An appeal for uploading photos to the Creek

[Brian Effinger]

In the spirit of Mitchell's thread on relevant titles, my appeal is for everyone posting photos to please (PLEASE) upload them directly to Sawmill Creek. Don't use other websites (like photobucket, etc.) and just link to them. I can't tell you how many times I've gone looking through the archives here, found an interesting thread, and then found it completely useless because the photos are all gone and all that is left are little red x's.
http://usera.imagecave.com/flyrod444/100_1373.JPG

Nothing is more frustrating and unhelpful. :mad::mad::mad: If we all upload them here, then they will be available to everyone for years to come.

Please, help your fellow Creekers.

Thank you for listening to my rant. :)

Brian

[Myk Rian]

Not to mention having a link to a pic, then finding out you need to sign up with the site to view it.

[Dave Gaul]

Or like in my case, when visiting SMC at work, our firewalls block some photo sharing/hosting sites!

[G. Brad Schmidt]

In the spirit of Mitchell's thread on relevant titles, my appeal is for everyone posting photos to please (PLEASE) upload them directly to Sawmill Creek. Don't use other websites (like photobucket, etc.) and just link to them. I can't tell you how many times I've gone looking through the archives here, found an interesting thread, and then found it completely useless because the photos are all gone and all that is left are little red x's.
http://usera.imagecave.com/flyrod444/100_1373.JPG

Nothing is more frustrating and unhelpful. :mad::mad::mad: If we all upload them here, then they will be available to everyone for years to come.

Please, help your fellow Creekers.

Thank you for listening to my rant. :)

Brian

Harrumph!


(Like the town hall meeting in Blazing Saddles)

[Amanda Huginkis]

Better idea for admins: when they decide a document or thread is OK for archiving, upload the images to their server. Someone else did the work and added the value, having function to copy images to local webserver and update links in the posts should be trivial.

Remember, unregistered readers CAN'T see the imbedded images. Externally linked images show up just fine.

[Jim O'Dell]

Amanda, I see you are new here. Welcome to the Creek. You may not realize that unlike some woodworking websites, all posts here stay, they aren'voted in or out of the archives.;) Therefore, the admin/monitors would be burdened with the changing of every post where the pics are linked to an off site storage place. Way too much work for the pay these guys and gals receive...Oh that's right, they don't receive any pay.:D So while it's nice to have the pictures saved on an off site for yourself or your personal website, here it causes problems down the road.
Oh, and about visitors not being able to see pictures....We have to have a hook somewhere to pull them in, don't we??:p Jim.

[Jerome Hanby]

Ditto, I get burned on this all the time!

Or like in my case, when visiting SMC at work, our firewalls block some photo sharing/hosting sites!

[brent warner]

Jim, I think your feeding a troll "amanda huginkis" :) brent

[Jim O'Dell]

Could be. I see it says guest now with N/A on posts. When I replied it showed that was her second post. Oh well, information provided is still relevant to anyone else thinking that. :) Jim.

[Josh Reet]

I'm going to play devils advocate here and point out that some people may want to keep control of their images and hosting them elsewhere is really the only way to do that.

I'll be double devils advocate and point out that SMC is one of those sites Myk complains about above that makes you register before you can see images attached to a thread.

But to be fair, I dislike reading an old thread and seeing a bunch of busted image icons. It sucks. Uploading here solves that problem.

[John Keeton]

Ditto on everything. I rarely, if ever, will try to access pics that are linked. There are those occasions, if I feel it is worth the effort. But, for the most part, I bypass those threads/posts.

[Brian Effinger]

Ditto on everything. I rarely, if ever, will try to access pics that are linked. There are those occasions, if I feel it is worth the effort. But, for the most part, I bypass those threads/posts.

I had forgotten about the threads that only have a link to photos. Yeah, I really don't like those either. Occasionally I'll follow the link, if I am very interested, but usually I just back out of the thread and don't come back to it.

[Greg Wittler]

I didn't know that I could upload direct to SMC. I always had to go through a Site like PhotoBucket on other forums. Good to Know.

Greg

[Brian Effinger]

I didn't know that I could upload direct to SMC. I always had to go through a Site like PhotoBucket on other forums. Good to Know.

Greg
Take a look at this (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/faq.php?faq=vb3_reading_posting#faq_vb3_attachment s) and this (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=25115). I hope that helps.

[Dave Lehnert]

One problem uploading to the Creek. You can only upload it once then it will not let you upload the same photo in another thread. You can work around that by linking to your photo in the first post but that may have been some time ago. Too much trouble to search for your own post with the photo.

[Jim O'Dell]

I agree Dave...that is a problem. Or maybe a better word is a hassle. It seems that there was discussion on this item before, and maybe there was a work around for it. Too lazy to go looking for it right now. I'm thinking it was in the "Lumber Yard" section. But don't trust my memory. I don't!! :rolleyes: Jim.

