Velebit - Feb 12, 2005 8:25 pm - Voted 10/10
WowVery beautiful shot Paul, larches are amazingly lit and look great on that grey surface!
Klenke - Feb 12, 2005 9:55 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: WowThanks. What you don't know (or maybe you do) is that this is a resubmitted version of an earlier out-of-focus shot. The old version was pretty fuzzy.
I wish Josh would allow for reloading images directly into old jpg slots. It would save me a lot of work updating all of my many many fuzzy shots to sharp ones. I also wish I had smartened up earlier to know the 650-pixel-width limitation.
Velebit - Feb 13, 2005 9:56 am - Voted 10/10
Josh, we need replace image option :-)I thought about that option Paul hundred times by now. Beside edit caption and delete options below the image it would be great to have replace as well!! And it would be also great if these updates weren't displayed in what's new. There's no need. I don't know how complicated is to program that. Replace would be great because address of the photo would remain the same, because I linked many photos among various pages so when you delete and upload new one all that work goes down the drain. Yes, now that I know about 650 pixels limitation too, would love to replace many old images, which weren’t sharp enough like yours too.
Nelson - Feb 13, 2005 10:43 am - Hasn't voted
Re: Josh, we need replace image option :-)Amen. Paul convinced me that we need that one. I've replaced plenty of my old fuzzy photos, and then weeks later find a broken link... My guess is that it would not be terribly difficult to program.
Vid Pogachnik - Feb 13, 2005 12:20 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Josh, we need replace image option :-)And for punishment you would retain all bad votes of the previous picture. Good idea.
But what if your second picture is lousier, ha, ha? Or a complete joke - you Sasa could temporarilly replace your beautiful sunset from Kredarica with a black rectangle and have all 4-stars for it. Programming is not easy ;-))
Velebit - Feb 13, 2005 1:56 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: Josh, we need replace image option :-)Well Vid, those are good points, jokers could do many 'funny' things with that option, so it's debatable :-) But I think most of the people here are serious about the work and we would mostly benefit from such an option, I guess.
Klenke - Feb 13, 2005 2:15 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Josh, we need replace image option :-)This is not the first time I have brought this up (look in this thread). But you know how it is.
I suppose people could do goofy or unacceptable things during a reload like you both have said, but I wonder why they would bother. Maybe Josh could make the function available only to those who request it (i.e., give it to those who are responsible). All I know is the reload function would improve this site markedly for those of us who know what and why quality is important.
Somewhere along the black boxes were placed around images as an experiment. No one really cared for it and the function was removed. Yet, important improvements like image reloading go ignored. I don't know.
Lee Stamm - Feb 12, 2005 9:31 pm - Voted 10/10
Great shotAnother beauty, Paul. There's nothing quite like glowing larches fronting a craggy peak.
Comments
Post a Comment