[wissink]

Im interested in this. I often share photos through Google Drive link, but that gives the viewer easy download access.

[normhead]

Maybe we should get started. Everyone have their pages ready? Is there a minimum number of pages we should have before we post or do you just want to go with mine and put more up. I don' mind taking PMS and sending out a list of slideshows, unless someone else wants to do it.

[boriscleto]

Guess I just didn't do enough investigation.

It depends on how you upload to Flickr. Aperture had an option to limit the size of the uploads, or do full size. The Flickr upload program is the same.

[wombat2go]

Do a check of what your host is serving down to your browser.
-Click on the image and "view image info"

I use box.com as a repository for my photos because I have low numbers of scans.
It is a business host and not a photo host,
but I think the photos are served with a better fidelity than the mainstream photo hosts.

For my medium format film scans I upload tiffs of 16 bit depth and they can be around 22MB.
When I view those in the Firefox, they are served as .png format, and can be a bit slow to load.
https://app.box.com/s/75d6e107gfday8k09t2rk55bqowr0fg1
This one is scalable by clicking a magnifier and can also be made full screen.

I use an Eizo here with nvidia x server, set to 2560 by 1440.
Typically the 6x7 format is served by box.com to fill the height ( but not the width) like this:
2,048px × 1,634px (scaled to 1,335px × 1,065px)
Then upsampled to fit the 1440 height.

png is a single still format with lossless compression, more modern than jpg
Portable Network Graphics - Wikipedia

The color fidelity of the pngs in the Firefox is usually much better than jpgs ,
but not as good as when viewing the original tiffs on local ssd.
I use gpicview and darktable locally which support Displayport to the Eizo.

[normhead]

That's a nice service....

I'm having trouble with google getting it to go into the slideshow from the link. The slide show goes to full screen obscuring the link windows.

Another thought would e to set up an account with a slide show that would allow people to just upload their photos to that account.

---------- Post added 11-26-16 at 09:13 AM ----------

Im interested in this. I often share photos through Google Drive link, but that gives the viewer easy download access.

I was thinking of handling this uy making the Album on google plus not open to the public, open only to people who have the link. Obviously any member of the group could download images but it wouldn't be open to web crawlers which is where most of our images have been found. If you type in certain tag words, you find our images, many of them linked to from from Pentaxforum and the canoeing sites we belong to.

That's why I suspect an album open only those wha have the link and invisible to those who don't have the link would be the way to go. Also if the link is ever posted on the forum in a thread, the webcrawlers will find it.

[Nicolas06]

In flickr and their 1TB limit, you can always upload full resolution JPEG and flickr will provide version in many resolutions. It will automatically choose the best for the screen/preview when you go to the website. You can even directly do a full screen slide show as long as you browser is to full sreen too.

You can select to not be shown in search result of flickr or other apps/tools and also limit the maximum size other can see/download your pictures.

The most important to me: this has to be simple, otherwise noboby will use it... I know that if I post a picture on the forum, even through people can go to flickr and see it in better setting, I don't even think people that like my post of the forum will go see the full version. In fact while we all want to think people will stare at our wonderfull captures for minutes on their 65" TV screen and will want to steal it, printing it to frame it on their wall, in 99.9% case, people don't care. Sure among the 0.1% would be maybe a few that would pay otherwise (how many ? 1% of that 1% ?) but to me, if you want this high rez gallery/thread to work it has to be easy.

The picture should display in high rez directly on the forum. No user action required.There should be button next to the picture/signature or user avatar to see their gallery in full screen. Eventually Pentax forum could implement a feature to restrict the high resolution display to subscribed users, or even, why not, to paying users. This would ensure yours photo are not stolen by random people crawling the web. This look feasible to me.

But if you have to go through loops of action to look that picture in full rez, nobody will do it, honestly. I mean it already works, and still there a thread there to try to find a solution! Even among people that are aware of the possibility, how many click on the pictures to see them in full rez? This is just basically 2 clicks away ! And that's already too much.

[wissink]

For Adobe CC users, you can create collections available as a sharable link too. I've used that many times.

[slip]

I wish my photos were good enough to steal

[normhead]

I wish my photos were good enough to steal

The question here is are they good enough for me to sit and stare at a slide show of them if I'm drinking a beer?

Maybe we should rate our slide shows...

Watch while sober...
Watch after one beer.
Watch after 2 beers.

There's a guy at a bar, he has a drink, he looks at a picture. He puts the picture down on the ba and orders another drink.
He does this a few times and is starting to look a little hammered.

Finally the bartender comes over and asks him what he's doing and what the picture is.
He says: "It's a picture of my wife and I'm not going home until she looks good."

It could work for pictures too.