Graphic image to discussion issues. Testing.

test

Here's an Irfanview report on bad then good image.

I don't see why these images won't upload. Strange.

There’s a max limit on image dimensions that can be uploaded. The left one is over the limit but the right one should be fine. I’m not sure why you’re not seeing the error message.

I did look around for any article about limits to discussions and limits but came up short.

1. Don't see any error message. The image uploads, you click Post Reply and the image vanishes.
2. Sadly this means the end to tutorials as some screen shots can be full or near full screen.

I tried using Imgur's markdown and hoped the images would show inline but that doesn't work. Another blow to tutorials today.

(Edited) If this is to keep a limit on image file sizes, then make the limit on files sizes, not dimensions. Then I could make the images with 8 bit or mono color palettes for file size savings without much or any information loss. And then there's Imgur. If the Imgur markdown worked, that would fix this also in another way.

I'm marking it solved and will give up the idea of more tutorials on things I run into.

Don't see any error message. The image uploads, you click Post Reply and the image vanishes.

I guess I'm confused because all of your posts in this thread do include image attachments? So what isn't working as intended?

Sadly this means the end to tutorials as some screen shots can be full or near full screen.

We have the exact same size and dimension requirements in place that we've had for the past 8+ years (ever since we switched off of vBulletin). If tutorials have been possible for the past 8 years, they're possible today. The only thing that really has changed is screen resolutions have gotten larger (e.g. I'm currently using two 5K monitors) which didn't exist 8 years ago, so I might have a problem uploading a full screen capture today while I wouldn't have had a problem in the past, since it's 10K+ pixels horizontally. For that reason, to keep up with the times, I can see why it would make sense to increase the allowable resolution for the first time in a very long time.

This is just me testing. I tried various images and some work.

You explained why but I can't see where that limit is. Because of this I think that's the end of tutorials. First for dimension, not size limits and second for the broken editor that doesn't allow inline images. I've read that one can go get a markdown editor and that's just another app that would be just for this forum and then the images may or may not post.

At least I know there is some limit and not to think further of any more tutorials. Sorry if that sounds bad. It's not really but it's a shame this is how it is.

It's always been in the plan to create a new UI to make it easy to include inline images, but it's taking a bit longer because I really was never happy with the previous implementation, so I want to do some more research to see if I can do better this time. In the meantime, inline images can be manually created with standard Markdown. (However, as you found out the hard way, this is only supported if the images are hosted on the daniweb.com domain, and not from Imgur, as we don't want broken images in the years to come should something happen to any third-party image hosting sites.)

Inline images worked before a recent change. My worry here is between image size limits and inline that requires you to have another editor means the end of tutorials.

I'll look one more time for limitations but the inline missing alone is a dead stop for tutorial or writing about issues and how to overcome them.

Inline images worked before a recent change.

Inline images work the same way (with Markdown). It's true that the old UI included a little button to auto-insert the Markdown (similar to how there are buttons for Bold or Code, but you don't have to use them), while today it has to be manually coded, because I didn't like the UI of the old auto-insert buttons, and so I want to try to retool them.

My worry here is between image size limits and inline that requires you to have another editor means the end of tutorials.

The image size limits have existed the exact same way for a VERY long time. Why do you need another editor??

As to another editor is so I don't have to learn markdown just for this site. If the Imgur markdown had just worked, then this would be an OK workaround. As to the image limits, I can't find a page with the limit documented so I have to guess. Again, I can see a valid reason to limit file size but image size? Today we are seeing UHD 4K and 5K screens and it appears the size limit forbids a screen capture.

One of the key mantras to apps and sites is to keep it simple. Some will tell me "use markdown". Sure, but no other site requires this. I'm calling this solved for me as making how-to's and tutorials is optional. Making it harder just changed my choice from I'll do that to "too much trouble."

As to another editor is so I don't have to learn markdown just for this site.

I recommend learning the basics of Markdown anyways. It's used by DaniWeb, Stack Overflow, Github, Reddit, Wordpress, Google, and so many other sites nowadays. It's pretty much the de facto way of contributing content on the web.

Again, I can see a valid reason to limit file size but image size? Today we are seeing UHD 4K and 5K screens and it appears the size limit forbids a screen capture.

I have two 5K monitors, and if I were to upload a screen capture of my entire desktop, it would be pretty confusing what you were looking at as you would only be able to see a very small fraction of it from a standard 1080p resolution, which is what the majority of visitors use. The screen dimensions are in place to provide a better experience for the viewer, not the creator. The max allowable dimensions are large enough to allow full screen captures for all of the top 100 most frequently used resolutions used to access DaniWeb, which comes close to representing nearly 100% of our visitors.

Incidentally, the max allowable image upload dimensions are 1600x1200. About 2% of our traffic access DaniWeb with resolutions larger than this.

To keep up with the changing times, I've incrased the maximum allowed dimensions to 7680x4320 (8K).

I want to reiterate that image max dimensions have been in place for 8+ years. 1600x1200 was considered absurdly large 8 years ago. Today, uploading a 5K or 8K image is comparable to that.

Thanks for that. My everyday laptop is 1080p or 1920x1080 so that's pretty much where a screen capture size happens today.

Even then I often cut the file size by reducing the color count to 256 or even B/W (2.)

I didn't find the limitations on any help page so maybe I was not good at searching or it just is what I call "tribal knowledge."

In the circles I run, we don't like tribal knowledge since tribe members (employees) come and go and soon only an elder knows where something is or how to accomplish a feat.

Yeah, the thing is, I'm not sure why you aren't getting the error message about the dimensions upon failed upload.

About the error message. I tested this across 3 Windows 10 laptops. 2 are so vanilla it hurts. And on my Moto G 5 Plus phone and a Nexus 9 (phones and tablets use Chrome) and not once did I get an error about the upload or image dimension size/limit. I didn't try it on the iPhone 6 which has Safari and now, Chrome (due to that discussion about the hamburger.)

It was simple. Attach the image, you see it update and an icon with a checkbox. Click Post Reply and only the text made it.
Since the image dimension limit change is in, I truly doubt that message woud fire today and for years.

My only feedback is that not everyone will consider reducing the file size with simple tricks like color count reduction.

My only feedback is that not everyone will consider reducing the file size with simple tricks like color count reduction.

That's not something I would ever expect of anyone. Our file size limits are pretty darn high, mostly capped by PHP upload limitations. The only way to exceed the limit is, realistically, if you're trying to do something borderline malicious.

Inline image attachments should work now. Let's give it a shot ...

Test test test :)

test then image.

And text below. This is going to make tutorials easy again.

Bizarre results. Preview seemed OK but the reult isn't as it was in the preview.

I do have some original PC hardware work ready to share. I have it up on CNET now and this, when working will make it easy to post it here.

It's a little bit about upgrading old iron. But hey, folk ask me all the time about such things.

I understand what happened, but I'm not sure why it happened that way. It looks like it added a URL path of /images/attachments/ but it should have added /attachments/large/ instead.

OK, fixed!! :)

Sorry about that.

We require inline attachments to have the path /attachments/small/ or /attachments/large/ so we can resize the image and control the dimensions, and so formatting doesn't get all out of whack.

As so ...

My mistake. That was larger than I remembered.

And will it place text down low?

That's odd. A twofer.

The image thumbnail attachment shown below the post is supposed to disappear if that image is shown inline. There's currently a bug where it doesn't disappear when previewing / posting, but it's just cosmetic and is fixed upon refresh. I'll fix it.

Test :)