Image Linking & Hosting, various issues |
Image Linking & Hosting, various issues |
Sep 17 2021, 03:07 PM
Post
#1
|
||
Member Group: Members Posts: 835 Joined: 9-May 21 From: Germany Member No.: 9017 |
Sol 203 Mastcam-Z right eye panorama with enhanced colors
I just found out that in addition to the file size limit for uploading images, there also seems to exist a limit to the total number of pixels in an image. When I try to upload images with a file size of less than 3 MB but with more than or close to 25 million pixels, the attachment management menu disappears. So I had to reduce the size (and hence resolution) of the above image to 92% (linear). Did anybody make a similar observation? |
|
|
||
Sep 17 2021, 04:42 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3009 Joined: 30-October 04 Member No.: 105 |
Good point, Tau. I recall that there are file size and image size limits, but I so rarely approach either limit that don't recall much in the way of details. I think they go to the days when many people were on Dialup.
Probably the best thing to do is to ask in "Forum Guide" at the top of the page. --Bill -------------------- |
|
|
Sep 17 2021, 08:08 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14448 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I think they go to the days when many people were on Dialup. The original limits ( significantly smaller than they are now ) were put in place to dissuade people from using UMSF as a place to host content, and encourage people to use image hosting services like flickr etc etc. Paying for hosting of and backing up a large image repository also has time/bandwidth costs. I've not been a UMSF admin for getting on for a decade so I have no idea what the total hosted content size is on UMSF, what the current server's specs are, or what, if any, steps are taken today to secure that data. Backing up the attachments was many gigabytes in 2010. I would continue to encourage people to put their content elsewhere and use UMSF as a place to discuss content, not host it. |
|
|
Sep 17 2021, 09:22 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 4260 Joined: 17-January 05 Member No.: 152 |
That all makes sense for large files - we can't expect UMSF to be a large image hosting site.
But looking at old threads here very many images have been (presumably) lost because they were posted to hosting sites that no longer exist (anyone remember imagehost.org or uploadimages.net?). It's a shame we can't see what some people here did in the exciting early days of missions with immediate public release policies. So posting smaller images (within whatever upload limit is set) to UMSF makes sense with the historical context in mind. |
|
|
Sep 17 2021, 09:55 PM
Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3516 Joined: 4-November 05 From: North Wales Member No.: 542 |
I second that from fredk. I appreciate the long term value of content posted here which doesn't disappear.
|
|
|
Sep 17 2021, 10:03 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 717 Joined: 3-December 04 From: Boulder, Colorado, USA Member No.: 117 |
Thirded! There’s great history here
|
|
|
Sep 18 2021, 09:43 AM
Post
#7
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 91 Joined: 11-August 21 Member No.: 9072 |
Dear djellison, if you consider my proposal valuable, you may create the special topic 'How to store your attachments in the „Wayback”' and move it there. Although I decided not to post at this forum anymore, I shall make an exclusion to answer there the colleagues' questions upon Wayback, if any.
----- I would continue to encourage people to put their content elsewhere and use UMSF as a place to discuss content, not host it. 1. By strange contra-coincidence, this summer the moderator of the 'nasaspaceflight' forum shocked me with the opposite requirement: not to 'hotlink' images (they call it embedding "Do not embed images") from the third sites, but to upload them directly at their host. Moreover, mr. 'zubenelgenubi' personally reloaded many pictures from my posts into the NSF attachments - see an example of USGS map reloaded from Wikipedia here. However I would not recommend anybody the NSF as a storage facility: forums are not eternal and forum policies change even more frequently. 2. My personal 'storage' is Wikipedia where I write articles for >11 years. I also upload images there (do not laugh at my ugly martian panoramas' compilations) and I'm sure in the relative eternity of this storage. However I shall never recommend Wikipedia to anybody who is concerned about his copyright. All original work uploaded there automatically receives a 'common license' which prohibits you to refer to this content as to the work of your own. Thus, if (for example) Phil Stooke whose maps are admired all over the Solar system uploads one of his maps to Wiki, he loses the right to refer to it as "map of Phil Stooke" in his future book. So be careful: "the free cheese may be found only in the mousetrap". 3. A good solution could be the 'Wayback' - the world internet archive, www.archive.org. It is more eternal than Wikipedia, since the last is not free from anonymous volunteers who may nominate your image for deletion. I did not try this tool on the USF, but let's do it together: When the entire forum page is full, query its address at the archive.org. Let it be page 12 of the Perseverance- Mars 2020 Rover. Syntax for the query is: [https://web.archive.org/*/] [URL of the page queried]. Thus, for CODE http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8600&st=165 we get query like this:CODE https://web.archive.org/*/http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8600&st=165 Put this string into address bar with "paste+go". This page was not archived, thus my first steps there were like this After passing these (and some other) steps this page is already at the Wayback. Its address there is (note two 'htpps' inside; it's normal): https://web.archive.org/web/20210918065336/...8600&st=165 However this is not all. You've archived only thumbnails, not the attachments! Continue your archiving job. To start archiving attachments you must open them, one by one with the right-click in new window. At this step you must be attentive: 'Wayback' shall automatically propose you addresses which include session tokens (syntax 's=' + [32 characters] + '&') This address includes a token: CODE http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php? s= efde22aa3ef9e1afe1a9b658cdbf22f7&act=attach&type=post&id=49195 Clear it (s=efde22aa3ef9e1afe1a9b658cdbf22f7&) to make address look like this: CODE http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=49195 Only in this case each new user shall be able to open the full-sized attachment. I did that, so thanks for my efforts at least two maps from here shall be kept at the Wayback by Andreas Plesh: https://web.archive.org/web/20210918065717i...st&id=49195 by Phil Stooke: https://web.archive.org/web/20210918070443i...st&id=49206 I said that 'Wayback' could be the solution for the hosting of attachments because now it is not. Hypothetically, everybody could make the following. 