Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bonez]

In the interest of helping clean things up and optimize image loading in the forums, I present the following two HIGHLY USEFUL tips.


In your {img} tag add width=  and height= and specify your dimensions. (using the correct brackets, of course.)

You MUST put the width first or it won't work!

Suggested maximum resolution specified in the img tag: 1024 x 576

An example:

{img width=896 height=504}IMAGE URL HERE{/img}

True 16:9 widescreen dimensions are:

128 x 72
256 x 144
384 x 216
512 x 288
640 x 360
768 x 432
896 x 504
1024 x 576
1152 x 648
1280 x 720
1408 x 792
1536 x 864
1664 x 936
1792 x 1008
1920 x 1080
2560 x 1440
3840 x 2160
7680 x 4320

Example @ 896 x 504(click the image to expand to larger size. Click again to revert to specified dimensions):



Similarly you can make your web links prettier by specifying {url=ACTUAL URL TO POST}SOME TEXT{/url} (again, using the correct brackets.)

Example:
SAS Home Page


Also, per Herra Tohtori (with his permission to append here):

Because of image scaling, it is generally best to scale the image to 1:2, 1:3, 1:4 scale or indeed any 1:N scale, where N is a natural number (no decimals).

Because of how raster images work, scaling to, for example, 1:1.5 size will lead to 1.5 pixels being compressed to the space of one pixel on both vertical and horizontal resolutions, and without any interpolation that can lead to all kinds of strange effects such as aliasing, alternating fuzzy and sharp edges, and other things which can be fairly obvious if you know what you're looking for.

Resizing to an "even" scale avoids these problems most efficiently, and it also preserves correct image ratio, whatever the original size was.

For 1920x1080 resolution images, the 1:2 resolution would be 960x540, 1:3 resolution would be 640x360, and 1:4 resolution would be 480x270.


The reason you might want to make sure your images are scaled at natural fractions is that different browsers may be using different interpolation methods for scaling the images and the quality may vary drastically depending on the interpolation options used (point, linear, cubic, SinC interpolation...). Luckily, for IL-2 imagery, this generally doesn't seem to matter all that much because most images don't contain that much geometric parallel lines that would make the scaling artefacts very obvious.


However, for improved ease of use, you can drop one of the terms in the [img] tags, and it will automatically scale the other dimension to correct aspect ratio. So, you can just use

[ img width=960]<image url>[ /img]

or

[ img height=540]<image url>[ /img]

and these two image tags would result in the same rendering resolution if the original image resolution is same (in this example it would be 1920x1080 HD resolution). This means you don't actually need to calculate the height component if you just want your image to be of a certain width. Or vice versa, of course.

[farang65]

There you go Bonez

a simple bit of information but useful especially if you are not to internet savy 

Kirby

[SAS~Gerax]

many thanks Bonez for this very useful thread. 

[SAS~Boomer]

Yes,thanks
very useful info

Cheers