DescentBB

Edit: Vote using your HORIZONTAL resolution.

I use the [img] function a lot and always guess that 1000px horizontally is a safe bet but I want to be sure from now on.

It's also possible that some people don't have their browsers on full screen but I'm not worried about that.

If you have more than one computer that you browse this forum with, then try to guess which you use the most. Then post its screen resolution.

And if you have more than one monitor just use the resolution of one. Unless they are different resolutions. In which case use the bigger resolution.

I assume you're asking about horizontal / width?

Yes!

1440x900; this LCD's native resolution.

I think the rules on the DBB are don't embed an image larger than 800x600, if you need something bigger link to it with [url] instead of [img].

My screen resolution is 1280x960 + 1600x1200.

Home: 1680x1050 + 1280x1024
Work: 1440x900 + 1440x900

Krom wrote:I think the rules on the DBB are don't embed an image larger than 800x600,

With these numbers it looks like 1000px across is safe. No one yet is under 1200px.

That assumes that people always have their browsers maximized. I often don't, particularly at work.

Isaac wrote:

Krom wrote:I think the rules on the DBB are don't embed an image larger than 800x600,

With these numbers it looks like 1000px across is safe. No one yet is under 1200px.

This is like telling the police that pulled you over for speeding that the road is straight so it should be safe to go that fast, you're still going to get a ticket.

I've seen the \"post your desktop\" threads on the DBB from time to time. There are people out there with 800x600 screen resolutions. (No 640x480 that I remember, though.)

If your attempting to do a website and you cant DIV and center, don't bother with anything larger that 1024....

Yeah Sirius but those desktop images can be any resolution. 1000px x ???px images look good in threads with a resolution above 1200px. If most of us have monitors that are like mine or better that means 1000px is a safe bet.

Krom wrote:This is like telling the police that pulled you over for speeding that the road is straight so it should be safe to go that fast, you're still going to get a ticket.

I'm not trying to argue. If it's my thread, then I should be able to post big pictures. If it's not then I should respect the 800px ???px unofficial rule.

Yes, even if it is your own thread you should keep them at or under 800 pixels. Although the FAQ is gone/broken, the rule is not \"unofficial\", it really is 800 pixels wide or link it.

Large images can stretch the tables making it so people have to scroll left and right on their screen to read an entire post which is why the rule is in place. 800 pixels wide was just a good number to compromise on between image size and undesirable table stretching.

Keep in mind not all of the horizontal screen resolution is available in a post, almost 200 pixels are used up by the side for the username/avatar display. Of course it could get even worse, I don't think anyone uses it but the Solaris theme is fixed width for 1024x768 screens.

I have in the past and will continue to edit excessively large images in posts and topics down into URLs. Although if you put a large image warning in the thread title I'll be more inclined to allow a larger image so long as it doesn't stretch the tables on a 1280x resolution browser window.

No problem.

home = 1600x1200
work = #1 1280x1024
#2 1280x1024

i make 250x150 thumbnails for the page load with embedded links to large scale pictures, or under 25k 800x600 images - still with links to the larger picture.

Does it take a little more time to setup.. a little bit.... just easier on the end user

I'm starting to think even AceCombat's Left toe has more brains then the SpamChode above who now wants to flood the forums with IMG Spam

It seem the bulk will be above 1200px. But I do wonder who is using a system under 1000px. An iPhone user?

Isaac wrote:I use the [img] function a lot and always guess that 1000px horizontally is a safe bet but I want to be sure from now on.

That's what the "Add image to post" link at the bottom of the post/reply textbox is for.

Hello EngDrewman. I like syntax instead of push button junk. But that's a very good post that might help someone.

Isaac wrote:Yeah Sirius but those desktop images can be any resolution. 1000px x ???px images look good in threads with a resolution above 1200px. If most of us have monitors that are like mine or better that means 1000px is a safe bet.

No, these were people taking screenshots of their desktop, taskbar and all. Some of them were 800x600. And they weren't downscaled either.

The only images in 2009 that match your description are scaled down.
See FunkyStickman and Jmeat.

My laptop's resolution is 1366x768.

Netbooks are also making low screen resolutions popular again, so the rule of not assuming more than 800 pixel width is just as valid today as it was in the late 90's.

There were some in 2008, but I haven't found any in '09 either, no. Doesn't mean they don't exist, though, but of the two guys that were posting them at least one isn't active any more.

The next step up - if I recall, 1024x768 (and then 1152x864 for a few people) - is still pretty common, it seems.

1680x1050 at home
1900x1220 at work

Thanks a bunch everyone!

1280x960 at home
1024x768 mostly when away from home

1600X900 on my desktop 1280X1024 on the laptop.