1. Temporarily upload their attachments here. 2. As soon as the page with attachments is full (this disclaimer is to prevent Wayback from overloading with multiple copies of unfinished pages), store it at the Wayback. 3. Insert the archived attachment into the post with the [img] tag... Halt! This forum does not dispaly wide images (that's why I had to use the 'URL' tag), and at the same time its "IP.Board" engine (or inner admin settings?) ignore the " width=" parameter of the "img" tag ([img width=]). Meanwhile this option is available at NSF (it runs on SMF 2.0.15) - I've just checked: all images from Wayback are visible, resizable and back-clickable to their original size from the pages of that forum (and others runnung SMF forum soft). Conclusions 1. Storing your forum uploads at the Wayback is always necessary. Do that before something undesirable may happen. 2. Wayback does not delete the stored images, even if they are subsequently deleted at the source, or even if the whole forum 'disappears'. 3. Condition (2) could release the forum quota at the host server from a burden of uploads (algorithm: 'attach - store - link to the stored image - delete the attachment'). But to make this workaround available, forum settings must allow forum members to use the image resizing parameter in the IMG css/bb tag. ----- P.S. This page is also stored at Wayback: you may follow this link |
|
|
Sep 18 2021, 10:25 PM
Post
#8
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8789 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Hey, all. A member requested that we start a separate thread for this since it's overrunning the current Perseverance transit thread, so moving those posts over here.
There are some good ideas in here, and Doug Ellison has explained the reasons for current UMSF policy. There MAY be some changes coming down the road, but that will be entirely dependent on a number of factors re site hosting that have not yet been resolved with TPS. With that in mind, please proceed.... -------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Sep 18 2021, 11:40 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1453 Joined: 26-July 08 Member No.: 4270 |
There have been times that I have spent a couple hours "reliving" some missions. Huygens' landing on Titan. Hayabusa (1)'s exploration of Itokawa. New Horizons' flyby of Pluto. Many others that this forum has been around for its members to see and share the excitement and amazement of these events. I fully agree that the history contained on this site is amazing, and it's a real treasure for re-living fond memories for which this very board was integral to forming.
-------------------- -- Hungry4info (Sirius_Alpha)
|
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 12:00 AM
Post
#10
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3009 Joined: 30-October 04 Member No.: 105 |
Agreed! The historical aspect of discussions of events and missions is practically a 'national treasure'. And a good argument for why some form of UMSF/Planetary Society storage of some level of images is advantageous. For example, I just edited my Signature to eliminate reference to Photobucket, which hasn't existed in over 10.years!
--Bill -------------------- |
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 03:40 AM
Post
#11
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14448 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
|
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 06:27 AM
Post
#12
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2547 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
Obviously nobody should expect anything posted here (or anywhere for that matter) to last forever, but this and every other forum I use is riddled with dead links to defunct photo-hosting sites. I find it hard to believe that with storage prices as low as they are, this site can't afford to store reasonably-sized images. I agree that there should be a size limit, but the current 3 MB limit seems a little low in 2021.
-------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 08:35 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1621 Joined: 12-February 06 From: Bergerac - FR Member No.: 678 |
That's why I'm self hosting my content since 2005. I don't trust Flickr, or any image hosting service for a long term hosting.
-------------------- |
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 11:51 AM
Post
#14
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 91 Joined: 11-August 21 Member No.: 9072 |
riddled with dead links to defunct photo-hosting sites. The 'Wayback' world internet archive (see above) is the last resort in such cases. Query the address of the page with 'dead images' at 'archive.org', there's a small chance that somebody has archived it before. Some popular pages are backuped dozens, hundreds of times: use a timeline above the Wayback's archive page to scroll deep into its history. |
|
|
Sep 19 2021, 04:41 PM
Post
#15
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2547 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
I'm a big fan of the Wayback Machine, but it has plenty of gaps and lacunae, and I'm not convinced that the Internet Archive is a better longer-term hosting solution than any other alternative.
For very large image products, certainly people should host however they wish, but it seems silly to require that for every single image, especially modestly-sized ones. -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 10:59 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |