BBcode

[Matooba]

Just wondering if anyone considered my bbcode (picpop) I submitted in PM or adding the youtube bbcode?

[Geo]

Hey.

You didn't really explain to me what your BBCode does. And I think the YouTube BBCode would just be annoying, it could perhaps be incorporated into the YouTube thread... but I think it'd use a lot of bandwidth. Got a link to the youtube code?

[Matooba]

Goto this test page I setup for you. It takes any images that people post, reduces them to a reasonable size, when click will open in a new window (offsite) to save on your bandwidth. Check it out.

Click Here For Example

Im only trying to contribute to the speed and great site you guys have redesigned. I think its so much better now that i actually have come back to modding halo.

[Geo]

I don't think that saves any bandwidth at all... the smaller image is just scaled down, you still have to download said image for your browser to scale it down.

[Matooba]

Any other thoughts?

[Geo]

Can it be set to only resize images if they're over a certain size?

[Matooba]

Unfortunately, that would take some coding. I don't know who does the coding for your site. I could put a script together for your site coder to look at. This is because or your portal and what templates have been altered. I'm PMing you the code.

[Tural]

I don't see any real necessity for this. Users are generally good about not posting too large of image inline. The amount of times it would be practical are not numerous enough to warrant its use.

[Geo]

It's not going to be implemented. Your main reason for us to use it was to 'save bandwidth' but as I've stated, it doesn't do that at all. Sorry.

[Matooba]

(Source) = I sent you the code for the autoresize anyways. If you ever need it you have it. (The BBcode)=The bandwidth i spoke of was on your sites load page time sectors. The image opens in a new window from original location of URL. I dont know how much bandwidth your alloted per month but it does help. Anyways Peace guys....

[Tural]

It does not improve load times. The script still has to parse the full image before sizing it down. If anything, it takes longer. It doesn't work like you think it does, it's counterproductive. The site cannot obtain the image and downsize it before the user sees the image, it does it on-the-fly on every page view. Every time, it has to load the image like normal, run it through the script to downsize it, then output it. Let's compare:

Normal: Load image --> Display image
Your idea: Load image --> Process image --> Display image

Are you seeing how this defeats the purpose? How you understand it is not how it actually works. It does not generate a thumbnail, it just scales the original size down, it takes the exact same amount of time to load it as it would normally, and it still has to process it. It cannot cause shorter load times, it's simply impossible from the way it works. This is all it's doing: <img src="" height="200" width="300">, basically. It doesn't make a smaller image, it just changes the display size. You're loading the exact same image with or without the script, it is impossible for it to be faster by adding more processing. It takes more site bandwidth and more user load times if you use that code. It is more inefficient in every single way. There is no legitimate technical reason to use it, the sole use of it is that it makes images smaller so it doesn't conflict with user resolutions, for convenience, it does not help the site's bandwidth or the user's load times, at all.

I've been continuously adding to my post in an attempt to make it more clear that it is utterly pointless, and even worse for the site than just loading an image, but I can't really expand much, because it's a simple concept. I hope you understand what we're saying.