[Dan Forman]

I guess I represent the other end of the spectrum. I use pics hosted on Photobucket, which represents extra work for me to upload there and post the link here that allows them to to show in my posts, without the need to click on the link. Hope that makes sense.

This way, I can sequence them in the post as I wish (having text and picture together, which is particularly useful for step by step sorts of things), and you don't have to click on a thumbnail, which then prevents you from reading the text while looking at the picture. I much prefer this when reading other's posts, than having to use the thumbnails.

The problem of disappearing pictures in posts is more a function of people either changing hosting sites, or deleting pictures from those sites, something I have never done.

Isn't bandwidth another consideration? Won't we use a lot of our bandwidth by posting pics directly to SMC?

Dan

[glenn bradley]

I also tend to ignore pics hosted elsewhere as they so often are no longer there, require some sort of registration to view or just use an engine that I don't want to bother with. I can also side somewhat with folks that struggle with uploading pics to SMC. Resizing the pics is no big deal but having to upload them 2 at a time often makes my pictorials fragmented or brief as returning time and again to the upload screen is clumsy.

[Myk Rian]

I'll be double devils advocate and point out that SMC is one of those sites Myk complains about above that makes you register before you can see images attached to a thread.
Well, if someone is here, reading the forum, they might as well sign up, eh.
Just don't post a message here, with a link to another site, that requires you to sign up to see it.

[Myk Rian]

One problem uploading to the Creek. You can only upload it once then it will not let you upload the same photo in another thread. You can work around that by linking to your photo in the first post but that may have been some time ago. Too much trouble to search for your own post with the photo.
When the system tells you it is alrerady UL'd, it gives you the link to it.

[Josh Reet]

I agree Dave...that is a problem. Or maybe a better word is a hassle. It seems that there was discussion on this item before, and maybe there was a work around for it. Too lazy to go looking for it right now. I'm thinking it was in the "Lumber Yard" section. But don't trust my memory. I don't!! :rolleyes: Jim.

there is a workaround for vB, but it might be a vB4.0 only one. Another site I use gives you the offer of attaching any of your older uploads to whatever the current thread is that you are trying to attach it to. If that makes any sense.

I'm sure Aaron is smart enough to figure it out if he is interested when he gets around to attempting the 4.0 upgrade. But if he or keith want, I can try to track the info down.

[Dan Lee]

One problem uploading to the Creek. You can only upload it once then it will not let you upload the same photo in another thread. You can work around that by linking to your photo in the first post but that may have been some time ago. Too much trouble to search for your own post with the photo.

Go to UserCP there is an option called Attachments at the bottom of the left side pane. This will let you view all attachments you have posted and a link to the thread they were in

[Paul Atkins]

Thanks Dan, Never knew that. Posting videos is the next issue I suppose.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I believe there are discussions about future possibilities of posting videos.

[Brian Effinger]

I guess I represent the other end of the spectrum. I use pics hosted on Photobucket, which represents extra work for me to upload there and post the link here that allows them to to show in my posts, without the need to click on the link. Hope that makes sense.

This way, I can sequence them in the post as I wish (having text and picture together, which is particularly useful for step by step sorts of things), and you don't have to click on a thumbnail, which then prevents you from reading the text while looking at the picture. I much prefer this when reading other's posts, than having to use the thumbnails.

The problem of disappearing pictures in posts is more a function of people either changing hosting sites, or deleting pictures from those sites, something I have never done.

Isn't bandwidth another consideration? Won't we use a lot of our bandwidth by posting pics directly to SMC?

Dan
I believe you could still do that with photos uploaded here. Let's try:
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=138163&d=1263323980

Yup, it worked. :) Just go to you attachments under your User CP to get the address of the photo and insert is as you would with an external photo. The best part is - it will never go away.

Paul & Ken - while the videos would be nice, I don't see it as big of a problem as photos only because there are more photos posted than videos. Of course, try telling that to Bob Hamilton! ;)

[Mike Cruz]

Dave, there is a way around it. Hope I'm not gonna make the powers on high mad about this, but here it goes:

When you upload a pic, there is a signature to it, the photo itself, that is. Most likely, before you uploaded it, you resized it. Well, all you have to do is take the original and resize it again. It creates a different signature that will be accepted.

Now, I'm sure there is a very good reason (probably space related) for SMC not wanting repeated pics being posted. So, please, don't abuse this "cheat". I have to admit, though, the reason I figured this out was because there was as legitimate reason why I wanted/needed to repost a pic and fell upon this loophole.

[Stephen Edwards]

I guess I represent the other end of the spectrum. I use pics hosted on Photobucket, which represents extra work for me to upload there and post the link here that allows them to to show in my posts, without the need to click on the link. Hope that makes sense.

This way, I can sequence them in the post as I wish (having text and picture together, which is particularly useful for step by step sorts of things), and you don't have to click on a thumbnail, which then prevents you from reading the text while looking at the picture. I much prefer this when reading other's posts, than having to use the thumbnails.

The problem of disappearing pictures in posts is more a function of people either changing hosting sites, or deleting pictures from those sites, something I have never done.

