revisited: photos per thread limit

Using our real names is an interesting deal. I think that we should all do it. I like to know who I'm talking too. <br><br>What would end photos being posted like the cry baby one is allowing only the original poster to put up pics. The only sideline I would have to that is if a following poster has a nice route photo (like scurlocks) . I like to see those.<br><br>Avators are too much in my opinion. They are a distraction. <br><br>I read ttips and cc.com. I think that they are different because most of the posters don't know eachother. We're a much tighter group. Plus those of us who ski year around, well, that takes a certain amount of Self-discipline.

Sorry for the delay. Last week was a school break and I just didn't find a block of time which I could use to concentrate on this issue, but I'm working on it again now. I've re-read all of the comments, which are very useful.<br><br>It's probably unanimous that nobody wants to have to horizontal scroll due to displayed photos that are too wide. I have checked the display of an 800 pixel wide photo on my monitor set to 1024x768, and it's fine - barely, with maybe 20-30 pixels to spare.<br><br>So a photo width limit of 800 should work, except for people still on 15" monitors. What proportion of TAY users are on 15" monitors (800x600) - anyone have a good guess, or better, an educated guess?

Here's some 1.5 year old data from a decent portion of the web browsing public, which may or may not be representative of TAY users (do we upgrade faster, change default settings more often, or vice versa?):<br><br>10x7: 40% and increasing<br><br>8x6: 40% and decreasing<br><br>(other about 20%)<br><br>Worth noting - many folks with 10x7 or larger run their browser windows smaller than that.<br>

I think we should give an increased photos/thread limit a try - how about three (3) for now, and 100KB max each.<br><br>What still needs to be determined is the max pixel width for posted photos. It is important to not leave a significant chunk of the viewing population behind, and this might mean that a photo 800 pixels wide would be too much. <br><br>Jim, would you care to make an estimate about how the viewing resolutions currently break down, factoring in the 1.5 year old data, variation of TAY users from the average, etc? (Not to put you on the spot...)<br><br>I did a quick check for horizontal scrolling problems using an 800x600 monitor. It looks like a width of 640 is the largest that won't cause problems on a monitor of that resolution (width of 680 extended off the page). So if there is a significant population of 800x600 monitor users out there, then we'd need to keep the maximum photo width to 640 pixels.

Boy, my guess is not a whole lot better than anyone's I think. Lots of new PCs have gone out at 10x7 default resolution in that 1.5 years, but again it comes down to assumptions about whether this is a more or less upgrade-prone crowd. I don't think that necessarily correlates to activity level out here. So with that disclaimer, I'm going to guess that it's still over 20% at 8x6, and that the data that many of &gt;=10x7 folks run their browser window smaller (not maximized) is still relevant. So, sharing your philosophy of not wanting to leave too many folks behind, I'd personally choose the 640 wide limit for now. I've always tried to get my photos to fit w/o any scrolling on 8x6, and they look pretty good to me on my 10x7 system, but then I'm one of the folks who likes to see a mix of photos and text so slightly smaller photos kind of helps that work...<br><br>Charles - if I can dredge up more recent data, I'll pass it along to you.

I have added photo posting guidelines to the "post a message" page. These guidelines will be displayed whenever someone goes to make a post, so hopefully they will be easy to find and follow.<br><br>Based on the general user data that Jim found (thanks!), I think that it is wise to still try to accommodate people having 800 pixels of screen width. This results in a maximum photo width of 640 pixels so as to not cause horizontal scrolling (and even this may still cause problems for some viewers). People who would like to provide access to higher resolution versions of the photos are still welcome to insert links to those photos.<br><br>Thanks to everyone who voiced their opinion on this issue. The photo posting guidelines are obviously a compromise, and being so may disappoint a large percentage of TAY members. I'm eager, however, to see how things turn out with the new guidelines, and if the quality of trip reports remains high, we can revisit this question again in the future.