to confirm this fact,

i'm sure wayne would be overjoyed with THAT idea!
:lol:
yeah, sure, i'll submit a pic to the "Image-o-Cooch"

:lol:

[that_punk_guy]

Seehund wrote:

Glaucus wrote:

blobrana wrote:

Ummm...  I don't think so. The image scaling you suggested would scale the image in the user's browser AFTER they already downloaded it. The proper way to do what you suggest would be to scale the images on the server side, sorta like how we are forced to do with our avatars.

Look again.

But I agree with that it sucks to make the clients scale images. The width=x height=y is quite good to have there, as long as it specifies the actual size of the image (makes the layout rendering quicker, and you can see where there's supposed to be pictures if they're broken or you've got image loading turned off).

Blobrana's is a thumbnail in this vein, have a click :-) It works nice enough, thing is I don't have the time to resize everyone's pics and everything. Besides that most people's images are not so much bigger than the tags specify, so there's no real performance hit. The idea was never to have ultra-high-res pics of everyone, just big enough photos so you can actually see what they look like (cyka take note ;-))

I'm thinking about getting my webserver back up and running and then maybe I can run some kind of photo album PERL/PHP scripts (open to suggestions there if anyone knows what might look nice)...

Thing is my home server couldn't cope with hosting Faces. 128kbps upstream is not a lot when you're getting the kind of hits Faces does (tens of thousands so far by my estimate :-o) so I'd have to keep the actual images on my faster NTL webspace... maybe via an automated FTP upload... goddamn it's complicated!

[blobrana]

As i said already...

(And for those not able to hack into your pmail)

It`s your site,
if it looks good to you - then fine... :-D




- Hum, now there`s  a thought - A website that only caters for 1terabit/sec users -

 :-D

[bloodline]

blobrana wrote:
As i said already...

(And for those not able to hack into your pmail)

It`s your site,
if it looks good to you - then fine... :-D




- Hum, now there`s  a thought - A website that only caters for 1terabit/sec users -

 :-D

Any reason why you have a camera on your celing... above your bed no less!!! :-o

My word A.org is getting one hell of a kinky place.

[blobrana]

And why would you ASSUME that i was on the Earth?

I could have been floating in a zero-g enviroment....



- (No,  just joking , it`s just part of my home defence equipment)

[bloodline]

blobrana wrote:
And why would you ASSUME that i was on the Earth?

I could have been floating in a zero-g enviroment....



- (No,  just joking , it`s just part of my home defence equipment)

um... err.. ok :-D

[blobrana]

 :-D

[that_punk_guy]

Was that like, so kinky it was even beyond Matt's comprehension?

[Karlos]

*views page*

@that_punk_guy

Man, you look loads different without the hat :-D

Perhaps you might consider splitting the page into a set defined by maximum number of images? Over 56K it can be a bit of a mission :-)

@blobrana

Blimey, I didn't know you were a lady :-) Nice to see were not all geeky blokes on there. Just most of us :-)

@cecilia

Where's yours, then? :-) Never mind the risk of stalker geeks - I'm sure we can restrain bloodli..er them :lol:

[odin]

TPG dude......you look like Murdoch/Lt. Barclay :-D.

[cecilia]

Karlos wrote:
*views page*

@that_punk_guy

Man, you look loads different without the hat :-D

yeah, what is it with you "English Types" (said with the monty python fake french accent) and cutting all your hair off???
see, hair should be kept ON the head, and OFF the body. cecilia's law. :lol:

@cecilia

Where's yours, then? :-) Never mind the risk of stalker geeks - I'm sure we can restrain bloodli..er them :lol:

don't worry, as soon as i find something, i'll send it over.
(heh, heh, i can handle blood-what's-his-name)
 :-P

[that_punk_guy]

odin wrote:
TPG dude......you look like Murdoch/Lt. Barclay :-D.

Who's tha... Hey! :-x

;-)

[that_punk_guy]

cecilia wrote:
yeah, what is it with you "English Types" (said with the monty python fake french accent) and cutting all your hair off???
see, hair should be kept ON the head, and OFF the body. cecilia's law. :lol:

In my case, it's just the cheapest haircut available. I can do it at home! :-D

[bloodline]

(heh, heh, i can handle blood-what's-his-name)

I'll like to see you try... no honestly I really would!!!  :-)