Isn't bandwidth another consideration? Won't we use a lot of our bandwidth by posting pics directly to SMC?

Dan

I've never understood how they do it but I do see posts here where the full size image is inserted directly into the thread, not a thumbnail, but the full sized image with descriptive text either above or below the image.

I agree, neither am I fond of the thumbnails in posts.

Nevertheless, I agree with the OP. I do prefer that everyone upload their images directly to SMC rather than using a third party hosting service. This does ensure that the images will always be here for all of us to see when we search and find old threads. Too many times have I seen the dreaded red X and/or the message: image not found. That's really a bummer when that happens.

Actually, in several past discussions SMC management has asked us to upload directly their servers. That being the case, the bandwidth doesn't seem to be an issue.

By the way, this seems like a good time to remind non contributing members that it only costs $6.00 per year to be a contributor. Every little bit helps! If any of you who learn and/or enjoy pics hosted here, as well as all of the valuable information at our disposal, $6.00 per year is affordable for anyone who has a computer and an internet connection.

[Brian Effinger]

By the way, this seems like a good time to remind non contributing members that it only costs $6.00 per year to be a contributor. Every little bit helps! If any of you who learn and/or enjoy pics hosted here, as well as all of the valuable information at our disposal, $6.00 per year is affordable for anyone who has a computer and an internet connection.

Good advice Stephen!

And if you'd like to know how to post the larger photos (from SMC, of course) in the middle of the text, PM me & I can walk you through it.

[Dave Lehnert]

When the system tells you it is alrerady UL'd, it gives you the link to it.


Thanks! I will look next time I try to post a pic.

[Matt Stiegler]

When I post pictures I always upload them and expect to keep doing so, if for no reason than because I'm too much of a luddite to figure out how to embed them. I do like the larger embedded pictures sometimes, though, and while I do an awful lot of archive-diving here I rarely come across dead image links. Happens, but rarely for me.

It is possible that some folks (especially more accomplished folks) prefer not to upload them out of discomfort with the TOS, which state, "the submitting user grants SawMill Creek the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the terms of any applicable license."

I gather there was some discussion at some point about collecting photos that had been attached to posts and selling them to contributors. Linking photos instead of uploading might be viewed as a way of making photos available here while retaining some control over their future use. That is pure speculation on my part, though.

[Narayan Nayar]

In general I want to upload my photos once and use them in multiple places.

So I use Flickr. Flickr allows you to upload photos and embed them easily in various places (just click "share this" and "grab the HTML"). They require you to link back to the Flickr page, which is also easy to do and is already done in the HTML they provide.

But anyway, this allows me to basically take my photos, upload them once, and use them on my blog, on other forums, and here quite easily. I used to host all my photos on my own site--I have the domain, after all-- but this is so straightforward I now just use Flickr for pretty much everything. I think it's a win-win; it's easy for me, readers get much higher quality photos (there's no Kb limit on a linked image) without having to sign up to Flickr, and SMC doesn't have to pay to host an image.

I have uploaded stuff to posts here from time to time, though. Like Sketchup files.

[Mike Cruz]

I don't think that the OP or anyone else disputes that it may be easier for a poster to use a site like Flickr. The point is, someday, you WILL drop that account, whether tomorrow, next year or 10 years down the road. Think about all the useless threads that you put out on the web, not just here, that have links to pics that are obsolete.

If the purpose of posting a pic is to help others by showing what you have done for, say, converting your band saw's dust collection from non existant to useful, then actually taking the time to upload it here is the "right" thing to do. Otherwise, it becomes useless.

If you want to share a photo of you with your buddies at a bar, well, by all means, I don't think anyone will miss it in 10 years.... ;)

[Dan Mitchell]

Or like in my case, when visiting SMC at work, our firewalls block some photo sharing/hosting sites!

VISITING SMC at WORK?!??? :eek:


Does your BOSS know about THIS???:D

[Jim Rimmer]

Harrumph!


(Like the town hall meeting in Blazing Saddles)
I didn't get a harrumph out of that guy!

[Bill Huber]

Dave, there is a way around it. Hope I'm not gonna make the powers on high mad about this, but here it goes:

When you upload a pic, there is a signature to it, the photo itself, that is. Most likely, before you uploaded it, you resized it. Well, all you have to do is take the original and resize it again. It creates a different signature that will be accepted.

Now, I'm sure there is a very good reason (probably space related) for SMC not wanting repeated pics being posted. So, please, don't abuse this "cheat". I have to admit, though, the reason I figured this out was because there was as legitimate reason why I wanted/needed to repost a pic and fell upon this loophole.

That is called the EXIF data and some programs will NOT remove this data when you resize it or edit it. I use ACDSee and it will retain the information with the file no mater what you do to it unless you tell it not to.

If you save a file for the web in some programs and remove the EXIF data it then will be gone.

Some programs just will not save this data no matter what you do to the program. The EXIF data is a really good tool to use to see when the image was taken and what settings you used to take it.