Discussion: FR: Image max size 20 mb

  • Started: 12 weeks ago on Mon 14th Nov 2022

Public discussion This is a public discussion in World.

juu started this discussion 12 weeks ago.

FR: Image max size 20 mb

Hi! Would easier if one could upload up to 25 mb photo. My every other photo is bigger than 10 mb and it is hazzle to resize them just for uploading here. I do not need such small files anywhere else.

Danny van Bruggen replied 12 weeks ago.

I have the same problem :-( It would be fine if the server reduces the resolution to reduce the file size. Now I have to do that myself.

replied 12 weeks ago.


replied 12 weeks ago.

+1 I frequently need to resize or crop photos to stay within the 10MB

Andrija Rubinić replied 12 weeks ago.

  • 1

replied 12 weeks ago.

Compressing is better than resizing - you do not sacrifice resolution

replied 12 weeks ago.

I also always need to reduce the file size but doing it yourself at least you control where you make sacrifices. Depending on what the picture is for maybe you sometimes want resolution, sometimes less compression? I guess an auto-downsize would be nice at least as a fallback.

Apart from that 10Mb max seems very reasonable to me given that the servers also need to be able to handle all of the traffic these images create. Have the admins ever looked at supporting e.g. webm? (maybe it already works? I never tried )

replied 12 weeks ago.

I also have a resizer and compressor as a standalone single tool. If someone is interested, let me know. Can do entire folders without effort with it.

Bowline Dandy replied 12 weeks ago.

To the developers of the website I may suggest using some form of client side image compression, that way you don't have to spend money on something like a server side compression thing. might be the lowest hanging fruit

replied 12 weeks ago.

I have been using Image Resizer Powertoy Clone, as easy as a right click on a picture, to resize.

juu replied 12 weeks ago.

Danny van Bruggen Totally agree. Make versions ever needed (web dev now what it is) and discard the orginal right after.

Bakó Ádám IMO not true. I prefer enough resolution with less compression instead of very high resolution with too much compression, as too much compression destroys the details and brings up the artefacts --> having that higher resolution does not bring any benefits if compression is too high.

Bowline Dandy Fantastic tip!

Alfredo Moises Boullosa Ramones replied 12 weeks ago.

In Windows I just right click the image (a copy of the image if I want to keep that photo). Select Edit so it opens the Paint application. Save without changing anything, Paint will already reduce the image file size

replied 12 weeks ago.

Half our images are used for topos. It is our policy to store the original and use the minimum size for purpose. Depending on what it is being used for the minimum size varies. This policy is not going to change for topos, and it is not worth dev time to have a mixed solution for photos. Besides photos can be converted to topos.

Lamπ[tm] replied 11 weeks ago.


Tobias Auth replied 11 weeks ago.

20mb is plenty. That's almost enough for a 20 megapixel RAW!

A good quality, 4K res, compressed image should be around 5 MB.

Andrija Rubinić replied 11 weeks ago.

That's true, but today's cell phones take huge photos by default, and then users don't know how to reduce them. Therefore, it would be best if reduced them to the optimal size regardless of the size of the original.

replied 11 weeks ago.

This comment has been removed.

juu replied 11 weeks ago.

Tobias Auth I save processed photos at full resolution (whatever is left after crop) in JPG with quality 11/12. Disk space is very cheap so no point compromising the image quality by reducing resolution or compressing too much.

Why full resolution? Prints needs the resolution.

Why quality 11? I did my pixel peeping and noticed 10 loses details and 12 does not bring visible additions.

This way the processed photos are best possible archive copies I ever need for any application, even for prints. They are even good for some re-processing if the orginal is not available anymore.

Process once, produce one final file and I'm done forever. Workflow is quick and easy - which is necessity as I process quite a lot photos each year.

The whole point of this thread is why waste even a second of your time for any task what a computer can do automatically - like this is done on many web services.

juu replied 11 weeks ago.

Simon Dale Thanks for the reply.

Showing all 19 messages.

You are not part of this discussion.